We are a group of Right-Wing advocates of freedom and liberty, the right to life, freespeech and net neutrality, pro 2nd amendment right to own and carry firearms, individual rights, constitutional republic government, separation of church and state, limited government, freedom of association, personal responsibility, individual initiative, property rights, the free market, de-centralize banks and reforming monetary policy based on sound money, preservation of western civilization, national self-determination, defense and sustaining of its people, land and culture, religions and the European people against feminism, communism, globalism (the ruination of the culture, the plague of internationalism and the explosion of degeneracy) and political correctness. For those on Mod DB if you're a social conservative, neo-reactionary (NRx), libertarian, traditionalist, paleoconservative, Christian, nationalist or New Right for; US, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa or European nations please join us to help defeat progressive liberals and proxies.

"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." - Benjamin Franklin

A explanation of what these policies may entail and literature on these subjects will be posted overtime, a outline is given on the pro-capitalist page.


see; Matthew Spalding's lecture " A New American Fusionism: Recovering Principles in Our Politics. "

How to Think about Modern Conservativism

Origins of the Modern Conservative Movement

Republican principles

Traditional values

Recommended conservative news sites:



The Conservative Mind by Russel Kirk
What is Conservatism? by Frank Meyer and Russel Kirk and others
In Defense of Freedom by Frank Meyer
A Handbook for Right-Wing Youth by Julius Evola
The Dark Enlightenment by Nick Land
A Gentle Introduction to Unqualified Reservations by Mencius Moldbug
Patchwork: A Political System for the 21st Century by Mencius Moldbug
A Formalist Manifesto by Mencius Moldbug
An Open Letter to Open-Minded Progressives by Mencius Moldbug
Reactionary Philosophy in an Enormous Planet-Sized Nutshell
What is Neoreaction: Ideology, Social-Historical Evolution, and the Phenomena of Civilization


9 Principles of the Right-wing by the Distributist

1. Meaning should be placed above welfare or merely the pursuit of human happiness - the expression of value and pursuit of transcendent meaning should be the central aim in human life.
2. Virtue should be the basis of a nation. Action is central to virtue - Humans should express their dedication to transcendent value through discipline and virtue.
3. Morals form the path of pursuing truth, the common moral beliefs are important for human survival and even for personal thriving - common moral beliefs should define human societies and link generations. The enhancement of the collective moral good should be the primary purpose of society.
4. The backsliding of society or regression from the mean towards the less than stellar and more common beliefs a person has when they have degenerated from the higher politics, meaning and striving - without some compelling force or discipline people tend to degenerate and backslide; they become less observant of morals and values they intellectually agree with.
5. The backsliding of institutions or regression from the function beliefs and tenets of society in favor of conflict of interest behind the scenes, when institutions no longer support whats beneficial for the people in question - without a compelling force for human institutions they tend to corrupt and backslide; they become less observant of core ideas, they become less dedicated to core stakeholders, they become more progressive.
6. The conservation of sovereignty. Regardless of egalitarian principles they the profess, human collectives are always ruled by a small minority of leaders set the important elements of the social and political agenda.
7. Prioritize human uplift and elevation over mere comfort, pleasure and security.
8. Favor investment-oriented accountability systems (skin in the game - Nicholas Teleb) - the system of rules should align with the interests of the subjects or people. Its not being of the people, the same class of the people or even being elected by the people that determines good governance. The sameness of the interests with rulers with that of the populace is what counts.
9. Pursue order-based politics - having a consistent operation is the only way to pursue society's priorities. This means having formalized rules and social order. Social order can be summarized as freedom, survival, prosperity, creativity, competition and growth.

Some Do's and Don'ts.

*Nato and EU undermine rules, they are disolving borders and are the global-homogeneity force in the world. Don't just believe that Nato or EU can solve our problems.
*There is an elite strata that is trying to get benefits out of the changes undergoing the nation's right now, using immigration, taxes and regulations to increase profits for big industry and stifle domestic industry and production. Avoid catering to the institutions, big tech and big media.
*Don't just hope for evicting natural born people out of a country.
*Don't believe that an external threat will in anyway cause us to reverse course domestically.

