Sep 24, 2011

By | 48 Comments | Print Print

White Preservationism is Dead

White Preservationism is Dead

The case for the White racialist Right is often made in terms of racial or cultural preservation. A civilisation, the argument goes, is inextricably linked with the genius of a race, and, because the Western civilisation was created by the White race, and Western civilisation is unique and an asset to humanity, the race must be preserved so that the civilisation may continue. A variation of this argument is that the White race itself is unique, because it created Western civilisation. Yet another variation is that the White race must be preserved because White folk have the right to exist as a distinct people, and to live how they like, among whom they like, just like any other people on Earth.

I have never seen this argument work with anyone outside of the racialist Right. At best, ordinary White folk outside the movement are left cold by appeals to their collective self-preservation; at worst, they react negatively, and dismiss the appeal as hateful nonsense, Nazism, and a rationale for genocide.

This is baffling, and it is certainly frustrating, at least for those of us who care about the future of the White race, but there are good reasons for this.

Firstly, Western civilisation is highly individualistic—individualism being, in fact, one of the principal traits that contribute to the uniqueness of Western civilisation.

This is particularly true among Anglo-Saxon folk, probably the most individualistic Westerners of all, responsible for extremist ideologies like Liberalism, and thanks to whose fanatical attachment to universalist abstractions has caused individualism across the West to be exacerbated to the point of fundamentalism.

Both the cause and the result of this is that White folk, already weakly ethnocentric by nature, have become culturally much less ethnocentric, much less racial, than other peoples of the world.

Western man sees himself as an autonomous, or sovereign individual, as a generic man, who may be from a town, a state or county, or a country; who may support a football team; who may belong to a leisure subculture; who may belong to a church, or a religious denomination; who may work for a given company, or work in a given industry. Very rarely—and only because minorities, politically correct politicians, and the multiculturalist media remind him—he remembers that he happens to be White.

In fact, when he develops friendships with non-Whites, he often forgets that the non-White is not of the same race as he is. The non-racial nature of his identity and self-concept is such that even drawing attention to Whites in private conversation is socially awkward.

This is not to say that he is incapable of a White racial identity, because the various identitarian political parties in Europe and the various forms of White advocacy in the United States are proof that he is. But, it requires a much higher level of existential threat, real or perceived, for Western man to adopt such an identity. Before he does so he is more likely to adopt all manner of other collective identities, a racial one being the very last resort.

It is only those who are contrarian by nature, obdurately independent, or unusually principled, who adopt racial identities today.

Thus, an appeal to racial self-preservation means nothing to someone for whom his race is so unimportant.

And it means even less when the surrounding culture only sanctions a negative White identity as part of a narrative that depicts Whites as privileged enslavers and oppressors.

Secondly, the threat of racial extinction seems so remote to most White folk as to appear but a preposterous delusion. Many Whites remain unaware of the extent to which their homelands have been colonised because the different races have automatically—explicitly or implicitly—self-segregated into ethnic or racial communities, and diversity is something they only encounter in the unreal worlds of television, airports, offices, and the public spaces of metropolitan areas, while commuting to their all- or nearly all-White peripheral enclaves.

What is more, while most White folk are aware and will openly acknowledge that the ethnic composition of their native countries has changed, the change, which in most cases he has witnessed from afar, and which in many cases began before he was born, has taken decades to occur. Racial extinction, therefore, seems to them so far off as to be of no personal import. ‘I won’t be here to see it, so what do I care?’

There is also a certain normalcy bias. So far most Whites, and almost all the Whites with meaningful power in our societies, have successfully avoided most of the unpleasantness of diversity. To them the prospect of extinction seems doubly remote.

Equally remote is the unpleasantness they would experience as a dispossessed minority, following a change in the balance of power away from the Whites. Comparatively few Whites, except some of those now residing in former colonies like South Africa, have any real experience of life as a dispossessed minority. The experience of those in highly diversified Western cities, like London or Los Angeles, is relatively recent and can be conceived in ways other than as an ontological threat as a race: it can be conceived in terms of political correctness being a nuisance; immigration being a requisite for economic growth, propping up state pension funds, and ‘doing the jobs that Whites refuse to do’; and muggings, rapes, and murde

for women”>relationship advice for womenrs being part and parcel of living in a large city, easily avoided through sensible precautions.

