Amerika

Posts Tagged ‘balkanization’

Modernity Has Ended, And The Battle For What Comes Next Has Begun

Wednesday, July 19th, 2017

Reading about the ancient empires — Inca, Maya, Angkor Wat, Minoans, Cahokia, Aztec — always fills me with a sense of sadness. Who were these intensely vital people, so committed to living the heck out of life, and why are they not still with us? It is a putrescent shadow of mortality: nothing gold can stay, it seems, and death takes all good things.

That might swell your heart with lightless emptiness. To think that the good is doomed, and that life is merely a mechanical process by which the coarser always wins out over the finer, is to depress yourself thoroughly. Another way to view it is that life contains certain traps or pitfalls which are invisible to our minds, and until we discover their mechanism, they will keep dooming us.

We are now in the midst of one of those periods. Against the advice of the ancients, our society took an individualistic path, which is where people care more about their personal power than doing what is right in order to maintain the order of tribe, civilization, nature and the gods. Abstract order is invisible to all but a few, and the perpetually angry and voracious mob wants to hearing nothing of it!

Because we accepted a bad decision as fact, and have since that time been corralled by that assumption into its inexorable endgame of a third-world style civilization ruled by corrupt politicians, postwar Western Civilization has ended. No one credible has faith in “the system” anymore; we know that we made a fatal choice, and now our only thought is to escape.

This means that we are no longer fighting to save democracy, the West, America, Europe, or even our retirement funds. We are fighting to escape the mental conditioning toward doom — that is the biggest fight — and then to escape from or take control of the dying society so that we can enact The Purge on its failed parts, and nurture The Remnant of good people back to health in a new civilization.

But what will this new struggle look like? Mencius Moldbug gives us the basic topography of this question:

There are two basic ways of executing this divorce. We’ll call one a soft reset and the other a hard reset. Basically, a hard reset works and a soft reset doesn’t. However, a soft reset is more attractive in many ways, and we need to work through it just to see why it can’t work.

In a soft reset, we leave the current structure of government the same, except that we apply the 20th-century First Amendment to all forms of instruction, theistic or “secular.” In other words, our policy is separation of education and state. In a free country, the government should not be programming its citizens. It should not care at all what people think. It only needs to care what they do. The issue has nothing to do with theism. It is a basic matter of personal freedom.

…In a hard reset, all organizations dedicated to forming public opinion, making or implementing public policy, or working in the public interest, are nationalized. This includes not only the press and the universities, but also the foundations, NGOs, and other nonprofits. It is a bit rich, after all, for any of these outfits to appeal to the sanctity of property rights. They believe in the sanctity of property rights about as much as they believe in the goddess Kali.

He essentially advocates two forms of libertarianism: one which relies on rule of law (soft reset) and one which converts all law into civil law (hard reset) by destroying current organizational culture — the Establishment and “deep state” — and replacing it with people who admit their self-interest and in return, obligate themselves to deliver a service.

This fits within one of the more pertinent criticisms of Moldbug, namely that he is not really an innovator so much as a marketer:

Anyway, there are two possible explanations for the end of Moldbugism. One is that his arguments were not original, just stated in a new way. His assertion that Progressivism has its roots in Puritanism, for example, is not new. I was making that point 25 years ago in Usenet debates and I know I’m not the first guy to notice it. His criticisms of democracy have been around since the Enlightenment. Old ideas restated in modern terms eventually just fade into the tapestry of the intellectual movement that spawned them.

The other possibility is that the people attracted to Moldbug’s ideas, including Moldbug, came from the Left ideologically. Young people raised on Progressivism were attracted by the subversiveness of these old ideas. They moved right into Left-libertarianism, then Right-libertarianism and then eventually dissident politics of various flavors. Put another way, the Dark Enlightenment guys were merely going through a phase as they first experienced the outlawed ideas from the outlawed past. Now, they are onto other things.

For those of us who remember the Old Internet, Moldbug represents the type of writer like Pietro Scaruffi or Justin Hall who essentially brought a new style of writing and scholarship to the nerdly internet. They had read broadly in the humanities, and so could discuss concepts that were somewhat alien to the mostly-techie audience of the internet of pre-iPhone era.

His core idea, couched in an imitation of nineteenth century writing that befits his Victorian fascination, is that government acts like a corporation, and markets are the only “objective” way to measure success or failure thus “rightness,” so it makes sense to hire a government instead of the other way around. Citizens would subscribe to a government service and in exchange, receive smaller government.

His “soft reset” describes what the Alt Lite desires, which is equality with freedom of association and speech. These are tempting ideas until one realizes that civilizations have structures, and someone must decide what that is, and government action or inaction will damage or promote such structures. There is no escape from the question of what kind of civilization we want to have.

Even more, as the past two decades show us, pluralism or the idea that people can have their own cultures within a larger culture, does not work. Each culture seeks to dominate because otherwise, it is under attack from competing visions of reality, and people are mostly foolish and will wander off to whatever seems cool that week. With pluralism, no one gets culture, values or civilization.

Most people like the Alt Lite/Libertarian vision because if asked, in a utilitarian sense, most people think they want anarchy with grocery stores. Then they realize that this means that the most vicious and brutal will dominate them, and they go running to government and make it totalitarian to banish their fear of loss in a Darwinian conflict. This is the history of democracy and how it leads to tyranny.

As a writer who came before Moldbug, and encountered these issues before, libertarianism was dead to me as a concept from an early age. Socialism was even more dead, which is why people like me support capitalism, but do not believe it to be a substitute for culture or leadership. Then again, people like me are Edwardians, not Victorians, at heart.

But if you take that nascent Anarcho-Capitalism viewpoint, merge it with nationalism, and add some Anarcho-Monarchism, you have a relatively complete idea: a society ruled by culture, with a caste hierarchy of leadership, in which people are able to market their skills and products within a range appropriate to their caste. This is a complete idea. Moldbug and Rothbard offer nothing that can compete.