*Have a rational ideology that brings together the pro-Western civilisation and majoritarian interests, something that backs up a euro-centric "no brother wars" nationalism or objectivism.
*Use structural realism to understand all the nation states.
*Have a system or structure made ontop of energy, passion and brotherhood, which should define prominent ideas. Under one creed, the march through the gates of destiny. A march towards freedom and order type values. It is common truth (destiny), common nature (ideas, ideology or natural law) and common cause (common purpose) that leads towards the realization of social order, which then in tandem creates the cosmic order (natural order).


3 important lessons that should be taught that help project the conservative mindset:

Falsehood exists so we must guard our society against all of its forms (traditionalist), the nation must continue to exist so that its people's wellbeing can be maximised and culture protected (nationalist) and nature is harsh so we must plan for the future (capitalist). These three aspects are what sustain western civilization, we broaden our horizons by truth, culture and fiscal policy. Refusing to acknowledge the laws of nature led to pacifism and now it leads to accepting the falsehood of multiculturalism, moral relativism, political correctness, nihilism, feminism and globalism. In the past failing to plan ahead led to starvation and today it leads to welfare and inter-generational poverty. Whatever saps the physical, mental and spiritual strength is the enemy.

Those that share that mindset?

Protestants founded it but Catholic orthodox and Eastern Orthodoxy have been important for upholding tradition i.e any European country with a Greco-Roman and Teutonic legacy. We uphold virtues of; strength, courage, determination, perseverance, hard-work, discipline, nationalism/unity, fatherland, duty, honor, truth, freedom, family, fearlessness, self-control and hardness, as well as Nietzsche's values of diligence, capable, ambitious, trustworthy, open-minded and will. You require experience in order to gain practical wisdom (action over abstraction, accomplishment over acquisition, self-knowledge over satisfaction, excellence and consistency over complacency) to climb higher, western civilization ideal, preserving the family unit and family values (marriage, gender roles i.e breadwinner and homemaker) and ethnic European cultures (national pride). A pride is for our role in the social order, our abilities, in the inter-generational goals that we participate in and in the women we care for. Understanding that to achieve this a optimal size of govt is needed for border control, maintaining health, checks and balances on political authority and a strong military tradition is required to uphold authority, leadership and hierarchy. American revolution was a Protestant war for a European outpost and freedom from British rule, later the threat reappeared with communism and now under globalism (the cultural threat being progressivism; feminism, gender inversion, diversity, multiculturalism and SJWism). Idealism is the alternative in the form of culture like faith, freedom and family, civilizational values, as the ideas we would like to hold.

Matthew 6:24 "You cannot serve God and money."

Link to a quote by Thomas Jefferson on the topic of indebtedness.



Its ironic also that popular sovereignty and self-determination is mostly associated with liberalism now. Even though that's a nationalist belief. How deeply embedded that idea is in the right, you can reaffirm the common good and so forth to make the health, survival and thriving of the people at the centre of the political system. That something that is outside the group dynamic, there are three ways of looking at things, its liberalism vs moral absolutes vs nationalistic, the absolute morals, liberalism and nationalistic all three kinds have different "takes" on what we should do as political actors. To distinguish between popular sovereignty and democracy, they fundamentally different. Popular sovereignty is rule for the people and not rule by the people. Not that everything is run by a democratic system but rather that their legitimacy as rulers gain that legitimacy their ability to derive rule by common interests, common nature, common destiny and common purpose (cause). That to me is what nationalism is about for some groups. Some people call that majoritarian.

1. God created nature,
2. Reason brings forth an understanding of nature.

By rationally inquiring into nature we can reveal its divinely ordained purpose or just a naturalistic purpose by which people find right actions. Inspired and motivated by those actions is a justification for them and can avoid unnecessary negative consequences is my take on what they could be but often times its just suggested that people will respect each other, right actions fosters respect. Having a sense of love or duty which bind a political community together into a people so that they can have common ancestry, common will, common history, cultural heritage and common identity (these five things are basically ethnos or ethnicity). A people is the distinct historical entity that exists between a ethnos and a nation, its includes common history and common identity. Having family values, joy, reconnecting to one another in the community, accepting ones identity and cultural heritage, living close to ones family as a unit, placing ones nation above other nation's, just like we treat our family as being primary providers and nurturers we also treat the nation as our extended family by participating in the nation's culture. That rational purpose is seen in the formation of families, communities and nations, then we can derive from that the sense of divine and rational authority in national authority.


