Псалъэ гуауэкIэ фымыуэ,
Фи гум ивмыгъэкI гущIэгъу.
ПцIы фыупсу фыщымыуэ,
Псалъэ пэжыр фщIы ныбжьэгъу.
Do not fire words that hurt and scar
From thy heart compassion cast not afar
Do not trip thy soul and pronounce lies
Make thy words, my friend, true and wise
– Leonid Dudey
In American public discourse, the racial qualifier “Caucasian” tends to substantially, but not fully, overlap with the qualifier “White”: strictly speaking, the former term is considerably wider than the latter. Although often confused, the terms have different scientific and social reference points: “Caucasian” tends to retain a strong anthropometric connotation, whereas the term “White” tends to culturally defined.
In anthropological theory, the pre-modern (Pre-Columbian) “Caucasian Race” habitat includes not only most of Europe but also large sections of North Africa and West Asia; it covers many populations that radically differ from Europe’s indigenous populations in appearance and culture. In sociological theory, the contemporary “White Race” identity is conventionally associated only with the indigenous populations of Europe plus their overseas settler descendants in the New World, South Africa and Oceania. In America an additional and a stringent endogamic “one-drop rule” tends to exclude all mixed-race offspring of the settler “Whites.” The American definition of “White,” informally leaning towards “White Anglo-Saxon Protestant,” is further narrowed by a strict exclusion of Latin American populations: the “Hispanics” are conventionally distinguished from what is effectively a semi-racial qualifier “White.” For the sake of clarity and argument, this essay will use this narrowest semi-racial qualifier for the term “White.”
Thus, this essay will indulge the thought experiment that the “White Race” is not a social construct, but that it is a biological construct: a genetically and phenotypically definable “sub-sub-species,” limited to a specified, narrow group. At first sight, this may appear to be something of an “academic exercise” because a truly Archaeo-Futurist approach to the question of race is actually incompatible with an exclusively materialist (biological, genetic, phenotypic) definition of race. Archaeo-Futurist hermeneutics aims at the long-overdue supersession of the highly artificial and entirely outdated “material-spiritual” dichotomy that is feeding the anti-identitarian agenda of the hostile elite.
Archaeo-Futurism therefore rejects the narrow definition of race which now dominates the public debate. This narrow definition is, in fact, highly outdated: it properly belongs to the sphere of the historical-materialist ideologies of yesterday: socialism, fascism and liberalism. The fact that the “talking classes” and entrenched ideologues — on both ends of the political spectrum — tend to cling to the historical-materialist definition of race does not alter this equation: their interests lie in the maintenance of a profitable status quo and a mental comfort zone. The extinction of bad ideas usually coincides with the extinction of bad thinkers.
But, even if the historical-materialist definition of race is simply useless as a culture-historical or meta-political concept within Archaeo-Futurism, the defence of a thus-defined “White Race” may still provide a convenient first rallying point for the New Right in the face of the current phenomenon of accelerating ethnic replacement. This replacement (or rather: inundation) strategy is currently implemented by the globalist hostile elite in their full-scale attempt to stamp out Western civilization. The hostile elite’s New World Order vision of a borderless world that can be economically exploited and socially manipulated with impunity is simply incompatible with the continued existence of any form of non-fluid (non-exchangeable, non-monetary, non-adjustable) identity. The unique combination of rational long-term planning, cooperative productivity, high-trust communalism, civic responsibility, self-reliant individualism and scientific discipline that characterize Western societies are simply incompatible with the interests and the sentiments of the globalist hostile elite.
These features are incompatible with the hostile elite’s “business model” of slash-and-burn neo-liberalism and with its nouveau riche attachment to resentful cultural Marxism. The recent rise of the White Nationalist movement seems to indicate that the carrying capacity of the White populations is now being tested to its limits. The fact that increasing numbers of well-informed and well-educated — even well-off — Whites are joining its ranks seems to indicate the imminent approach of a socio-political “breaking point.” The utter failure of the business-as-usual model of “mainstream” politics and media is now giving rise to a formidable groundswell of indigenous indignation throughout the entire West: the New Right movement, of which the White Nationalist movement is merely a part, is nothing but the visible tip of this iceberg. With its shift to accelerated all-out ethnic replacement (openly announced in 2015 in Angela Merkel’s slogan Wir schaffen das), the globalist hostile elite is playing va banque. Clearly, the hostile elite feels safe enough to choose this strategy: clearly, it feels time is on its side.
