The West is in a state of political turmoil. Populist sentiments are rising all over Europe and the US. Different factions are competing for the vacuum left by the declining conservative movement. There are vague culprits to be blamed; unrestricted immigration, globalization, overtly interventionist foreign policy, urbanization, etc. Some voices in the mainstream would like to curb immigration, scale back foreign policy, and restrict trade. However, it must be pointed out that most of these people are still absolutely committed to liberalism in a classical sense – that is, citizenship and equality must still be respected as a fundamental norm, and “true racism” is not OK. These are the Paul Joseph Watsons of the world, who while railing against Black Lives Matter and Islam, and rejecting cultural relativism, still will not touch the third rail of civic racial egalitarianism.
This can be seen as the West clinging to its liberal traditions. Louis Hartz, an American Jew, argued that the US was influenced by Lockean liberalism so profoundly that it resisted the far more volatile political shifts of old Europe, such as fascism and communism. It is true that the US has generally been far more centrist than Europe, but in truth, it is much more than that.
Another faction, in contrast to the aforementioned, which is itself quite a broad coalition, challenges even this fundamental assumption of liberalism, and it is known as the “alt right.” If you are reading this, chances are that you don’t need an introduction to the movement.
The alt right, with its many disagreements and sub-factions, generally rejects equality, along with the modern liberal conception of what a nation is. They argue that peoplehood is fundamentally rooted in blood and identity, transcending some counterfeit civic construct like American citizenship.
I agree with this understanding. I was raised with a strong Jewish identity, and told that I was part of a larger nation that spanned all across the globe. My extended family of Jews was a much stronger source of identity and solidarity than American citizenship. I am much more tied by virtue of cosmic destiny to a Jew on the other side of the world than to a fellow countryman with whom I shared a spoken language and political system. It was strongly ingrained in me that the most important preservation beyond basic individual survival was of my traditions and people.
Until quite recently, this was a common understanding among white gentiles, implicitly if not explicitly. Mass nonwhite immigration as mandated state policy into Europe and the Anglosphere started only in the last century. Before this, Europe was so tribal that it had major wars even between different white ethnic groups going all the way back to antiquity. The US, despite all the popular myths of it as a nation founded on diversity, had an explicit white European identity (as can be found in the 1790s immigration law, the laws excluding nonwhites, and open discussion of race in immigration as late as 1924 by people like Madison Grant), and the founders’ views on race are no secret. This topic has been discussed to death elsewhere, and I don’t see the need to make the case for the obvious truth here as well.
Today, we are inundated with the message that race isn’t real, that diversity is a strength, and that immigration, cosmopolitan lifestyles, and mixing will lead to a harmonious and tolerant society that draws strength from its many different components. This plays on people’s sympathy, optimism, moral superiority complexes, and fascination for the other. This has led to European man handing over his society, resources, and culture on a silver platter to whomever will come and take it, with little mainstream backlash until recently. Whites are slowly waking up to their impending demographic destruction all over Europe and North America.
This represents a major political upheaval that will play out not only within the politics of Western countries, but it also represents a rebellion against the values held by the elites of international institutions, where the sacred dogmas of human rights and left-liberalism/Marxism (the latter two not necessarily interchangeable) are dominant.
The great irony is that third-world and developing nations utilize the European-derived concepts of human rights and racial egalitarianism that they themselves do not believe in, for their own ends, often against the West’s interests or at its expense. Meanwhile, in their own countries, they are not deluded about diversity the way whites are and do not enact the suicidal policies of the countries they exploit.
Jews have historically been at the forefront of moving the status quo towards the current egalitarian order, even long before it had disastrous consequences. The organic identity of Old Europe naturally excluded Jews as outsiders of disparate origin, and quite understandably so. Despite the existence of Jews who have genuinely felt patriotic and proud of their European host countries, along with Jews who wanted to remain separate in ghettos, many Jews who wanted to participate in gentile societies felt the need to push national identity towards concepts based more on principles and values, rather than ones based on blood that would exclude them.
Thus, Jews have developed the consciousness of a quintessential nonwhite outsider for whom nationalism and in-group European consciousness did not bode well, and have maintained that to this day. Beyond merely the expansion of civic identity, Jews and Jewish organizations have been disproportionately at the forefront of pushing massive nonwhite immigration and diversity in the West, and unseating the cultural particularism of white host countries. When asked why, often with very little introspection, they will usually cite their own historical experience as excluded outsiders as a reason to sympathize with other groups subject to the same problems. (Books could be spent discussing this topic in more detail, but for our purposes here, these two paragraphs will have to suffice.)