Housewives are happier than feminists and happier than women in any other occupation which fundamentally contradicts the feminist view of promoting promiscuity between men and women. A study on this has shown definitively that women are less happy absolutely and comparatively to men then every before since the 1970s, where women and men where mostly married where much happier, the reason for this unhappiness? Relation stability is the reason and isn't due to the hours worked by women, a 30% increase in sexual partners since then. People are having more promiscuous and increased multiple partners then ever before since the sexual revolution (between 1970 and 2000). There is also detrimental effects on the cognitive ability and psychological wellbeing of teenagers in cohabitation or single-parent homes. A British study has debunked many of the feminist myths. The most secure families are where both the male and female are married virgins. We have different roles and we like different subjects, we are also physically and biologically different. Currently the largest threat to family is alimony and no-fault divorce where women win 97% of alimony cases and child custody w/o having to prove anything. Therefore we must encourage women to become mothers, encourage men to protect & provide for their family and discourage birth control.


MSM sell the lie the establishment candidate is "closely tied in the polls" with the anti-establishment candidate, upping their lead towards the final few months to set up false expectations to convince you not to go out and vote. Its called gaslighting.
When in fact the polls are rigged, the exit polls are also run by the same mainstream media and are designed to "match up" with previous polls and the rigged voting system. Polls are rigged by loading it up with democrats, labeling democrats as independents or calling previous people that say they voted democrat regardless of what their outdated party registration is. Exit polls are conducted by private media corporations (National Election Pool) as are the companies behind the E-voting machines (DIEBOLD/PES, Dominion Voting and H.I.G Capital) connected to the establishment candidate. The exit polls portray a picture that the anti-establishment is losing in order to dissuade people from going out to vote (thats how its really won, because rigging EVERY state and municipality is difficult).

This is done in the biggest swing states. Theres also registering immigrants and illegal voters (people who reliably vote left), and striking down voter ID laws so that people vote multiple times.


Fire arms are used to stop crime. It's about time democrats/liberals started thinking for themselves about the benefits of firearms in law abiding hands. States with the strictest gun-control have some of the highest violent crime and murder rates, and countries with the strictest gun-control have the highest violent crime.

The only opposition to the 13th, 14th, 15th amendment and Eisenhower's 1957 Civil Rights act was by the liberal democrats. Southern strategy is a myth or the 'big switch'. For a full history lesson read Mugged by Ann Coulter, 'Hillary’s America: The Secret History of the Democratic Party' by Dinesh D'Souza and 'Hillarys America' film.

The leftist racial segregation laws where removed and the Civil Rights Act was instituted thanks to 80% support from the Republicans. In the 1860's there was 100% Republican support for the 13th amendment while 70% of Democrats opposed it. 94% Republican support for 14th amendment with 100% opposition from Democrats. The Democrats also opposed the 15th amendment. There was 11 Democrats that switched over to the Republican side, thousands of these Democrats retired as Democrats. The Act would not have gone through if Republicans where blocked from both houses of congress since 3 times as many Democrats opposed the Act, neither would the Voting Rights Act and Fair Housing Act.


Is climate change consensus true? No, the 97% consensus myth has been debunked. There is better evidence to support global cooling or natural cycles.

We live in a strange world with an increasingly clear battle-line separating:

1. Political powers and consensus ‘scientists' adjusting experimental data on one side.

2. A benevolent creator and sustainer of every atom, life and world on the other side.

Side 1 directs society to UN's Agenda 21: Habitat.igc.eorg

Side 2 directs society to a much Higher Power: Dl.dropboxusercontent.com

Evidence against CO2 cause.


The spirit of anti-humanism lives on only if people do not fight for virtue, freedom and truth.

  • View media
  • View media
  • View media
  • View media
  • View media
  • View media
Post article RSS Articles
Neo-Reactionary Consensus - Hierarchy and Deep Heritage

Neo-Reactionary Consensus - Hierarchy and Deep Heritage


Reactionaries affirm that hierarchy is not only natural, but almost purely beneficial to group success. Reactionaries affirm that the development of deep...

The Virtues Part 2

The Virtues Part 2

News 1 comment

The heroic ideal is to form oneself in hierarchies, and is based on the beliefs of a warrior ethos. One sees that Heroism isn't portrayed accurately on...