But having declared war on the Western “White” peoples, the globalist hostile elite must now do or die. The New Right would be well advised to exploit the strategic predicament of the hostile elite. The hostile elite’s now irrevocable commitment to mass-immigration and ethnic replacement is increasingly limiting its options: hence its increasingly desperate politics (shifting from bland “political correctness” to extremist “identity politics”) and its increasingly absurd journalism (shifting from simple censorship to outright misinformation). The present transition from nominal democracy to open totalitarianism throughout the entire Western political domain is taking place at a breathtaking speed.
The globalist hostile elite is now starting to show its real face: its malicious intelligentsia, its resentful feminists and its corrupt color-colonizers are already openly celebrating their victory over “White privilege,” “toxic masculinity,” and Western civilization. But they may very well be celebrating prematurely: their quarry may be wounded, but it is not yet dead. Given the fact that its enemy is now revealing its real agenda and given its now undisputed status of sole champion of the indigenous peoples of the West, the New Right should re-consider its strategy. With the enemy in undisputed occupation of vital positions of Western institutional power and with the hand-over of large sections of the Western homeland to immigrant colonists, a defensive posture no longer suffices: what has been lost will stay lost, unless it is reconquered. The reconquest of the lost ground will require a grand strategy that takes in consideration the entire battle field.
For the New Right switch from a defensive to an offensive strategy, a White Nationalist program may be a valid reference point, but it does not suffice. Any “fight for phenotype” is lost from the outset: people only become motivated to fight for a group that they identify with; “phenotypical similarity” does not suffice as an identity marker. Phenotype may be a factor (of varying weight) in the complicated equations of long-term cultural-historical identity, but it still is only one factor; there are many others (language and religion being of at least equal weight in any case). The “divided we fall” examples of nineteenth century Native America vs. White America and twentieth century White-on-White (world) war Europe prove the point. The “everybody for himself and no God for us all” mentality dominating Western public discourse in neo-liberalism and cultural Marxism proves it again.
The “fight for phenotype” will fail to inspire the hearts and minds of the great mass of Whites. At least, not until a sufficient percentage of Whites have their backs to the wall and a knife at their throat at the same time. And that the devious calculus of the globalist hostile elite will never allow to happen, at least not till the relative percentage of Whites in the globalist melting pot falls below a yet to be determined critical algorithmic point (a point that the ruling South African plutocracy seems to currently bend on finding). But given the fact that the New Right is still very much a project in the making, and that it is still very much at the stage of rearguard action needing fall-back positions and rallying points, it may be useful to somewhat further indulge the thought experiment of the biologically defined “White Race.”
Within the New Right, one possible aspect of the “White Race” thought experiment tends to be very under-investigated: the phenomenon of White-on-White Genocide. A historical study of the phenomenon of White-on-White Genocide may benefit the New Right in solving at least one of the many issues that continue to weaken it through ideology-driven infighting and sectarian internal division: the so-called “Islamic Question.” Perhaps the example of the phenomenon most relevant to this subject is found in the nineteenth century Great Caucasian War and its follow-up, the Circassian Genocide. These episodes saw the (near) destruction of the indigenous White nations of the north-western and eastern Caucasus under the imperialist “steamroller” of White Tsarist Russia. These indigenous peoples were partially Pagan and partially Christian, but mostly Muslim. They were not destroyed in the course of some “religious war,” but simply because they stood in the way of modernist (material, technological, social-darwinist, evolutionary) “progress.” In the same way the White peoples of today stand in the way of “progress” as defined by the globalist hostile elite.