However, in praise of Moldbug, what he did was something every computer geek since the dawn of time knows well: he made a compendium of code fragments, a type of ur-stylesheet from which people could draw ideas to use in argument. In that, he was not a mere marketer, but a marketer who defined the frame of the market. This was no small achievement, in that it allowed former Leftists to participate in the Right.

That is a nice way of saying that the answer to civilization decline is not found in Moldbug, although he brings up the word that most of us should be using: restorationist. This means one who wants to bring back civilization after it has failed:

If I had to choose one word and stick with it, I’d pick “restorationist.” If I have to concede one pejorative which fair writers can fairly apply, I’ll go with “reactionary.” I’ll even answer to any compound of the latter – “neoreactionary,” “postreactionary,” “ultrareactionary,” etc.

The term formerly referred to those who wanted restoration of the monarchy, which also applies, since without democracy, our only options are military junta or oligarchy, that is, if we refuse to see the wisdom of monarchism.

However, one cannot restore civilization from within modernity, which is the political form of individualism. Nor can one resurrect virtue from an outside-in or materialist method. Not only that, there is no method which works except, as Michel Houellebecq reminds us, the resurrection of our desire to be good and thus, to have a functional civilization. Without that, there is nothing!

For this reason, many think that our future will be of the “patchwork” that Moldbug envisions, but a more organic type, and here they are more likely right, if we follow the hard reset path. This “balkanized” future involves a restoration of tribalism, where each group separates to its own geographical communities, based not just on race but ethnic group, caste, religion and most likely politics.

The foremost writer on balkanization, Billy Roper, expresses an idea found in Old White Nationalism, namely that nothing will change until the system crashes and dissolves. He gives us a vital insight in his description of the transition to this state:

The crisis trigger scenario which will cause massive riots, ethnic conflict, and systemic collapse is inevitable, now. In ninety days’ time, at noon, the power grid will go down and not return. The United States will begin Civil War II and balkanization. Millions of people will die of starvation, disease, and violence. Millions more will become refugees from ethnic cleansing. Whites will have a shot at an ethnostate, but there will be a chaotic period of struggle which could last years, in the meantime.

The thing to remember about modernity is that it is a bully. Hiding behind rules, it hits people where they are weak to provoke them, and then cries victim when attacked. This is why all Communists seem to point to their stays in jail as proof of having been “oppressed” when usually they were engaged in collusion toward crimes and terrorist activity. It is also why modernity defends perpetrators as much as actual victims.

Bullies tend to make their victims furious, and most people who have finally awakened to the fact that the modern West is falling just like Tenochtitlan are now enraged. They are mad that they were deceived, which requires the partial participation of the person misled, and mad that while they were trying to have normal lives, the herd has been working fanatically and pathologically to destroy everything that it can.

Since the bullying has made people enraged, the vision of blood, fire and death that Roper writes of seems quite pleasing. We all want The Purge on some level, and would be glad to see all of those who are guilty die in writhing pain. But looking at the patterns of history, we see that this vision is not quite likely as stated.

For starters, we have abundant data about how civilizations collapse because we are surrounded by their remnants. In each case, caste revolt did them in, with lower castes overthrowing the upper and then proving unfit to rule as the society plunged into chaos. But that chaos was not of the Hollywood apocalypse variety, but more like modern-day Brazil: a slow descent into crime, corruption, stupidity and filth.

Some always survive those. If you want to look at patchwork in action, see southern Brazil. There, the remnants of German communities — many now hybridized with native Brazilians or Spanish imports — stay in isolation and spend most of their time earning money to pay for the taxes that keep the rest of the country afloat.

There is also the problem that the Confederate States of America encountered, which is that if you set up a patchwork, and there is a larger group nearby, they will invade you and take your stuff. In the age of international travel, this could be China, either buying up or outright invading America. Disunited, self-interesting tribes will not unite in time to repel an invasion, recapitulating the experience of the Amerind tribes who could have resisted European conquest but failed to do so.

Another problem occurs with genetic assimilation. Small groups in the country seem fine for awhile until a girl or boy goes into the city and finds a new partner, or comes back with a half-and-half baby. Over the generations, trace admixture infiltrates the group, much as it did with the remnants of Greece and Rome. The original tribe is genocided by outbreeding, which is inevitable because young people select partners from those that are around them, and are oblivious to the threat of someone who is one-eighth something else.

Already we are seeing signs of the slow decay which will lead to division and eventually, genetic absorption of our people by the far more numerous Other:

An extraordinary new Pentagon study has concluded that the US-backed international order established after World War 2 is “fraying” and may even be “collapsing”, leading the United States to lose its position of “primacy” in world affairs.

…Observing that US officials “naturally feel an obligation to preserve the US global position within a favorable international order,” the report concludes that this “rules-based global order that the United States built and sustained for 7 decades is under enormous stress.”

…The document is particularly candid in setting out why the US sees these countries as threats — not so much because of tangible military or security issues, but mainly because their pursuit of their own legitimate national interests is, in itself, seen as undermining American dominance.

In other words, “rule-based” systems have failed, and clash of civilizations style tribalism and self-interest are rising. Although this report was written about lands outside of American borders, there is no reason to think it does not apply within the US as well, which means a de facto ethnic segregation with the most numerous group (Asians, a root race which includes Amerinds and Hispanics) absorbing the others.

That leaves us with an uncomfortable realization: the transition to tiny libertarian states is not going to work, and the balkanization that occurs will happen slowly, resulting in gradual biological assimilation. This leaves us with one option, which the realist will embrace: we either master our out-of-control countries and send away the Other and those who would thwart us, or we die out.

Unfortunately, this requires a greater plan than simply “nationalism.” Hunter Wallace shows us what form such a plan would have to take:

We do need to do a better job though of articulating our greater overarching vision of a new social order to replace the one that is failing. We have to vanquish this beast though before political change will become possible.

