Furthest Right

The ethnopluralist manifesto (Jaroslaw Tomasiewicz)

The ethnopluralist manifesto

Jaroslaw Tomasiewicz





A Man has a natural need to identify himself with a group. Only a part of our personality can be created by ourselves. The rest is obtained from other people in a form of culture.






Eradicated person – it means thrown off from the culture typical for his community – is lost in the world. This situation makes his personality poorer. Without being backed by the culture – group identity – man can be easily manipulated by the authority, and thoughtlessly follows fashions.






The freedom of man is expressed in his right to preserve his identity and unlikeness. So the right to preserve group’s cultural identity is a result (in a certain way) of the right of every individual to preserve his individual identity.






The group identity being the necessary binder of the social solidarity is an autonomous value. The unlimited freedom of changing someone’s identity involves chaos of the group existence, weakens its unity, and facilitates the assimilation of small communities by the big ones. The choice of the identity must be not dependent only from an individual, but it must accepted by other members of its group.






Group identities – cultures – may be created on different basis, but the most common form of the group identity is the ethnic (national, regional, tribal) identity. So these identities are not imagined or hypothetical but they are real.






Cultures which were created during the historical changes of natural communities are based on tradition. Breaking off with the tradition always leads to the loss of own cultural identity. This is tantamount to the alienation of individuals and to disintegration of the community. That’s why while not wishing stagnation or petrifaction of the status quo we demand to reconsider our idolatrous relation to the progress which is not good by itself. Proven, traditional forms are better than the experiments made on living organisms. The society must develop, but changes must have the evolutionary and unconstrained character. They must not lead to the disruption of the cultural continuity.






The diversity of the human kind is a fact beyond any discussion. It is manifested in all areas of human existence. The abundance of being is a crucial value should be defended. Protecting this wealth we defend at the same time both: the richness, the diversity of the world around us and the real freedom of the group (the community can not be free without being conscious of its separateness). Further more, being rooted in a specific culture we are more sensitive to the uniqueness of other cultures. All cultures are equally alien and indifferent for the eradicated person. In such a situation we can not talk about tolerance, but only about the lack of his own identity.



[Zakorzenienie Magazine]


Share on FacebookShare on RedditTweet about this on TwitterShare on LinkedIn