The ethnic replacement strategy of the globalist hostile elite has brought a wave of Muslim immigration into Western and Central Europe as well as the great cities of the overseas Anglosphere. These Muslim immigrant populations — plural because they are divided into many different ethnic groups with many different socio-religious practices — inhabit the kind of cohesive, semi-collectivist and semi-Traditional life-worlds that the indigenous populations abandoned two or three generations ago. They positively live and experience cohesions — ethnic identity, social structure and religious commitment — that the indigenous populations now only know in a negative sense (as in non-dual “citizenship,” individual “freedom,” and “cultural Christianity”). To the extent that the outer life-world of these semi-Traditional (still-Muslim) immigrant populations is increasingly intruding into the public sphere at the expense of the almost fully-modernized (ex-Christian), but numerically declining indigenous populations, conflict is inevitable. For many indigenous people, the growing public presence of “Islam” is the most visible aspect of the immigrant take-over of the great cities of the West: it is inevitably associated with the atrocious terror, homicidal crime, industrial-scale rape, systematic vandalism, economic dispossession, and infrastructure collapse that characterize the slow-motion Fall of the West. These phenomena, however, are nothing more than the inevitable by-products of all processes of bio-evolutionary competition, where the losers of “natural selection” fall into civilizational decay, cultural decadence and social implosion. The statistics that describe the final downfall of the Native Americans, the Australian Aboriginals and many other shrinking “primitive native” populations prove the point. It is true that the globalist hostile elite artificially creates, promotes and enforces the ethnic replacement process for its own purposes (consumer base expansion, ethnic business trade boosting, labor market dilution, electoral base-engineering, etc.). But it is also true that it does not specifically favour Muslim mass-immigration: it simply favors all mass-immigration, to the extent that it serves the globalist interests and that it weakens national interests. The Muslim presence merely happens to be the most visible alien presence in the West; as such, it provides the globalist hostile elite with a perfect tool to “divide and rule”: Islamophobia.
By focusing on “Islam” alone, the “populist right” effectively serves as a political lightning rod to distract the public debate from attending to the real issue: mass immigration as a whole, including the non-Muslim elements coming across the borders. Populist “civic nationalism,” which merely wishes to force Muslim immigrants into the socio-economic straightjacket of secularism, individualism, consumerism, and nihilism, leaves intact the hostile elite’s basic liberalist-normativist worldview and its cultural-relativist universalism narrative. This kind of civil nationalist populism lashes out at “Islam,” but leaves in place the entity that has brought “Islam” into the West in the first place: the globalist hostile elite. As Islamophobe populists indulge in facile psychological generalizations, infantile “theological” criticisms and biased historical “analyses,” the globalist hostile elite remains scot-free. In the best case, these populists use Islam-bashing as a convenient disguise to fight immigration policies, but without ever addressing the underlying assumptions and interests that sustain these policies. In the worst case, they are political opportunists in search of a short-cut to parliamentary perks and publishing royalties. Unfortunately, some of that old populist-style civil nationalist Islamophobia has carried over into the New Right. The time has come to rid the New Right of this counter-productive anachronism. It should be said loud and clearly: primitivist Islamophobia is incompatible with an intellectually and politically mature New Right. It infects the New Right with the “civic nationalist” memetic virus, it damages the New Right’s public credibility and it limits the New Right’s space for political maneuver.
The remaining old-style Islamophobes within the New Right may still label Islam as “opportunist and expansionist theocracy”; they forget that Christianity may very well be typified in the same way if we look at history at the level of schoolboy simplification.
Islam is not “anti-white.” Islam is racially neutral, it is universal in appeal and tries to encompass the whole world and herein lies its problem. Since it tries to expand with the sword it comes into conflict with the whole non-Muslim world. The conflict with the (formally) Christian West is only part of that conflict and there are no racial motives involved. Islam is also in conflict with animist Africa, Hindu India and Buddhist Asia, again with no racial motives involved (Franklin Ryckaert).
Islam is no more “anti-White” than Christianity. The remaining old-style Islamophobes within the New Right may mistake the mental self-justification construct that is called “Islam” by opportunist immigrant colonizers for the authentic Tradition that lies at the heart of Islam, much as they may mistake the “New Age” pseudo-Christianity of immigrant-importing “progressive churches” for the authentic Tradition that was once the beating heart of Europe. They may misread and hate Islam for the same reason that they misunderstand and despise Christianity: because they think themselves exempted from the simple rules of spiritual life and transcendental reference that guided their ancestors – and that still guide those peoples that continue living within communally and individually viable Traditions. If the Western peoples are to survive, they will have to re-conquer, re-invent and re-live their Western Tradition. Their fundamental problem is not the strength of Islam, it is the weakness of the “White” West: its lack of transcendental inspiration, authentic vision and communal spirit.