This is the challenge before us. Challenges of this nature are more fun than most will admit because they are hard problems which reward bold solutions and clear thinking. But no matter how we slice it, the old order is dead and we are entering uncharted territory, which means that we will be fighting for our lives — and the ability to restore our civilization.

About The Gay Mafia

Thursday, June 29th, 2017

When times go degenerate, many vital things are forgotten. For us, one of the most vital is the fact that every identifiable group acts in self-interest, such as “the gay mafia,” where sexual preference trumps even national origin:

That’s what Ovitz believes. It is one of the driving factors in his decision to talk about what happened, a burning need to name names, to throw light on the shadowy Hollywood cabal he believes did him in. He calls it the Gay Mafia, though several of its “members” aren’t gay, and much of what he says about these men is nasty and unprintable. In Ovitz’s eyes the cabal’s demagogic leader, its merciless Macbeth, is Geffen, laying waste to all Ovitz held dear, spreading rumors about his family, at the same time he was poisoning the business deals that would have saved AMG—all things Geffen denies. Geffen’s partners in crime, Ovitz alleges, include Ovitz’s onetime protégés at the Creative Artists Agency, Bryan Lourd, Kevin Huvane, and Richard Lovett—powerful Gonerils determined to kill the father figure who gave them life.

…All the gay people get together, like the Jewish people get together. I mean, yeah, we meet on Thursday. I’m offended. That’s just so offensive. You know, all the fags, they get together and they pick a victim: Let’s go get that one! It’s remarkable that, at this point in history, the most powerful man in Hollywood, he’s been brought down by a gay cabal! I’ve never heard anything like it in my life!”

A naturalist does not find this unusual: every organism needs a group to survive, so chooses one based on its most obvious trait. Gays stand out in any group, so they cross group lines and united on gayness, not national origin or religion. It is this type of special interest group secession that is driving the balkanization of the US/EU.

No Place Nowhere

Thursday, June 29th, 2017

Where is home?

This simple question requires many answers: home may be a house, in a town or city, within a nation, as part of a civilization, during a certain time. All of those support structures are required before an individual can make a house into a “home,” a process too complex and nuanced to be trusted to men.

Civilization is important to humans because we depend on group collaboration to have more than the utter basics of life. And yet, we study it very little, in part because like most really big questions in life, it scares us into silence.

On the Right, we fight this battle to understand civilization through an issue that is currently shaping the discourse of the future. This battle is the conflict between nationalism, racialism and patriotism. These are easily understood:

  • Nationalism. Loyalty to tribe or ethnicity, and recognize that genetics produces culture and that produces political and social opinions, so keeping the tribe unadulterated is essential.
  • Racialism. This is like nationalism, but replaces “the tribe or ethnicity” with “the race.” At this point, one is defending the interests of one of the four root races, which since it is distant from origins becomes more like ideology.
  • Patriotism. Loyalty to the state, the flag, and the political interests of the nation-state — a country made of political and economic, not racial or ethnic, boundaries — with a focus on laws and ideology.

At this point, those on the Right are learned to disregard patriotism. Mainstream conservatives essentially lulled themselves into a compliant stupor by focusing more on the government than the organic nation which was responsible for its success. Now that this group is under attack, many more are looking more seriously at the idea that genetics, not laws or finances, are the root of our future.

Many know something has gone wrong and that their people are under attack, but have no idea how to define who their people are because they no longer share a culture or customs, so they default to race. This is a good start, but it ends up removing focus on the nation, or the organic group created together from the same root, such as “Germans.”

As a result, we are seeing the next wave of thinking appear: a focus on specific groups instead of whole races. For example, American Nativists — those who think America should be Western European — have been separating not just from other races, but from Southern and Eastern Europeans, causing clusters in the New World which resemble the geography of the old.

In addition, other racial and ethnic groups are realizing that they, too, need a home. Until they live in a society which is created by them for people like them, with their rules and standards, protecting their values and culture, they are never truly at home. While this is more existential than practical, it touches on some of the most vital concerns that people have, even more than wealth or safety.

The result is that balkanization of the USA and EU will likely involve repatriation more than anything else. Liberal democracy is dying, and with it will go the social welfare programs. At that point, there is nothing for other groups here but conflict, and their homelands — which may be less affluent — will become more appealing.

People do not understand DNA. They treat it like an Excel spreadsheet, where on each line one gene corresponds to many traits. It is more like computer code, where each bit describes how to build a human being with proteins, which act both as building materials and instigators of the chemical reactions that change them. When you hear about how some group is 99% or 97% similar to another, stop and think: would you let someone insert enough code to be 1% of your operating system, into your computer, especially if it — for example — controlled your heart monitor in a hospital? You would be insane to do so; the differences between us seem small, but are vaster than anyone can count.

For this reason, our minds turn toward the tangible and immediately discernible. It is a good thing to be from a tribe that does not look like any others, tied to a specific place, in a society made by your people for your people with an eye toward existing for all eternity. This is the only way to have a home.

Modernity failed Europeans in this way. Our lands were taken over by an ideology, egalitarianism, that made them not dedicated to us and the organic living thing called culture and civilization to which we belong, but instead directed them toward that ideology. This created a new priesthood of ideologues who, being concerned only with that ideology, quickly destroyed our sense of well-being by making society into a mechanistic, neurotic, perverse, greedy/selfish, paranoid and pathological mess. Technology is not modernity; “me first” is modernity, and it always leads to chaos and misery.

This is why Europeans stopped reproducing. We do not have a home, no place for ourselves, and no somewhere where we really belong from now until the end of time. We are adrift, surrounded by bad options and cruel manipulators, but our fellow citizens are so stupid that they keep selecting these people and then patting themselves on the back for having done so! Perhaps is true that as Alfred Einstein reputedly said, “There are only two infinite things, the universe and human stupidity, and I am not sure about the former.”