The Virtues Part 1

The Virtues Part 1


This is a summary that I hope people will agree with and try to apply in their life, as thats what the other half of virtue is about.

Natural law

Natural law

News 80 comments

A good way of understanding what the Laws of Nature are, if one needs a guide or theory to understand, observe, contemplate and respect that which occurs...



News 2 comments

A summary of conduct rules to add how discussion should naturally follow.

Comments  (0 - 10 of 223)





Reply Good karma Bad karma+1 vote
DravenTheCrow Creator

Looks like experts were wrong and it wasn't common sense after all. New mask study in 600K study shows no evidence they work to as promised: Youtube.com

Link to study: Cochranelibrary.com

According to the Cochrane review: “Wearing masks in the community probably makes little or no difference to the outcome of laboratory-confirmed influenza/SARS-CoV-2 compared to not wearing masks.”

Even fitted N95 masks in health care settings; involving 7779 participants "The use of a N95 respirator compared to just a medical surgical mask, probably makes little or no difference for the objective and or the more precise outcome of laboratory confirmed influenza infection".

Technocrats and media pundits have dropped the ball giving people false hope, controlling people and actually could have caused more infection spread by still getting people to walk around strangers who might be infected and coughing.

Reply Good karma+1 vote
TheUnbeholden Creator

At the moment there is a change going that converges individualism with the nation. To put it another way, capitalism and nationalism is being appropriately principled and is coming together between them, without creating a imbalance, to create the Republican party. Its evolving to approximately serve this role. To strike a balance of these powers of the West, must approximately restore the balance of powers of Western civilisation.

Its not sufficient for the right to merely negate the left. Its the role of the capitalists to protect the liberty and prosperity of the individual (money and markets running, property rights, technology and efficiency), its the role of the nationalists to serve the nation and protect, uphold and preserve the culture (values like self-determination, autonomy, living space, anti-materialism, idealism, natural hierarchy, patriotism, self-development, solidarity, independence and aesthetics), its the role of the religion or clergy to enshrine beliefs, tenets, spiritual systems, rites, customs, values, creeds and practices that is a traditional system (patriarchy, family, natalism, natural law, divinity). Neither one of these blocks, ideologies or elements of a trichotomy can overshadow the other or throw out the other lest an imbalance in power occurs. It must positively reconstitute the traditional system. That I think is ultimately what the right-wing movement has been about in pieces and what neo-reactionaries suggest when pressed on values but only a small portion of what I said from one block.

Reply Good karma+3 votes
DravenTheCrow Creator

People don't merely support a regime because it has useful or good formal rules, regulations, bonds, codes, laws, but because they believe in the myth and understanding of what the regime stands for, its ideas, values, tenets and precepts. What informs us with the what and why we should follow the regime and how we abide by a reason for existing, direction or the purpose behind the system. What makes sense of natural law and thus a sense of how to take concerted personal actions to break obstacles is a good step forward i.e. the obstacles that holds us back from forward momentum, whats keeping us from continually moving the ball forward and making the reality we desire or are passionate about, to be passion to produce the ends we wish to achieve, so that we believe in something compelling and true. Otherwise we are sacrificing for vanity or sacrificing yourself to feel important and unintentionally may be strengthening the regime we may oppose. All people within our system for it to be long-lasting needs a good enemy, they need someone to blame for shortcomings, and something to rally against when the goals have failed. Without an enemy to flex our goals in opposition too, we could be acting as a tool for the enemies purposes without being cognizant of it.

We're in great danger to be useful tools for the enemies purpose of being soft, easiness, complacency by accepting a progressive agenda, by just going along with "politeness" of social justice when it works against our collective interests, goals, will and identity. It also sometimes overrides individual rights which gets other groups riled up.

In the cosmopolitan view of man religious sect, local community, family, social class, ethnic identity, moral or virtuous character, are at best subordinate considerations and are considered to also be much of the time to be against the fulfillment of human potential. They see those things as artificial and obsolete barriers. Cosmopolitanism thus rationalizes the adoption of a mass framework of a modern regime and the collective disciplines that characterizes the managerial regime and homogenization of production and consumption, through which the multinational organizations and economics of which managerial capitalism operates in.-Samuel T. Francis "Leviathan and its enemies"

The real affect of mass managerial political and social reforms is to level the bourgeoisie differentiations to liberate the masses from tyranny of bourgeoisie or prescriptive institutions and homogenize the mass population and bring it under the control of the mass organizations, the alliance of mass and managers against the bourgeoisie is the basis of managerial caeserism.-Samuel T. Francis "Leviathan and its enemies"

Contrary to public opinion, the banks, the military and defense contractors aren't the problem, they are neutral on political-cultural issues in America.