This makes it easy for White folk to believe the narrative of the radical Left, which explains the extinction scenario as a concoction of paranoid, fear-mongering haters.

Thirdly, preservation is about the past, and appeals to something of the past in a culture that prizes progress and modernity is a marker of irrelevance.

To frame the battle against the radical Left in terms of preserving the race is to cast oneself as a conservative. And a conservative is always easy pickings, because he negates the new without ideas of his own; he represents stasis, ossification, museology—concepts linked to old age.

Against him the radical Leftist can easily cast himself as a force of innovation, as the voice of the future, because he does have an idea of his own: his is an act of affirmation. What he affirms may now be old, decrepit, orthodox; it may have been exhausted, it may be bankrupt, and, because of its inherently destructive nature, it may offer no way out; but an affirmation is always more appealing than a negation, and the Leftist’s affirmation, though of an old idea, is newer than the idea defended by the conservative, which is even older.

Worse still, conservatives seek to conserve the ideas of superseded radicals, so he is by implication a dealer in antiquated, second-hand goods.

Hence, why scribblers of the radical Left strain to portray their enemy’s events as gatherings of superannuated pensioners, consigned to irrelevance and reduced to waving an arthritic fist at a world that has left them behind.

Hence, why the radical Left loves the racial preservation argument. For the reasons given above, its ideologues and supporters understand better than anyone the degree to which said argument is an own-goal for their enemies. After all, it was the radical Left that campaigned to move the goalposts further apart, and to hire a midget for a goalie.

The racial preservation argument is only good for 1) endangered non-White ethnic groups, and 2) racialist Right-wingers in need of self-justification.

White racial preservationism is dead.

What, then, is the alternative?

As I said earlier, it is always better to affirm rather than to negate; to be for something rather than against the opposite.

Therefore, rather than speaking in terms of preservation, we need to speak in terms of destiny; not in terms of what we are, let alone what we were, but in terms of what we can be, of what we ought to be, of what we must be.

Rather than lament the loss of the West, we must pursue its future glory; we need to imagine it, to daydream, to fantasise about it, and we need to project our visions out there, in the most seductive manner possible, with the most modern media, methods, and techniques.

If we are not masters of the present it is because the radical Left defined it in the past as their glorious future.

We can only be masters of the future if we define it ourselves.

Framing our proposition in terms of destiny is utopian, and implies regeneration and rebirth. In other words, it implies a renaissance.

And after so many decades of misery under the Left; after so many decades of broken promises, failure, and decline; after so many decades of disillusion, scepticism, cynicism, guilt-mongering, and forced apologies, people in the West are crying out for a renaissance, for strength, for pride, for glory.

A renaissance, or rebirth, goes well with a traditional outlook. Tradition is the ongoing affirmation of the archaic, which is endlessly regenerated and renewed, always rooted in the past, but also always futuristic.

Hence, why a radical traditionalist outlook is also called archeofuturist.

Framing our proposition in such terms also avoids the negativity of a preservationist argument, with its implied fear and pessimism. Because it implies fear and pessimism, such an argument is the marker of a losing faction, of people who have lost power and are en route also to lose their future. And with good reason, according to the Left, since those who talk about preserving the White race are an evil anachronism.

As no one wants to be part of that, doing away with the fearful and pessimistic preservation argument further eliminates the risk of denial, for most find living in denial preferable to being sober realists.

One additional advantage: a utopian conception of destiny cannot be deconstructed, cannot be disproven, because it is about belief; whereas arguments about preservation can be subjected to forensic investigation, to case-making, because there is a historical record that can be used and interpreted as evidence to support any imaginable position, including the revisionist slander preferred by the Left. Facts can be neutralised with other facts, logical arguments with other logical arguments, and rationalisations with other rationalisations, ad infinitum; but belief cannot be paralysed in this fashion because it is transcendent, metaphysical, not of this world.

Ultimately, to get us from here to there, we have to know in our hearts, and visualise in our minds, what there could, ought, must look like. It is about ideals—about ideals that give life meaning, that cause individualist man to reach outwards, higher, beyond. It is, in short, about being Westerners.



Related Posts

  1. The Creativity religion as set out in “Nature’s Eternal Religion”, is about the past, present and future of our Holy White Race.
    Only a religion can show a path through all the lies and deadly pitfalls our people face in our lives. The main rules are to have many children if you can; hold the family sacred and practice racial loyalty. These ideas must be passed on to the next generation as dogma and not as a debatable issue.

