The last decade brought so many changes we will be estimating them for another decade or two. After the Cold War ended in 1991, we had a decade of thinking the age of threats was over. With technology, and liberal democracy, we were all protected from the horrors of the past.
Then some guys flew a plane or two into a building (or two). We embarked on a huge war, only to find out that we were not fighting organized states or religions, but independent activists who wanted modern society to keep its corrupting influence away from their people. This was as much about knowing that porn ruins girls’ self esteem and Coca-Cola makes people lazy as it was about dislike of the USA.
Now that war is going to migrate elsewhere.
Identitarianism. With the election of Barack Obama, the USA and Europe assumed that we could finally get that tedious racism out of the way and just live together in peace. A few riots later people were realizing the obvious: culture isn’t just an accessory. It’s something you live, and no two (or more) cultures can exist in the same place. What brought this on was not brown people, but the conflicts between Western, Eastern and Southern European cultures. What will bring this on in the USA is the demographic collision between Hispanics and African-Americans.
Culture wars. The left had been patting themselves on the back during the Clinton years. We’ve won! Everything is permissible! Ten years later, people aged from 25 to 35 and started wondering about what “everything is permissible” was doing to their kids. The result is a sharper division between social conservatives, who want a chaste orderly morally upright world, and social liberals, who want permissiveness.
Clash of civilizations. Even more than the West versus Islam, we’re seeing modern society — consumerism, liberal democracy, internationalism, mass media and family-destroying sexual liberation — collide with everyone else. The rich nations took modern society on a test spin and have come out of it as ruined, dismal places straight out of Blade Runner. The rest of the world is thinking, maybe, no thanks.
Economics. There has always been one agenda in modern politics, and that is redistribution of wealth. With the industrial revolution, wealth became abundant; what they didn’t tell you was that it was a one-time dividend. Manufacturing, standardized parts, steam and then gasoline power, and finally computing. Great! What other frontiers exist? Many lucrative ones, but few gold rushes. As a result, the competition between haves and have-nots ramps up.
In short, all the stuff that caused our wars back at the start of the lastcentury is back — and thanks to our technology, expanding population and greater media awareness, it’s more potent than before. This comes at a time when our oil supplies are dwindling, we’re out of timber, overfishing and overhunting are further limitations and we have better weapons. It’s a perfect storm brewing.
The two “sides” in our political debate are of no use. In the USA, we have neoconservative Republicans and neosocialist Democrats; Europe has more political parties, but they are either rightist or leftist, with most being more leftist than rightist. The left wants to advance an agenda of “progress”: more equality, more wealth redistribution, pacifism and solidarity with the workers; the right are muddled, but want national identity and some kind of social Darwinist meritocracy.
No clear winner has emerged because all sides are tied to pointless issues. These issues are symbolic, not real. The left has tied itself to multiculturalism, which is failing; the American right panders to social conservatives with token issues like abortion and gay marriage, but fails to address the underlying problem; the greens somehow let themselves get swept up into the leftist mania for wealth redistribution.
If you think mainstream politics is bad, the underground is even worse. The far-left are either insane anarchists who think that society will magically become perfect if we just get rid of standards, and the far-right are — well, we’ve covered this before. Blaming Jews for all of your problems, getting angry at other ethnic groups for the failures of diversity, and most of all insisting on an uncompromising and violent dogma, for good reasons, drives voters and everyone but the loudmouths away.
In contrast to this, we at Amerika.org have a sensible platform:
Social conservatism. A world with chaste girls and boys, happy families and lasting marriages, upright public behavior, lack of drugs/drunkenness, and positive values is actually a better world. A good deal of this is contained in undoing sexual liberation and returning to the idea that yes, our society does have standards, and you are judged by how well you uphold them. Few people are honest enough to admit this. The European New Right mostly denies it. But most families with children want to see more of it, and they’re the cornerstone of our species. We can’t win this one with abortion, gay marriage, school prayer and other token know-nothing issues however. We have to go for the jugular: standards — We want them.