Equality is flawed because it seems to produce a intention to destroy differences between human beings, to wipe away all the cultures and values that are inherent to particular ethnic or racial groups around the world, which is exactly what Free Masons and Globalists want to do. They at best want to accelerate that erasure or eradication of culture. Marxism for instance is for a complete equality, erasing the principle of ethnicity and personality. The culture, tradition, heritage and ethnicity makes a country stamped with unique civilisational traits, nothing like it can come about again if its erased. They try to tear down national independence, cultural elevation and economic independence with coercion and impossible solutions to things that are not honest social evils. They make demands which not only overshoot the goals but their realization is also practically impossible or ruins the economic independence of the nation.

Reply Good karma+2 votes
DravenTheCrow Creator


Readable version online: Unqualified-reservations.org

In that book by Mencius Moldbug mulls over the following:

"Take the recent decision of the California Supreme Court, who have just discovered that the state’s Constitution allows people of the same sex to marry. As a matter of policy, I have no objection at all to this. Quite the contrary. I think it’s an excellent and sensible policy. I do, however, have an interest in where this policy came from.

This is what, in the 20th-century progressive public-policy world, we call “law.” The craft of the lawyer used to be the craft of discovering how the words of a law were intended, by the officials who ratified the law, to imply that one’s client was in the right. I think it’s fairly safe to assume that the drafters and ratifiers of the California Constitution and its various amendments had no such understanding of their work. (Try reading the actual decision. It’s a fascinating hunk of boilerplate.)

Nonetheless, the drafters wrought better than they knew. The practice of drafting laws which are vague to the point of meaninglessness, then empowering “judges” to “interpret” them, is simply another way of abolishing politics. Congress legislates this way all the time. All they are doing is transferring the power of legislation to a more private body, which is not subject to public scrutiny and the other painful woes of politics. The great thing about the gay marriage decision is that no one in California has any idea who made it. I think there are nine people on the California Supreme Court. Who are they? How did they get their jobs? Who the heck knows? No one seems to care at all.

The US Constitution was the first and greatest offender in this department. Its drafters did not even agree on such basic matters as whether a state could leave the Union. In practice, it made the Supreme Court the supreme legislative assembly, which over the last 200 years (mostly over the last 50) has created a body of decisions, perfectly comparable to Britain’s unwritten constitution, that we call constitutional law. The idea that this legislative corpus can be derived in some mystical, yet automatic, way from the text of the Constitution is preposterous, and no one holds it.

Instead we have the Living Constitution, which always seems to live to the left. I’ve never heard anyone, not even the most deranged fundamentalist, propose reinterpreting the Constitution to provide rights to fetuses, an obvious corollary of this approach—if the Inner Party and the Outer Party were symmetric opposites, and the “life” of the Constitution was powered by political democracy."

Reply Good karma+2 votes
DravenTheCrow Creator

"Of course it is not. It does not rest in formal interpretation of texts. It rests in ethical judgments. It is the job of the legislator to make ethical judgments, and the California Supreme Court is doing its job. It’s a pity it has to carpool with such a large bodyguard of lies, but that’s the modern world for ya.

And we know where these ethical judgments come from. They are Inner Party judgments, and the Inner Party’s ethics are Christian, Protestant, and Quaker in their origins. Fine. We all need ethics, and “applied Christianity” will do as well as anything else. What interests me is when these ethical judgments come about.

Imagine, for instance, that the California Supreme Court had decided in, say, 1978, that it was unethical—I mean, unconstitutional—for California to prohibit its male citizens from marrying each other. Is this a thinkable event? I think not. And yet the court’s writ ran just as far and was just as powerful in 1978 as in 2008. And ethics, surely, have not changed.

The Living Constitution does not adapt with changes in ethics. It adapts with changes in public opinion—as long as that public opinion is shifting in the direction of “applied Christianity.” Public opinion was ready for abortion in 1973—barely. It was ready for gay marriage in 2008—barely. It was not ready for gay marriage in 1973. What will it be ready for in 2033? One can see this as a noble concession to the great principle of democracy. One can also see it as the Cathedral getting away with whatever it can get away with, and nothing else.