    “Victory Day” is a RAHOWA song that looks forward to the victory of Creativity and the Holy White Race. Prussian Blue sings a cute version on youtube.

    Those who do not hold these beliefs will become extinct or else part of the brown mass.

  2. Mr. Kurtagic’s article is Buchananist in it’s prophesy that Western Civilization and Western Man are inevitably doomed and that there is nothing to be done save rave against the coming darkness. Yet this decline, depending whether you establish its origins to 1861, 1945 or as some do the beginning of the Renaissance, is still in historical terms but the blink of an eye, Recall if you war the 400 years war the 800 years war, the multi-century wars of the Greek against the Persians, the millennium long struggle against Islam. No, Mr. Kurtagic, the battle is not lost, it has only just begun. You speak of the Saxons, yet have a care; while glacially slow to anger our wrath is awakening and woe to he who hast roused the sleeping colossus.

    The Wrath Of The Awakened Saxon
    It was not part of their blood,
    It came to them very late,
    With long arrears to make good,
    When the Saxon began to hate.

    They were not easily moved,
    They were icy — willing to wait
    Till every count should be proved,
    Ere the Saxon began to hate.

    Their voices were even and low.
    Their eyes were level and straight.
    There was neither sign nor show
    When the Saxon began to hate.

    It was not preached to the crowd.
    It was not taught by the state.
    No man spoke it aloud
    When the Saxon began to hate.

    It was not suddenly bred.
    It will not swiftly abate.
    Through the chilled years ahead,
    When Time shall count from the date
    That the Saxon began to hate.

    • “Mr. Kurtagic’s article is Buchananist in it’s prophesy that Western Civilization and Western Man are inevitably doomed and that there is nothing to be done save rave against the coming darkness.”

      I am afraid you have not read the article carefully, as I make no such prophesy nor have I ever held that view.

      In fact, I am critical of Buchanan precisely because he appears unable to conceive anything beyond the America of the past and thinks purely in terms of its retracing its steps rather than regenerating itself into something new and better, founded on different principles. See my review of Suicide of a Superpower:

      • I sympathize with what you’re trying to do. However, anything “traditional” sounds old and archaeoanything sounds ancient. I think you’re rationalizing.

    • avatar
      phil white said:

      To some extent I agree with you. That is the article makes too much of white passivity toward and ignorance of their racial destruction. The tone of the first half is that whites are some how uniquely mentally incapable of self preservation.
      We are not a unique race in that regard. Everyone subject to enough Jewish propaganda can be forced down that path.
      Look at he Jones Town massacre in 1978 in Guyana. It appears a good two thirds of these 900 people who were propagandized into mass suicide were black.

      I like the articles idea of a positive message. So let him write us one, maybe exploration of the stars?
      But there is hope. Our tea party group of mostly oldsters gave me a round of applause when I told them we had to stop illegal AND legal immigration or we were flushing our grand children down the toilet.

  3. How can whites be simultaneously individualistic yet attempt to champion white preservation, which is a collectivist mindset? Seems rather contradictory.

  4. To frame the battle against the radical Left in terms of preserving the race is to cast oneself as a conservative. And a conservative is always easy pickings, because he negates the new without ideas of his own; he represents stasis, ossification, museology—concepts linked to old age.

    Against him the radical Leftist can easily cast himself as a force of innovation, as the voice of the future, because he does have an idea of his own: his is an act of affirmation. What he affirms may now be old, decrepit, orthodox; it may have been exhausted, it may be bankrupt, and, because of its inherently destructive nature, it may offer no way out; but an affirmation is always more appealing than a negation, and the Leftist’s affirmation, though of an old idea, is newer than the idea defended by the conservative, which is even older.

    True; this was noted as far back as the 1920s by Hitler. He wrote in Mein Kampf of how the right-wing parties could not stop the Left because they were seen as reactionaries. The Left on the other hand could present themselves as visionaries.

    Of course, the Right was right, their version of Germany would have been much better than the hatred, greed and mockery dreamed up in an opium haze in the Left’s café culture. But they needed a better way to present it to the sheeple … I’m sorry, the enlightened, noble voters.