Our stupidity has killed us. Our best, looking at this mess, checked out long ago and went to live lonely childless lives on meditative mountaintops or whatever equivalent they could find. Our sane and brilliant people abandoned technology, art and literature to glorified baristas who do not know how to use it without destroying good things. The talented fled leadership and official positions.

As it all spirals down into dust, we should ask ourselves whether we are ready to admit that life is made mostly of mystery, and what we can do best is to create a home for ourselves, and send other groups off to do the same, because this order is — existentially, spiritually, morally, mentally — best for everyone, and will result in a return of human thriving.

How To Live With Diversity

Thursday, June 8th, 2017

Diversity sucks and is dangerous. It is less dangerous when a community actively encourages its members to take full advantage of their rights as American Citizens to own firearms. She points out that nobody cares about the safety of women and children in a diverse, Anarcho-Tyranny such as the Modern Amerikan City. This is excellent self-reliance. I feel greater confidence that I won’t get stuck taking care of someone who handles their own business.

Ownership of a weapon is a responsibility. It is a step towards adulthood rather than the permanent childhood as a warden of the state. It is also empowering. A 6’2″ 225Lb aggressive male would typically have their way with any woman he chose to slap around and assault. That stops when the woman is properly trained in the use of a handgun and points it directly at his center of mass. At that point in the proceeding, the bigger the man is, the more he is in mortal danger. It isn’t hard to drill lead into the center of a really large mass. It is hard to get into a fist-fight with one. There was some old joke in the American West that all men were created equal, but only a Colt .45 kept it that way.

Compare and contrast the females in the YouTube Video above who purchase firearms, join a gun club and go train together at the range to the disarmed London Cops facing the Islamo-Fascists that Sadiq Khan relies on for his continued electoral majorities as Mayor. The London Police don’t believe they should have to employ deadly force in a free society. The attitude is summed up below.

“In a free and democratic society, there is going to be a balance between democracy, freedom and openness, and a police state — and none of us want to live in a police state,” said Brian Dillon, former head of the Met’s firearms command who now runs the counterterrorism consultancy Rubicon Resilience. “Therefore at some point some attacks are regrettably going to hit home, that’s inevitable,” he added. “Not everything can be stopped.”

When a population is disarmed and denied access to firearms, the fightback against soulless killers gets harder. The killers won’t obey laws. If they are willing to kill you, they won’t get too picky as to whether their methods. Once you’ve committed a capital offense, the additional charges no longer matter. They aren’t going to wake you back up and give you a shot in the other arm.

There are three reasons why someone would logically understand they will get the max* for killing another person and do it anyway.

1) They don’t believe they will get caught, so they are brazen. Chicago, Illinois is an example of this. If someone has no moral qualms about dropping and drilling someone, and they assume there is no way they’ll get caught; then they assume murder is de facto legal and if they get the itch they scratch it.

CHICAGO — In 2012, the body count — 506 murders — marked Chicago as America’s murder capital. But here’s another grim statistic: Chicago police solved just 129 of those killings last year, a 25 percent clearance rate — the lowest in 21 years.

2) They believe so strongly that they should kill you that having you die is worth any penalty they eat as a result of their actions. The Fort Hood Shooter, Malik Nidal Hassan, is an example of this sort of killer. When the assumption that the gas chamber awaits no longer discourages a potential killer, you are your only reliable defense against this person’s diabolical intentions.

Nidal Malik Hasan, the Army psychiatrist who opened fire on dozens of soldiers at Fort Hood., Tex., was found guilty Friday of murdering 13 people, taking him one step closer to becoming the first active-duty soldier to be executed in more than 50 years. Hasan, who acted as his own attorney but demonstrated little interest in mounting a defense, was convicted on 13 charges of premeditated murder and 32 of attempted murder by a panel of senior officers.

3) They believe that you lack the conviction to defend yourself or punish them. This is what happens when large groups of people have their negative actions excused because of perceived victimhood. The “victims” then no longer consider your death a crime. It is considered condign punishment. They have a right to shoot you for slavery, poverty, racism, classism, capitalism, turning them down for a date 12 years ago, etc… Once you give a knave a moral justification for their behavior, they no longer believe they are the “The Bad Guy.” Once they have a chat with the high-powered lawyer and Officer Friendly, everyone will agree you should have been stabbed, shot or robbed.

In societies afflicted with cultural diversity featuring supercharged identity politics, all three of these individuals will be amongst you. While judicious stereotyping can help you avoid a large number of the orcs, it will be like Pokemon. You can’t catch them all. Not all Muslims are terrorists, not all terrorists are Muslim. Not all killers are dope-dealers, not all dope-dealers are killers. And we can go on all day. Diversity will make it impossible for you to identify every threat and avoid them. You have to be ready when the threat manifests and attacks you or those that you love. It isn’t to trifle that Simone’s video quotes JRR Tolkien.

I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend.

Before belittling the gun owner, or arguing they shouldn’t enjoy that right, ask yourself an important question. How much do you love the ones you are responsible for defending? It may be the gun owner, not the one who ridicules his or her ignorance, that is the superior and more mature human being. Diversity is not our strength. A .45 that you know how to use will always be yours.


* — The max in most places in the US is typically a ticket on the night train to The Big Adios. In Europe your mileage may vary.

Bastides: A Model For The Balkanized, Post-Collapse West

Wednesday, June 7th, 2017

“Nature abhors a vacuum,” goes the old saying. Nature is competition, which is how it ensures a lack of empty spaces. To avoid any one tendency from going too far, nature uses a system of balances, and it balances the anti-vacuum with a fierce territoriality. That way, it can avoid a tragedy of the commons by ensuring that all territory is owned, defended and to some degree managed by its territorial species.