Before it can become truly superior to its many enemies, the New Right needs to purge itself: it should become lean and mean; it should transform itself into a formidable fighting machine that has no stain and no weakness. It should become worthy of its historical calling, which is a sweeping crusade against the perverse evil that is oppressing the West. The New Right should purge itself from all that is holding it back: sentimental nostalgias of the “Third Reich” type, anachronistic ideas of the “Islamophobia” type and outdated attachments of the secular-libertarian type. This does not mean that the New Right should pursue a purist and sectarian path. Rather opposite: it should exclude no vision, no idea and no person; all those that are drawn to it have their place and their use. All opposites and streams within the New Right — and, by extension, within Western society at large — must fuse and work together for a higher purpose. That purpose is a glorious future for the West.
The True Right that will rise from the New Right should be nothing less than an all-conquering world vision that unifies and purifies all that was before it. This requires a re-appropriation of the authentic source energies of Western Tradition, a break-out from the perceptual limits of the globalist modernity and an incorporation of the strengths of its enemies. To the extent that the Muslim immigration wave presents the New Right with the problem of bio-evolutionary competition, it should learn from that competition: it should adjust, outcompete and overcome it in all ways. This is what it would mean for New Right “to come to terms” with Islam: it should absorb all that is strong and superior in it. This is what it means to eat the heart of your enemy. In ancient Nordic lore, the conquering hero is required to eat the heart of his slain enemy: only this is what gives him superior knowledge and, through that knowledge, superior power.
The holistic and synergic “True Right” vision outlined above requires the New Right to rise above its current “ugly duckling” self. To set an example, the author of this essay will forego (childishly easy) “eat your heart out” responses to the “critical comments” that may attach themselves to any of his previous, current and future words. In his or her heart every civilized reader knows where and when “criticisms” and “commentaries” cross that very fine line into innuendo, paranoia and maliciousness — and nobody knows it better than the “line crosser” himself. The only thing that the readers and writers of the New Right should remember is this: that its enemies rule by dividing it. That they rejoice when the New Right indulges in pharisaic arguments such as “X’s position is closer to the truth than Y’s,” “Y’s points is a direct challenge to X’s point,” “only X can be correct,” or “Y indulges soft proselytizing.” The New Right’s enemies rejoice when its members fight among ourselves. The easiest form of White Genocide is White Fratricide, as we saw in the world wars. The cheapest victory over the New Right unfolds in its own little drama of White Suicide. The intelligent questioners and truth seekers of our movement should take care not to fall in the role of Pharisees, who seek to see only the splinters in the eyes of their fellows. Truth should arise in the assembly of men, but it can only arise when it is spoken from a True Heart.
For the New Right, this True Heart equation is simple. The New Right can unite around one basic idea: the love of the people it fights for: the Western people. They may be called “White” by those that seek to realize the albus in albis (“white within whiteness”) ideal in themselves, as long as their heart is true in that love and clean from immature hate to “others.” This True Heart will allow the New Right to defeat its true enemy: the globalist hostile elite. This True Heart will allow it to see through the webs of lies spun by this enemy, including its “Islamophobe” lightning rod agenda. The truth is that there will be no “Islamic Question” left to discuss if the New Right rallies around — and sticks to — its basic ethno-nationalist vision. A non-dogmatic and well-calibrated implementation of that vision would immediately dissolve the spectre of the “Islamic Question.” This vision may require localized and temporary adjustments and it may – eventually – be followed by greater visions, but it will have to do for now. The New Right should learn to focus. The New Right should overcome the emotional immaturities and psychological imbalances of the “morning after” its “red pill”; it should not indulge in childish tantrums against the many “feel bad” realities it has discovered. It should not be seduced by the easier fights of internal bickering and scapegoat bashing. It should prepare to face its real enemy: the globalist hostile elite, not “Islam.”