    So you need to present a vision of your own; a nationalist vision, I would call it.

    That doesn’t mean you can’t talk of the danger of Whites becoming a minority. Yes, Alex Kurtagic, you are right in that people see the immigration as having occurred slowly, and so they see no real threat against themselves today. But I have found that is is very useful to talk about what will happen when Whites are a minority. Not extinct; they won’t believe that, and they can’t see that far into the future. But a minority. People understand that.

    Simply asking, “Do you think it is good if Whites become a minority in the West twenty years from now?” is a useful question. They have never asked themselves that. (People have very short horizons.) But when you ask it, and force them to answer yes or no, they will start thinking.

    It is also very useful to show the crime rates non-Whites bring in all Western countries. Of course, people should be against immigration no matter what the crime rates, and even if non-Whites didn’t commit any crimes at all. We must preserve the uniqueness of our IQ pattern, with its heavy amount of outliers, and our unique creativity and positive culture. But for those with short horizons, discussing crime rates is useful. The crimes committed by non-Whites show clearly that they don’t belong among us.

    Finally, do not assume that we have “failed”. It is not an internal factor that is the problem, like talking too much about preservation and too little about the future. (All anti-immigrant parties talk about both.) Rather, we have been “defeated”. (But not completely, and not forever – things are changing.) Nationalists are targeted, demonized, ostracized. Companies are forced to fire them out of fear of being connected to them. Nationalists are attacked and beaten, their homes are vandalized, while the media hide these left-wing extremist crimes. THIS is the reason why nationalist parties are not bigger. We need not split hairs about our message, how much there should be of this and how little there should be of that. The main problem is that nationalists are being attacked – socially, economically and physically.

    • A recurring theme in my writing has always been my rejection of the defeatism and the tendency towards analysis without solutions or forward vision that characterises much of the writing we have known from the radical Right.

      You will find this theme as well as my vision for possible alternatives to or pathways out of the status quo outlined in my earlier articles. There are links to over 200 of them on my website and they are also reproduced on my blog.

      This article was about a type of argument that I think needs to be abandoned as it has not proven to work.

      The White minority argument is a variation of the above and there is no evidence that it works. Formerly White-majority cities have become minorities all the same with the full knowledge of the Whites who lived there. The Whites’ tendency has been keep quiet and then flee after the event.

      Whites tend not to think seriously about being an racial minority until they are one and have nowhere else left to run.

      At the moment there are many White-dominated spaces into which to flee. They will run out eventually, but it would be foolish to wait until they do, because by then the change will be permanent and irreversible.

      Strategies for changing attitudes need to be those that work now, while Whites are still in the majority. Being able to inspire positively rather than just frighten is key to a successful approach, because no one wants to be frightened, but everyone wants to feel positive. And our fellow citizens are crying out for something positive.

  5. avatar
    Michael Woodbridge said:

    Mr. Kurtagic is absolutely right of course; by synthesising the past and future into the present we have a new direction and the impetus towards action. All else is stagnation.

  6. avatar
    john thames said:

    I enjoy reading Mr. Kurtagic but have always regarded him as the ultimate starry eyed dreamer. He postulate a new wave for the future but can never define what it is nor how it shall be achieved. And until he does, I remain unimpressed.

  7. I warm to Ygg’s discussion of Keith’s work. (It resembles my constant reminder to folks that Darwin is about groups, not individuals.)

    Keith apparently (not read him yet except for a little of Ygg’s words) has tweaked Darwin insofar as interrogating the selection dynamic farther than others have done (?). The notion is that groups or races or tribes are not pansies, not loafers, not lotus-eaters. If they become so, they quickly vanish and leave the field to their more lively cousins.

    So, then the more lively tribes are led by the more lively individuals. This is where personality comes into play. Strong, creative, smart, etc. types provide leadership, provide genes, provide more fighting spirit (enmity toward outsiders) and more amity toward insiders. This amity includes friendship, family and family alliances , and general sociability in what we call civil society…associations, clubs, etc. that Ygg and Keith enumerate (and which are in decline now).

    So, to address Alex’s call for vision and “utopian call for destiny” which he urges as a positive and attractive, rather than defensive and reactionary…we need to be able to ask folks to talk about what they want for themselves and their kids in the near future.