If you wonder why the ancients spoke of natural order, this is what they had in mind, which avoided the opposite extremes of communism/inclusion and capitalism/consumption. Instead of giving way to once force alone, nature balanced them, and so became more violent but also more efficient and less destructive.

This is why we talk about the “4 Fs” of nature — feeding, fleeing, fighting and reproduction — instead of merely three. Fighting is part of nature and it is how territory is established, and through that, stewardship is established. A lion watches over his patch of the wild and punishes any who will exploit it. The birds, rodents and lizards do the same. Populations stay in balance; resources are not over-exploited; each area reaches an optimal carrying capacity and nothing more. Nature, more than humans, is logical.

That third F however means that war and conflict are not errors, but a necessary part of life. Each group defends itself and its territory so that it can survive as a species, sub-species or cultivar, and so that its territory does not fill up with humans who will then exploit its resources to the point of depletion.

Democracy, which like communism is based on the idea of universal inclusion as an antidote to naturally-occurring hierarchy, cannot defend itself against a tragedy of the commons. This is why democracy follows the pattern of a yeast bloom: the population rises to consume all of the resources and then dies out.

In the case of modern democracy, this exploitation mainly consists of our false elites in media, business and government and their support base of a permanent third world underclass. They divide up everything this society has created and abscond with it, converting it into landfill overflowing with disposable entertainment products and tiered sinecures of graft.

Now that the West has had 228 years of democracy and over a thousand of egalitarianism, or anti-hierarchical thought, it is nearing the collapse of those systems. They ate up everything good and left a rotted infrastructure, mentally and racially mixed-up population, and a total lack of unity on any point.

As Samuel Huntington wrote in The Clash of Civilizations And The Remaking Of World Order, the backlash to this over-extended period of history is occurring through a cultural wave of people wanting innate connections to others, instead of merely ideological or financial ones. Nationalism, tribalism and ethno-centricism are rising because those are innate, where ideology is imposed from outside.

This leads to an intermediate stage called balkanization where each group — tribe, cult, gang, subculture — will set up its own community and by necessity, exclude all others with force. After democracy comes tyranny, and as the tyrants this time turn out to be twerps of great incompetence, the first world will instead fragment into many smaller groups, shortly before being invaded by any strong powers that remain. Practice your Chinese!

But, before the great invasion takes over, it makes sense to look at what balkanization entails. William Gibson and Billy Roper offer competing views of this vision; in Gibson, people will form massive vertical structures or other specialized forms of the city, with enclaves of secessionists living in geographically-defensible regions like bridges and abandoned buildings. In Roper, the focus will be less on structures than areas which are self-sustaining and defended with military force.

Imagine a combination of the two, and you will see history rediscover itself as we rebirth the bastide, a type of fortified village used in the past and likely again in our future:

The Dordogne region is famous for its historic fortified towns, known as bastides. They were mostly built during the reigns of King Henry III of England and his son Edward I. They were founded by the English kings and by local feudal landlords…The bastides were defended towns planned on a straightforward rectangular grid.

The towns were typically defended by perimeter walls and centered around a market square, often with a covered section, known as les halles; a number of towns still retain these most attractive structures. Each bastide was founded on the basis of a charter. Land was generally provided by the founder, king or nobleman. Legal rights and subsidies were granted to those who contributed to the building of the towns. In return the founder could raise taxes to finance military campaigns and also levy troops.

While most in our society have been chasing scapegoats like The Rich™ and The Jew,™ the more far-sighted rulers have realized that human hubris drives democracy, and that me-first people in groups agitate for collectivism as it allows each individualist to be subsidized. This hubris and its recent manifestation democracy are actually what destroyed us.

For that reason, interest is rising in aristocracy, or replicating the natural hierarchy in human form. We take the best among us by leadership ability and place them in charge, then have them select a staff. This arrangement is hereditary as this ensures that the best women match with the best men, creating a self-perpetuating institution, at least until hubris attacks in mass delusion again.

We can get there easily through democracy. The first step is to remove all the laws that impede natural organization of human beings; the next is to patch our laws so that we can appoint an administrator or regent who will select the aristocrats and entrust them with ownership of land areas, which will then become localized bastides or something like them under the feudal system.

In the intermediate stage of balkanization, should we survive it by not getting invaded by hostile Asian powers as has been the pattern of history, bastides will be more organic: warlords will seize local areas, charge everyone rent, and use those rents to fund a strong army which can repel any regional threats. Life goes on as democracy fades away.

White Racism Is Disguised As Anti-Racism, And Anti-White Racism Does Not Help

Wednesday, May 24th, 2017

After the last election, the ripple wave passing through the Black community is notice of what has been obvious but forbidden because of a perceived need to ally with the Left.

African-Americans are recognizing that white SWPLs are anti-racist in theory, but discriminatory in action:

It got so bad in 2014 – 2015 that I stopped renting farmland on estates where I could be easily seen from the road, and I stopped making food deliveries into wealthier neighborhoods because of how often police would “happen by” and sometimes even question me five or ten minutes after I got a strange look from a passerby (usually someone jogging, but occasionally someone in a car). I’m not a paranoid kinda guy, but this happened way too often to be a coincidence.

It isn’t Richard Spencer calling the cops on me for farming while Black. It’s nervous White women in yoga pants with “I’m with Her” and “Coexist” stickers on their German SUVs.

Second is the sheer degree of cultural appropriation going on with businesses in the city proper. It’s little things – e.g. shops and other businesses incorporating wide swaths of hiphop culture into their branding while having not a single Black owner, partner, employee, or vendor. And those businesses are KILLING IT here. This is a town where Blackness advances White-owned brands and subjects Black-owned businesses to inspection by law enforcement.

Do you really think that problem comes from people like Richard Spencer?

White anti-racism is often designed to mask a Not In My Backyard (NIMBY) attitude to diversity. There is no better way to hide sins than to virtue signal the opposite, so that if someone calls you a racist you can point to your Black Lives Matter participation, Bob Marley posters, membership in the Diversity Council and massive collection of old school hip-hop on vinyl.