Larry Auster, probably the most imaginative and interesting right-wing writer on the planet, who also happens to be a converted fundamentalist Christian with all the theopolitical baggage that you, dear open-minded progressive, would expect from such a person, has a good term for this: the unprincipled exception. Briefly, an unprincipled exception is a policy that violates some absolute principle of ethics held by the policymaker, but is not openly acknowledged as such a violation.

For example, dear progressive, why is racism wrong? Racism is wrong because all humans are born simply as humans, having done nothing right or wrong, and it is incompatible with our deeply-held ethical principles to mark these newborn babies with indelible labels which assign them either privileges or penalties which they have not earned. Such as the privilege of being able to drink at sparkling-clean water fountains marked “Whites Only,” or the penalty of having to go out back to the horse trough."

Reply Good karma+2 votes
DravenTheCrow Creator

"We hit that one out of the park, didn’t we? Okay. So why is it ethical to label newborn babies as “American” or “Mexican,” due to nothing but the descent and geographical position at birth of their parents, and give the former a cornucopia of benefits from which the latter is barred—such as the right to live, work, and drink from drinking fountains in the continental United States? What makes Washington think it is somehow ethical to establish two classes of human, “Americans” and “Mexicans,” based only on coincidences of birth that are just as arbitrary as “black” versus “white,” and treat the two completely differently? How does this differ from racism, Southern style?

You think this is ugly? Oh, we can get worse. Let’s suppose the US, in its eagerness to treat these second-class humans, if not quite as well as possible, at least better than we treat them now, establishes a new guest-worker program which is open only to Nigerians. Any number of Nigerians may come to the US and work.

There are certain restrictions, however. They have to live in special guest-worker housing. They have to go to their workplace in the morning, and return before the sun sets. They may not wander around the streets at night. They must carry special guest-worker passes. Obviously, they can’t vote. And they are strictly prohibited from using all public amenities, including, of course, drinking fountains.

Is it a more ethical policy to have this program, or not to have it? If you think no Nigerians could be found to take advantage of it, you’re quite wrong. If you have the program, should you cancel it, and send the Nigerians home, to a life of continued poverty back in Nigeria? How is this helping them? On the other hand, our program has all the major features of apartheid. And surely no-apartheid is better than apartheid.

There is a very easy resolution to this problem: adopt the principle that no person is illegal. This rule is perfectly consistent with “applied Christianity.” It is taught at all our great universities. It is implied every time a journalist deploys the euphemism “undocumented.” And I’m sure there are dozens of ways in which it could be incorporated into our great Living Constitution. There is only one problem: the people are not quite ready for it."

Reply Good karma+2 votes
DravenTheCrow Creator

"But perhaps in thirty years they will be. Perhaps? I would bet money on it. And I would also bet that, by the time this principle is established, denying it will be the equivalent of racism. Us old fogeys who were born in the 1970s will be convulsed with guilt and shame at the thought that the US actually considered it ethically acceptable to turn away, deport, and otherwise penalize our fellow human beings, on the ridiculous and irrelevant grounds that they were born somewhere else.

So the Cathedral wins coming and going. Today, it does not suffer the political backlash that would be sure to ensue if the Inner Party endorsed opening the borders to… everyone. Still less if it actually did so. (Unless it let the new Americans vote as soon as they set foot on our sacred soil, which of course would be the most Christian approach.) And in 2038, having increased North America’s population to approximately two billion persons, none of them illegal, and all living in the same Third World conditions which it has already inflicted on most of the planet, our blessed Cathedral will have the privilege of berating the past with its guilt for not having recognized the obvious truth that no person is illegal. Ain’t it beautiful?"


So what does all of this mean, and what can we do about it?

A progressive resolution cannot override the civil rights that has been built up. "No person is illegal" will inevitably be propagated through the basically its propaganda "wing" of culture power. i.e. through the media, academia and serious artists, whom all work together on the manufactured "truths", that this social networks Mencius Moldbug calls "the brain" (the aforementioned media, academia and serious artists). Leftists of all kinds including progressives seriously believe in this proposition and push it whenever they can. Even libertarians that where on this group before but had no argument to push back on this point where shooed away from the conversation when it is was backed up against this stonewalling inalienable universal civil rights suggestion that we've been stuck with.