Earlier this summer, the author wrote an essay entitled “A Note on the Islamic Question.” It is just what it says it is: a note to include in the New Right’s strategic priority memo. In stating that such a thing as “True Islam” really exists, separately from its — largely primitive — bio-evolutionary strategy “adaptations,” this Note does not “defend Islam” (no authentic Tradition needs defense), it does not “trumpet Islam” (a Traditionalist-validated Archaeo-Futurism cannot prioritize any one Tradition over another) and it does not “embellish the mystique of the Other.” In the other-worldly heart of Traditionalism, which is one of the two great pillars of Archaeo-Futurism, there is no “other.” Rather, in this world, Traditionalism insists on unique self-realization for each unique individual and each unique community. In the political sphere, the self-realization of nations and peoples requires the sovereign right to self-determination – it is entirely incompatible with globalist universalism and cultural-marxist relativism. This is one of the points where Traditionalism informs, affirms and upholds the New Right movement and its basic ethno-nationalist vision.
If Traditionalism teaches that there is such a thing as True Islam, it also teaches that there is such a thing as the proverbial True Scotsman: the True Scotsman creates himself by living a that life is not only self-empowering, it also projects power. In other words: Let Scotsmen determine who is entitled to call himself a true Scotsman (James O’Meara). Here applies the saying that even if only one person incorporates a Truth, it is still a Truth. Traditionalism does not decide what is thought to be True Islam or a True Scotsman: it merely records their presence and upholds their legitimate rights. In other words: The limits of orthodoxy within a particular school of thought is the kind of debate that is best left to the adherents of that school of thought, not outside observers (James O’Meara). Traditionalism stands above the “logical” sophistry, the counter-productive “hyper-rationalization” and the false “objectivity” of historical-materialism: it merely affirms and confirms true power, or the kind of power that is absolute because it is incorporated. And so does the sole heir to Traditionalism: Archaeo-Futurism.
True Islam represents pure power, a power type that is found in all true religions. As such as, it can never be entirely alien to the authentic Western Tradition, which is most quintessentially expressed in pre-modern religions. So, no: Islam is not a “religion of brown people”; it never was and it never will be. There are a number of Whiter-than-White nations that are predominantly Muslim. In fact, the arguably Most White nations of the world are either predominantly or very substantially Muslim: these are the (remnant) indigenous “True Caucasians” who still live in southern Russia and in Transcaucasia. They are (pre-historically) more indigenous to their ancient lands than the Indo-Europeans will ever be in Europe. They are genetically, phenotypically, and culturally “purer” than the “Whites” of Europe. Their exquisitely beautiful women were the envy of the pre-modern world. Their ferociously brave men were the nightmare of their modern enemies. The remnants of the Circassians (Adyghe), living partially in ancestral land “reserves” and partially in Middle Eastern exile, now mostly adhere to Islam (mostly in “specialized” adaptations). The surviving Abkhazians (Apswa) reconquered their Black Sea coastal land in a true David-and-Goliath fight in the early 1990s; they harmoniously combine Islam and Christianity with their own ancient (Pagan) religion. Other such “White-and-Muslim” nations are found scattered throughout Eastern Europe and the Balkans.
Even within the Western heartland itself, there have always been some historical “oddities” that incorporated Islam in the private sphere. These have included some of the West’s most exceptional minds. Here is a very non-exhaustive shortlist for lazy readers. Within the Traditionalist School: Titus Burckhardt, Nun Ha Mim Keller, René Guénon, Martin Lings, Jean-Louis Michon, Frithjof Schuon. From theology: George Baker, Cary Legenhausen, Marmaduke Pickthall, Huston Smith. Within academia: Rolf von Ehrenfels, Myriam François, Joel Hayward. Much longer lists can be provided for more controversial groups such as artists, military men and “Old Right” activists.
Of these “White-but-Muslim” peoples and of these “White Convert” individuals it can not be said that they convert… because [Islam] projects strength, and they either want to be on the winning team or fear muslim violence. Cowards convert (somebody said that while using a pseudonym). The facts show the opposite of what many Islamophobes believe: the category “Muslim” is not in any way relevant to the definition of what it means to be a Westerner, a European, or White. In the author’s home nation, the Netherlands, many “lily White” natives adhere to religions much further removed from the Christian Tradition of their ancestors than Islam will ever be. There are sizable numbers of Dutch Buddhists and Baha’i who live peaceful and productive lives with private beliefs that are entirely compatible with the greater good. There are many more Dutch men and women who have even gone further: they have entirely forsaken God altogether (a thing that could never be said to their “convert” compatriots). But even if many of them have left the God of their ancestors, they still remain part of the Dutch people. For all of them, it is true that …in all cases they will still be white people, with white sensibilities doing stuff white people like and keeping their contact with non-whites to an absolute minimum (“Vagrant Rightist”). There may come a time that the indigenous peoples of Europe, irrespective of their beliefs and un-beliefs, may be forced to take a stand against the forces that seek to destroy their nations. It is only then that we will see who will …die fighting for the ideals of their own people, no matter how desperate (Eordred).