Richard Spencer is not the problem the black community faces; it struggles with the fact that white America wants to be white America, and this requires excluding everyone else but a few token minorities. At the same time, it will gladly appropriate the massive perceived authenticity of black culture and use it to sell more worthless consumer products.

On the flip side of this, anti-white racism (also called “anti-racism”) is not helping the black community either. It shields the guilty and exacerbates the problem by making white people afraid to interact with or speak truthfully to minorities. Only recognizing that every group wants to live with and interact with only its own leads out of this puzzle.

The Roper Report Links Balkanization And Nihilism

Wednesday, May 17th, 2017

Billy Roper (interview) stands out among nationalists because he has been active in promoting sensible ideas for a long time, and during that time, has developed and refined his philosophy to combine history and politics into a vision of the inevitable future and how we can redirect the failing of Western civilization into its rebirth.

In other words, he accepts all of the dark and bad, and instead of becoming depressive and self-destructive, points to the opportunity that this gives us: when a rotted order falls, we can create in its place a healthier Western Civilization than can exist at all under the current form of society that we have chosen over the years of decay.

On the most recent edition of The Roper Report, Mr. Roper talks about “the black pill,” or nihilism, and how it is useful for us to accept the enormity of our situation and the corresponding intensity of what we are called on to do. This is “do or die” territory, and most people are looking for a reason to choose a “good enough” placebo solution instead of the good solution that is actually required.

From there, Mr. Roper and his guest Cantankerous Ordo — a well-spoken fellow with depth of insight — investigate the Alt Right and how it navigates between virtue signaling and purity spiraling in an attempt to enforce internal integrity and prevent “frenemy entryism,” which is what I call the situation when people who want to take part end up accidentally bringing their Leftist ideas or broken behaviors into the wider cultural wave, corrupting it and eventually inverting it.

The whole thing is worth listening to, complete with a mixture of music and commentary. It includes a discussion of how the fragmentation of the West guarantees that Balkanization, or the break-up of nation states into individual ethnic and cultural groups, will end the travesty that is the fallen West.

For those who enjoy what they hear, the book by Mr. Roper entitled The Big Picture provides more essential thinking material. Thank you to Messrs. Roper and Ordo for discussing the Black Pill and presenting such an interesting podcast!

How Trump Can #BuildTheWall Without Laying A Brick

Saturday, May 13th, 2017

People in the ruins of the West are starting to realize that diversity does not work.

On the surface, they see it through increased behavior of the type one finds in the rest of the world outside of the West. Most of the world languishes in third world status because of its refusal to adopt the founding principle of Western societies, which is the need for social order, including behavioral standards like honesty, integrity and a need to be productive.

Beneath that, they realize on some level that it means their nations have become shopping malls where citizenship is for sale in exchange for votes or paying taxes. No healthy society runs on this principle, so at a gut level they know their society is falling around them. This provokes some fear and trembling, but as long as the jobs are OK and they can afford reasonably comfortable lifestyles, they sleep.

At the most profound level, that of inner thought, some are starting to realize that diversity means a lack of direction. Diversity is the committee principle extended to ethnicity. And so there is no longer a standard like “the way we do things around here” or any principles in common except those of liberal democracy, tolerance, basic law and order, and that the money must flow.

Diversity creates apathy. The most diverse American city is also one that is famed for its apathy. When there are no social standards because every group has its own, people hunker down and ignore the world outside of their homes, jobs and grocery stores.

As usual, responses to this vary with how the individual thinks. Conservatives, who are realists who aspire to transcendentals like goodness and beauty, realize that the basic questions of life are qualitative. The methods are long known but the degree of their application determines how well results turn out, and how long they will endure.

Leftists, on the other hand, are motivated by egalitarianism alone. It is their one theory from which all of their rhetoric springs. In their view, the loss of social standards is a good thing because it empowers the individual. They favor apathetic, third world style civilizations because the individual has the least restrictions on its whims.

For this reason, the issue remains at an impasse. Conservatives are focused on improvement of what exists, and Leftists actively desire diversity. But this has changed with the observations above. Add to that the ongoing collapse of the American economy brought on by Leftist tax-regulate-and-spend coupled with a constant flow of new workers, driving down wages.

As a result, President Trump was elected in a large part based on his promise to Build That Wall. For most Americans, this was not a statement of racism, only a recognition that diversity is not just failing at its own goals, but damaging the country. The biggest social change of the last two decades has been the re-segregation of America in response to diversity, a prelude to Balkanization and eventually ethnic separation. Diversity has failed.

So far, however, we see no wall. There are political reasons for this, and practical ones, but even more, it may be that the wall is best interpreted at metaphor. What if we could, without laying a single brick, end diversity and immigration, or at least third world immigration (and bring the battered South Africans over instead)?

The answer lies in a simple question: why do they come here? Why give up their culture, way of life and homeland just to join the great shopping mall that is the post-collapse West?

The answer is equally simple, because the human organism never changes: for the free stuff and better money.

If you really want to build a wall, you will do so by making the free stuff go away and ending the guaranteed better money because of forced hiring. This means targeting our social welfare programs, including free medical care at emergency rooms, and ending the host of civil rights policies that follow the “disparate impact” theory behind Affirmative Action.

As American law is currently interpreted, if a white person and a minority person walk into a job interview, a rental office, a real estate office or a store, and the minority person does not get hired, rented to, sold a house or served first, legal liability is created. The business owner can be sued and the high legal costs could easily deprive him of his business.

These laws guarantee that if third world people come here, they can have whatever jobs, housing and service they want. This slipstreams into the psychology of immigrants, which is to want to convert whatever place they occupy into something like their homeland. They must either admit their homelands were not as nice as the new place, or invent a cognitive dissonance response that claims the new place is not nice at all, but will be so once the newcomers take it over and make it in their image. This, too, is eternal human behavior.