"No person is illegal" will be pushed harder then ever before. And will berate people for not creating a better state and version of things in the perverse affair that everyone will share in the dismal lackluster standards. Joseph McCarthy thought he was attacking a bunch of communists but he was really attacking the informal American cultural elite and elite establishment for continually moving further and further towards the left, heading towards this miserable utopia. Even if Trump materially approves of a staunch opposition or clash with these utopian changes, and materially improves the situation on legal restrictions on entry, punishing and expelling visa overstays, creating the wall. These culture power groups can overcome any of these challenges to instituting sanctionary cities, decriminalizing overstays, cancelling deportation and laxing these legal restrictions for illegals over time because these can become through their influence, control and dominance change the system to their suit agenda.

Trump may have been in office and may become president again but hes not the holder of power. The only way to win is complete reformation of the system from within. That is until the political components of the system are dismantled. "The Cathedral" which is all those elites who hold sway over the culture, which is the academia and the press, then theres political component of the civil service, the judiciary, congressional staffers, NGO's, corporate monopolies, corporate contractors, and congressional are the top-level bureaucracy that actually decides the supreme court justices that wield alot of power. It isn't the top-level of the bureaucracy that rotates every four years that we have to focus most on, the bureaucracy needs to be changed which sets the rules, budgets, the organization and makes the rules followed to the letter all over the country. Even Communist USSR was destroyed from within partially because many different ethnic groups where not molded into the bureaucracy, ethnic tensions in the Soviet Union where common place and still are prevalent in Russia. I.e. laws, customs and formal rules where not made to pander to separately to each ethnic group in each of its regions, that have different perspectives and tastes.

Someone commented awhile ago: "The soviets had a friendship of the people's notion (Order of Friendship of Peoples). Which was a ethno-national regional idea where they would emphasize ethnic cultural differences among regions." But even this did not stop that from happening and dismantling the USSR. Balkanisation or succession is likely to be future for the US rather than complete distrust and overhaul of the status quo if things remain moving towards "the Cathedral's" agenda.

Reply Good karma+2 votes
TheUnbeholden Creator

Culture is organic in the sense that it has an individuality, and a soul which permanently stamps anything that it creates with its character, a spiritual essence that cannot be reduced down any further, with their own individuality. Since this is the case that culture cannot ever be reproduced, its a one time phenomenon. I don't believe most people are actually illegitimate in their cultural thoughts, this is primordial. The popular opinion is mislead by the bourgeoisie, it isn't the cultures fault that they try to replace it with a soulless corporatised culture or design by committee. The culture represents what people have been conditioned to believe they have been taught or absorb the most. If they the people absorb healthy things then the aggregate output from our individual actions will be healthy too. Better health of the people and absorbing knowledge is what we want to do. They demand dominance of ethnic culture and control of education to spread educational benefits, culture benefits, protection and a high standard of living. A culture of honor, strength and joy. Beauty and traditional values. Spirituality and community. Hierarchy and familialism. Liberty, fraternity and family. We support culture, tradition and heritage.

There is a destiny that is dependent on who a people are, their particular common ancestry, common will (their interests), common history (their founding myths, their struggles, their symbols), cultural heritage (their best values) and common identity.

Nationalist culture is even more specific. Its anti-materialist in that we oppose a purely physical or material view of man, man needs more than bread. It puts value in the citizen as untapped potential and spiritual being. He has a intellect and a soul, man needs ideas which is what gives him nourishment also. Anti-materialism opposes the view that things happen because of material needs or the need for economic fulfillment. Rather we are a person that looks for spirituality and higher meaning in life.

Secondly, the principle of idealism. That ideas are what turn the tides of people's support for things, people are captured by ideas and ideas make the world either a better place or hinder rather than help. If only certain ideas propagate and take hold that we can be sure that the future belongs to the people rather than a parasitical class. Idealism is nation, tradition and capitalism, which forms Western civilisation.

The third element is that all nationalists believe in a patriotic duty and obedience to serve the nation, uphold the national sovereignty, autonomy, living space, protect the health and thriving of the people, improve the people's wellbeing. That always means try to consolidate and create military power, protection, educational benefits and cultural benefits, i.e. freedom, and a highly regarded standard of living. That is all in the pursuit of the common good. Common good is above all other considerations.