The New Right is tasked with formulating viable — democratic, legal, realistic — strategies for avoiding the bleak future scenario of a bio-evolutionary inter-ethnic and interracial fight-to-the-death. It is tasked with performing an emergency operation on the dangerously sick body politic of the West. Many intellectual pitfalls will have to be avoided for that operation to succeed. Many comfortable illusions will have to go out of the window. One of these illusions is the thought that Enlightenment™ values are in any way authentically “Western.” Another is the thought that its derivates, total “individual freedom” and militant “secular humanism,” are in any way compatible with the survival of the indigenous peoples of Europe. The propaganda slogans of the globalist hostile elite — “freedom of speech,” “representative government,” “checks and balances,” “human rights,” “democracy” — are counterfeits, based on these Enlightenment™ derivates. They merely tap into sub-rational emotions and illusions; they are not realities. The contemporary reality is globalist: it is neo-liberal and cultural Marxist at once. For the indigenous people of Europe and their settler descendants overseas it now includes “algorithmic” digital censorship, undemocratic transnational governance, corrupt cartel politics, obscene wealth imbalances, enforced interethnic wealth redistribution, “open borders” mass immigration and socio-cultural “deconstruction.” This reality is enforced by the globalist hostile elite. The true enemy facing “White people” is not True Islam; it is the globalist hostile elite.
All this leaves an important question unanswered “what is compatible with the West?” But that is precisely how it should be: it is up to Western peoples to decide on the answer. The answer that Traditionalism and Archaeo-Futurism can suggest is this: it is all that is High, Beautiful and True. The Western peoples themselves will have to decide on what that will be. What the New Right can do is this: point True North — but add a realistic roadmap.
A compass, I learnt when I was surveying, it’ll point you True North from where you’re standing, but it’s got no advice about the swamps and dessert and chasm that you’ll encounter along the way. If in pursuit of your destination, you plunge ahead, heedless of obstacles, and achieve nothing more than to sink in a swamp… What’s the use of knowing True North? – Abraham Lincoln
 The author does not equate the globalist hostile elite with the “Jews”: his contribution to the New Right’s re-examination of the “Jewish Question” can be found on https://arktos.com/2019/02/06/from-jq-to-iq-part-1/ .
 The author’s earlier contribution to the New Right “Islamic Question” debate is found on https://www.counter-currents.com/2019/07/a-note-on-the-islamic-question/, Spencer Quinn’s “Islamophobe” riposte is found on https://www.counter-currents.com/2019/07/true-muslims-true-scotsmen/. In this essay, the quotations within quotation marks are taken from Quinn’s article; the quotations in italics are taken from the commentaries to both articles.
 These “trolling” quotations were undoubtedly intended to sow dissent within the New Right by “creating” friction between the Eurasianist and the White Nationalist sections of the New Right, as respectively represented by the author and Greg Johnson. To dispel the entirely artificial notion of any such friction, the author points to his Archaeo-Futurist review — and positive assessment — of Greg Johnson’s Manifesto: it can be found on https://www.amerika.org/politics/operation-belisarius-seven-archaeo-futurist-perspectives-on-greg-johnsons-the-white-nationalist-manifesto/ .
 Cf. note 3.
 The author’s summary perspectives on the Traditional School are found in his books Sunset (424-8 – https://www.cambridgescholars.com/the-sunset-of-tradition-and-the-origin-of-the-great-war) and Alba Rosa (151-3 – https://arktos.com/product/alba-rosa/). A short online presentation relevant to the concept of “Tradition” is found on Interregnum’s Youtube episode “Alba Rosa with Alexander Wolfheze” (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9T8FjeyrJGQ).