    Then we need to be able to guide such remarks in our way. I recently asked a middle aged and probably middle-class gal what she believed in with regard to her identification with the Tea Party. She came up with a list. With her permission I related those items to a White Nationalist point of view. She went along…and was mildly surprised and (I must admit) a bit irritated that I had done so, but she got it.

    To put it simply, if you ask White folks what they want, and you get a lively response, then ask them if what they want …they deserve to have. Ask them if they will fight for it. Ask them if they have the right to be who they are. If affirmation comes …then the next thing is to point out who and what stands in the way.

    This is the beginning . Ask them if their destiny is secure amongst Blacks, Jews, and Globalization. This line of talk gets folks thinking.

  8. avatar
    Jeffry Bates said:

    Very good piece, and nowhere near as negative as I thought it would be going in. You’re right to recognize individualism as strength among Anglo Saxons; in separates us from collectivists, from Moses to Marx. We need to separate ourselves entirely from these Middle Eastern fairy tales, extract outsiders’ moral codes that must’ve meant a lot to desert dwellers 3,000 years ago, but which today convey truth no more profound than samplers on granny’s wall. There will be no such restoration of ethnic identity until crisis binds us together; we can’t awaken unless danger is already at the door. Technology has rendered the peril great, and the battle can be over in swiftness that would render moot protective union, but that’s the risk we run. There won’t be turning away from dread terror of being accused of racism, or silly faith in effeminate saviors nailed to boards, until fear and anger left by violence breaches our delusion.

  9. When I think of the anxieties expressed by Mr Kurtagic about the impending racial diminishment of whites I envisage not a bunch of Libyans landing on some Mediterreanean rock but rather rows upon rows of crosses in military cemeteries, and row after row of military planes in the American desert, huge wards for the psychiatric cases spawned by trauma, and old newsreels of WW1 veterans twining and untwining their limbs in nerve gas induced spasms, for as long as they piteously live. We have spent our energies very very unwisely. Contrition, not boasting, is in order.
    Had we not done so a few Africans wandering around Italy could be solved by opening a shoe factory or two in Sicily, or teaching them how to cultivate vines.

  10. While I believe that Pro-White advocates should be prepared to make the ‘right of Nationhood/self-determination’ case and the ‘biodiversity of breeds’ case, another important advocacy focus is the goal/paradigm of White Nation Progress and Fellowship.
    White Nation Progress is the ‘paradigm’/goal of developing the Economy and Culture most conducive to our nature. It’s the cultural-economic paradigm of Natural Affinity informed by Tradition.
    It’s sort of the cultural-economic paradigm of …’Crunchy Conservatives’ by Rod Dreher/ ‘Stuff White People Like’ by Christian Lander/ Nationalist Economics of Tariff Import Tax and Worker Co-operatives/Amish-to-Menonite Agrarianism/ Norse ‘Thing’ governance/ Anglo-American Constitutional Democracy/ Anglo-Saxon Common Law of EdwardCoke to LearnedHand/ Swiss ‘armed peacefulness’ ..the pro-Peace of mutual Protectors against predators / Community Supported Agriculture (CSA) groups/ Rod & Gun Clubs/ Voluntary Eugenics of further developing traits of health, abilities, intelligence, kindness, fortitude, etc. / Pro-Ecology ‘Sustainable’ Economics of ‘Distributism – Localism-Decentralism’ & E. F. Schumacher /the J.RR. Tolkien rural idyl of ‘shire’/ the Pro-Family attachments of Family-Clan-Tribe-Nation/ Anarcho-democratic traditions of Do It Yourself (DIY) Movement and Bicycle Co-ops/ Ecological Stewardship & Animal Rights/ Traditional values of Natural Family /Pro-Family Culture of Courtship and Mating-Marriage/ Self-Determination of ethno-Nationhood/ ..etc.
    It’s a ‘rough consensus’ of natural affinity toward a life-affirming Nationalist culture that can be … highly motivating and engendering dedication … and active Fellowship.

  11. NO ONE knows what needs to be done, how to do it, and explains it so well as Alex Kurtagic does. This is not only the missing message that all other writers are still seeking after these many decades, it is the marketing strategy of how to deliver it. Capture the culture and you win everything. Preach hope to the awakened, not doom and gloom!

  12. avatar
    kris krause said:

    Please contact me I want to preserve my white race

Back to Top