Fourthly its about maintaining a strong hierarchy. Nationalism cannot be complete with a meritocratic system that supports the best in people at the level of education system, right down to the corporate and familial level. Where families are taught skills and paths to instill and educate their family members about.

Fifth its about the move to improve and enhance self-development/meritocracy of the people. Building the people up to create a structure and order that outlasts the frail abstractions of other systems.

Videos on the topic that help flesh it out a bit,
*Why Nationalism?: Youtube.com
*Endurance of Nationalism: Youtube.com
*Liberalism vs Nationalism: Youtube.com

The Christian old moral order was replaced by a secular world where its unknown what the next generation's going to be like. If a order is to survive and gaurantee protection, high standards, benefits (cultural or educational) there a requirement of the following; common nature (character), common cause (common purpose) and common truth (destiny) to create a social order. We're entering a new era and its hard to say what the new era will be like because there is a race to power. The Nietzschean basic point is in the absence of a god nobody believes in, the critical thing is that it must all-powerful being, now man is left to his own devices to meek out his existence and has a existential burden on his own willing. That all living things, humans being a intermediate expression of the will to power, engage in a historical and super-historical will to power.

The future must rest on the following values as the ones we cannot compromise on; natural hierarchy, deep heritage, gender norms, microeconomics, federalism, subsidiarity, freedom, self-determination and autonomy. Its a combination of religion, individualism and nation, to put it another way, its traditionalism, capitalism and nationalism. A Neo-reactionary trichotomy.

Reply Good karma+2 votes
TheUnbeholden Creator

That was alot of stuff to read but overall message I think I agree but only when some things are pointed out. There unfortunately is no good argument against "global homogeneity" and "citizenship and civil rights for everyone" by using only a hyper-individualist way of looking at things. That is only recipe for the left to win by default mode of looking at things. If you take it for granted then you have to draw the conclusion that is the only logical conclusion to that belief system. You either accept everything that it leads to or you reject it out right. Otherwise you get a California leftoid hellscape.

So anyone, unless they are of a collectivist mindset, someone won't be able to come up with a good argument except marginal structural limitations. Where we should only accept immigrants for permanent residence only when our infrastructure services can handle possibly handle it. Thats not going to stop the left. Collectivism is the only way to stave off the "march through the institutions" strategy of the left. They eventually will succeed, by pretending not to be hippies, anarchists, communists and progressives and portraying themselves as being social democrats instead at first, or lightly socialistic. Socialism is just about votebuying and the left turns many places into slums: Youtube.com

The kind of collectivism that works is nationalism to secure the nation from the parasitical class. Since it demands that people believe and follow in practice the culture and know about the national history. Nationalism requires interrelated disciplines to all work together to paint a picture of a nation's struggle via anthropology, philosophy, history and politics. Society makes individuals through the education, skills, craft, abilities and values it instills in people is what ultimately produces the best in people. As opposed to the libertarian concept (or most extreme version of it is libertarian) that individuals are creating society by merely a collection of individuals come together to contractually create this abstract order.

Nationalists think the social order is already there, its created through what the collective provides us to become the best version of ourselves. Educational benefits and cultural benefits are collective. We're taught to become virtuous people, rather than make decisions on subjective feeling or personal preference hardwired into us. How we view family, communal relations, religion, is somewhat taught. We're taught what to value based on those cultural and historical connections we make. Virtue creates liberty, liberty creates consumption and some of the culture around us. That doesn't happen right away or by individual investigation, like individualists like to believe but mainly due to educational benefits, and cultural benefits that a national system promotes and encourages.

Another form of collectivism is Syndicalism (like Sorelianism), Guild Socialism, Market Socialism, Distributism, Keynesianism and Mercantalism. I don't mention this class anywhere in my writings but it is the key elites from the very top of the state that are to blame. They have to be in cahoots with the cultural elite for anything to become sick, degrading, complacent, stagnant or degenerate. We need a masculinity injection (realizing destiny - heroism and pursuing truth) into us to stand a chance at facing these enemies. Elect men and women of virtue and discipline to ensure they won't be corrupted.

Reply Good karma+2 votes
Post a comment
Sign in or join with:

Only registered members can share their thoughts. So come on! Join the community today (totally free - or sign in with your social account on the right) and join in the conversation.