If Mr. Trump wants to build a wall, the fastest way to do this would be to change the interpretation of American law from “disparate impact” to no presumption of racial guilt if results turn out unequally for white people and non-whites. This would remove minorities from the legally-enforced front of the line, and allow the re-segregation to continue even faster.

In doing so, he would not be changing history but acknowledging it. The postwar experiment in diversity has failed, and since it is taboo to say so in public, people are simply segregating themselves. All races are doing this, as we see in places like Houston, which is in a pre-Balkanization state of each race isolating itself in its own neighborhoods.

A physical wall would be impressive, certainly. But the only sure way to stop the flood is to stop the handouts. Without guaranteed jobs and housing, and with no social benefits like welfare and healthcare to tempt them, the third world would stay home and do the right thing, which is to work toward the improvement of its own nations instead of deferring the solution by coming here.

Balkanization Is Our Future, Not “Ethnic Liberalism”

Saturday, May 6th, 2017

Billy Roper points out that the future of the West is Balkanization, or retreat into separate enclaves per ethnic group, because the policy of diversity has failed and as a result, people have fallen back on what “freedom of association” remains to withdraw from the disaster of mixed-ethnic society and produce their own communities mirroring European countries:

And on this year’s edition, out this week, they say natural geographic sorting has taken place over the past couple of decades. Liberals have moved next to liberals, conservatives next to conservatives. It used to be the rule just not to bring up politics in polite company. Now imagine a real estate ad – two-bedroom, one-and-a-half-bath, cul-de-sac, good schools, nice neighbors, no people of the other party need apply.

Of course, the recent media coverage about racial gerrymandering also supports the observation I made in my book The Balk, as does this NPR program: people are moving to segregate themselves politically and racially, to live among their own kind ethnically and culturally, voting with their feet, as America separates itself out through internal immigration on the road to balkanization. The black areas are becoming blacker, the Hispanic areas browner, and the White areas Whiter. What we are witnessing is the emergence of new ethnostates, which will become new nations when America goes down.

The people who really lost out here were the people who gambled on miscegenation. Their kids will have to pick one tribe or the other, and because the closer the tribe is to human origins, the more it influences appearance, this means they will have bred toward the more original group. If you had a white parent, no one cares anymore.

In the meantime, people are sorting not just according to race, but by ethnicity, with groups such as the founding group of the United States, the Western Europeans (WASPs) finding their own space apart from the mixed-ethnic Europeans (South, Irish, East) and third-world immigrant flood. Again, people do not care how well-behaved or intelligent these immigrants are, or what their SAT scores are. They just want to live with people like themselves, which means that Everyone Else need not apply.

This contrasts the “magic dirt”/proposition nation/Leftist view of society, which is that we can combine all different genetic strains of people and then indoctrinate them in Leftist ideology and forge a nation out of those robotic, obedient, and conformist beige people.

Conservatives in name tend to adopt this view as well. Witness Breitbart editor Ben Shapiro assert multiculturalism as a goal of “conservatism”:

The alt-right are people like Richard Spencer who think that Western civilization and Western culture are inseparable from ethnicity. In other words, European ethnicity is the dominant force behind Western culture and Western civilization biologically.

…I think the alt-right doesn’t want immigration, legal or illegal, because they oppose immigration on the basis that it endangers Western civilization or European ethnicity. People that I’m aware of on the mainstream conservative side, if they have objections to immigration, it’s on the basis of costs or culture, not on the basis of race.

I don’t care if someone immigrates here so long as they’re willing to imbibe the principles of Western civilization. I don’t care what someone’s race happens to be. This is consistent with the founding vision of the country. But the alt-right doesn’t accept that.

Shapiro is wrong, of course; the founding fathers specified that they wanted Western European people only and were quite vocal about race and inherent inequality. But current American conservatives, who have been selected for their ability to work with the post-1968 Leftist Establishment, see it differently.

Even more, it is nonsense to assume that culture is independent from race, just like it is insane to separate sex and love. You can force it to appear as if this is true, but then, a conspiracy of details over time destroys you, much as it has destroyed our society for pursuing these illusions.

All general tendencies — “traits” — are heritable. Cultures are composed of traits, if not explicitly, in orientation. This is why human differentiation happened. This means that the hardware required to run culture, at least without it being enforced temporarily at gunpoint, is limited to the group that invented that culture.

Shapiro may not like this, but he is out of luck because it is uncontroversial by itself. If someone argued that we should replace the Maori or Zulu with legions of Fred from Accounting and his lovely wife Mabel from Cleveland, OH, then they would be uniformly seen as genocidal racists. When the inverse is argued, people shrug it off, because it fits within the Leftist wealth transfer narrative.

Shapiro also fits within that narrative, which is unfortunate given his entertaining insight in many other matters.

The grim fact is that Balkanization is happening because Western people, steeped in egalitarianism and universalism, cannot accept that there are different groups because they have different genetics. At least, they cannot accept it in public. When you deny this impulse, it comes out in the form of groups withdrawing from the ruined false center of society, and retreating to be with their own.

As usual, diversity fails. It is attempted genocide that will benefit no groups, although some members of each will be peeled off and mixed into the new beige master race of perfect Leftist supporters. Instead, it will create a collapse where different ethnic, ethnic-religious and ethnic-cultural groups. With that, superpower status goes away forever.

Balkanization offers us a view of the civilization cycle. Civilizations rise, invert their thinking, become individualistic, and then extinguish themselves through equality including democracy and diversity. Within them, the former active and productive agents pack their bags and go elsewhere, producing a new civilization, while the miscegenated remnants writhe in third world status.

Democracy Dies In A Haze Of Hypocrisy And Failed Promises

Tuesday, April 4th, 2017

Barack Obama is a wonderful man. It turns out that this is the week he gets busted for eavesdropping on the incoming Trump administration, possibly by using American allies to access the feeds in an attempt to work around the law.