Pro-Imperialism. Our European New Right brethren really fail it on this issue. A world under American hegemony has been a stable world despite the leftist shift of the United States; in fact, the USA having to be an imperial power has brought it back toward conservatism, as we see with the Obama foreign policy, and Clinton’s before it. Even more, American hegemony has brought stability to Europe by holding back the true invaders at the gates: Eurasians, who want to dominate Europe to use its riches to subsidize their failing post-Soviet and post-Mongol societies; the Middle East, who want a reverse jihad; Asians, who would like a retro-Mongol invasion of the West to finally achieve dominance. That’s real politik and most people cannot handle it, but American imperialism has kept its horrors away.
Culturism. The American conservatives are baffled by this one, but Europe gets it and even increasingly the UK and Canada are getting it: every nation needs a dominant culture. Ideally, this is a clear harmony between customs, values, language and heritage; in ad hoc nations like the US and Canada, it has to be a founding myth into which others are integrated, like our American nativist English-German-Dutch roots. American conservatives tend to bluster on about “collectivism” and how it’s bad and they are brave “individualists,” but they really mean independents, or those who act by guidance of their own principles. Individualist means someone who acts for their own motives before all else, including reality. Culturism is not collectivism; rather, it’s anti-collectivism, because it makes the collective and the individual alike subordinate to the shared standards of culture.
Conservationism. Not many on the American right will support environmentalism, much less deep ecology, because of the unfortunate stink of leftism that clings to all the green groups without exception. However, the best environmentalist thinkers are conservatives like Garrett Hardin and Pentti Linkola who point out that growth and letting our economy lead our thinking will cause us to commit ecocide. Having standards and a stable society as social conservatives want will actually reverse ecocide. The left (and lackeys the greens) fear this and will spit out a hundred lies a minute to deny it. The truth is that no amount of rules, fines, laws and agencies will substitute for actual environmental activism: setting aside at least 1/3 but more like 1/2 of our land in its natural, unbroken, untraversed state — or restoring it to that state.
Meritocracy. Equality is opposed to meritocracy. Meritocracy requires the best rise above the rest, which requires that not everyone be equal; in fact, everyone needs to start at zero and work their way up to “equality” (a base level of function and reward) or you end up subsidizing people to be mediocre. European socialists get nervous when you make such talk, but the truth is that the West has weakened itself by breeding downward for centuries, first under the influence of charitable churches and secondarily under leftist dogma itself. Egalitarianism is death.
Anti-dogma. Dogma is what happens when our society, in order to be more Utopian, decides what are universal right ideals, summarizes them, and enforces them onto the people. Conservatism works by the opposite principle, which is exclusivity, namely that values vary with the quality of person and degree of self-actualization. We can agree on societal values, but not all will uphold them; our society will sort itself with the best at the top if we insist on social standards and reward those who live by them. Dogma wants us to believe that we are little cogs that can be bent and molded into the right shape, and thus become perfect citizens. Reality says we should set up a meritocratic, moral and functional society, and let culture and the qualities of individuals sort us to a higher level, instead of imposing it through rules and subsidies.
These are the kind of ideas from which we can construct a future.
They do not rely on the failures of the past, or the reaction to those failures, or those who just want society to stop advancing in any way. We want people who can grasp the future and yet apply the eternal values of human success to it, learning from our past and using it to shape our future without giving in to the entropy of hopeless obedience.
This platform is inherently anti-leftist as it denies the silly notion that we’re all equal. We choose our friends carefully; that alone shows us how equality is a farce. Not just any person will do when you want friends, mates or business partners. Instead of trying to force us all to be OK, we should start trying to force ourselves to evolve so we can get past our problems as individuals and thus, as a species.
We are the future, those who can grasp this platform and others like it, because we are thinking beyond the clash of civilizations, beyond the collapse of consumer society, beyond the decay of the West and beyond the trivial issues that leftism has imposed on modern politics. We are thinking like frontier settlers, kingmakers and conquerors again, which is to say that we’re thinking creatively or how we will construct something new, not fight over parts of the old.
This outlook alone is so unique that modern politics cannot even visualize it. It is outside political discourse, which is based on carving up the pie, not baking a new one. Even more, it is based on measuring the consequences of our actions against creative values, or the type of society in which we hope to live. It’s about a choice of what whole type of civilization we want, not how we’ll tweak the existing one.
As politics in the West winds down to another embittered stalemate, it’s those who seek a truer tomorrow who are breaking away from the decadent infrastructure and finding power elsewhere. We are the future because we are the only ones who can think about how to make that future. Join us.