It has become clear that in addition to spying on Americans, Obama left the economy a smoking ruin, lowered American prestige worldwide, normalized corruption, savaged the workforce, demoralized law enforcement leading to lawlessness, made diversity even more toxic, increased political division and ushered in a collapse of the white middle class. All of these are good things, in that they have made it clear to even the least observant that our current path is not working.

After all, Obama was not that radical. He is a Democrat, which means he supports socialist-style welfare state policies funded by consumerism in the Roosevelt model, and an African-American, which means that realists recognize that he works in self-interest, or for his tribe at the expense of others, most notably the majority who are Western European. He adopted disastrous policies like socialized medicine, women in the military, gay marriage, bailouts and an increased welfare state, but none of these are outside the normal Democrat or Leftist agenda. He merely took them to their logical extremes and showed us what we can expect in the future, since democracy always slides Leftward.

The slide Leftward is visible in our culture, first and foremost. The backlash against it is gratifying. One great example comes from the sports network that broadcast liberal propaganda and saw its ratings drop, causing it to now backtrack on having political commentary involved with sports programming:

“Original news reports should not include statements of support, opposition or partisanship related to any social issue, political position, candidate or office holder.”

This one seems straightforward and achievable, at least within ESPN’s platforms. The one place on ESPN in which you don’t see straight opinion is on the hard news side of the operation.

“Writers, reporters, producers and editors directly involved in ‘hard’ news reporting, investigative or enterprise assignments and related coverage should refrain in any public-facing forum from taking positions on political or social issues, candidates or office holders.”

During the Obama years, every institution public and private drifted Leftward. It was like a prole holiday: with the first black president, all those evil conservatives had been beaten back and therefore, people could do whatever they wanted and expect the government to subsidize them.

This worked out poorly for them in part because their main demographic of consumers are the normal, middle class WASP and other white citizens who really do not want to hear about slavery, socialism, transgenderism, gay marriage, colonialism, patriarchy and sexism anymore. These are practical people who are accustomed to overcoming adversity to provide for themselves, and they view this as whining that they were willing to tolerate until it became a threat, at which point they started fleeing from it.

Another entertainment company also learned that PC is bad business when it alienated its primary demographic:

Following a recent decline in Marvel comic sales, vice president of sales David Gabriel thinks the company’s diversity push is to blame.

In a recent interview with ICV2, he said: “What we heard was that people didn’t want any more diversity.”

He continued: “They didn’t want female characters out there. That’s what we heard, whether we believe that or not.

“I don’t know that that’s really true, but that’s what we saw in sales.”

Here is a hint: each ethnic group prefers its own. If you are marketing to black people, have black characters (the industry has no problem doing this, interestingly). But if you are selling to white people? It is best to feature people like them.

Marvel and others got fooled because for a long time, white people did not mind going to see movies with characters of other races. The reason is that white people, uncharacteristically for humans, are open-minded to the point of having their brains fall out. As a result, to them there is no significance to the fact that since the 1980s, just about every movie president has been black, and every movie includes a magical black character to convey wisdom, and black action heroes, and so on… but once it was clear that these were designed to replace white heroes entirely, the audience rebuked them.

White people have always viewed diversity as “we keep our society as it is, and you can tag along and enjoy it too because we’re generous.” This is oblivious to the reality of life, which is that any group which is not tribalistic will soon disappear from the earth, and so people without this First World Problems tendency toward pathological pacifism will act sensibly, which is to view every other group as a threat because each group has a self-interest in obtaining territory and imposing its values, religion, and genetics upon it. The white vision of diversity is totally incompatible with reality. But, being good consumer aphids being milked by the corporate ants, the white population never objected until the white genocide aspects of non-whites featured in media became evident.

Under Obama, this media push for total propaganda all the time became normal. It was entirely consistent with what the Soviets would have done, and what the bureaucrats in the EU were also doing. The United States, under Obama, began to resemble the Soviet Union more than the old America. Considering that both Soviets and Democrats are socialists, and that Obama’s goal was to obliterate the old USA for the benefit of his people, this was not surprising. But then it backfired because Obama by acting like a third-world tyrant (thankfully and blessedly) overplayed his hand.

The result of Obama’s wonderful work is that the races, political orientations, religions and classes are now totally polarized, giving way to Balkanization or Civil War 2.0. Witness this diversity-failure audacity:

The April 15 meeting plans to discuss projects and initiatives for the upcoming year and act as a place for people to “meet, strategize and organize.” While children are invited to attend, white people are explicitly banned from the meeting, according to the Facebook event page.

When people began questioning the ban on whites over Twitter, Black Lives Matter Philly stayed by their ban, explaining that their meetings are “black centered.”

This outrages the average blockhead conservative, but to a nationalist, it is completely sensible. No black person can trust a white person to act in the interests of black people because each ethnic group has its own self-interest; this is the same reason diversity has never worked throughout history. But before Obama, this sort of crisp, clear and logical articulation was not possible. Now that he has made everyone hate everyone else, it is commonplace.

I said before this last election that if I could have elected Barack Obama for another eight years, I would have. At the end of that time, the USA would be in default and would collapse like the Soviet Union; white people would have fled the cities and made a living through barter and agriculture; Leftism would have adopted the hammer and sickle outside of sotto voce conversations and the churches would all have become convenience stores or mosques. At that point, Civil War 2.0 would have been not just imminent, but ongoing.

As it is, I have to settle for the glory of watching Barack Obama dismantle America to the point where reconciliation is impossible and all of its many diverse groups distrust each other on a permanent basis. The rainbow nation has failed, thanks to Barack Obama. Liberal democracy is disintegrating. People are fleeing institutions and cities. Now that the crash is here, the renewal can begin.

Recommended Reading