Last week, characterised by the El Paso shooting and media hysteria over ‘White Supremacy,’ spurred me to further reflect on the root cause of modern turmoil–identity. These reflections are as follows.
It appears any effectual political action requires overcoming two initial obstacles. Surmounting these challenges does not automatically produce victory; but as shall be demonstrated, they are prerequisite conditions for any political success.
So, to those obstacles.
First, to justify political action, there must exist a clear subject matter. Just as civil litigation requires a plaintiff to argue his/her case; proposals to political or social issues are only conceivable when they would benefit a defined group. (Individuals alone provide insufficient pretexts for political action, and as I have made a point of restating: Because the collective is more substantial in number than the individual, it necessarily derives further rights, importance and provides a more realistic vehicle for political change.
This subject matter–a distinct people–must exist; equally, this identity must be widely understood. If one is coaxed into believing an actual group doesn’t exist, obviously, he or she will not advocate for this group. As put by Oz Conservative, “If you assume that you live in a society that only exists as a collection of self-creating individuals with no distinct ties to each other, then what is there really at the larger level to defend?”
Second, there must be a positive sense of group identity. It is one thing an Australian or Western identity to exist; their similarities viewed as extending beyond trivial, accidental matters; and people are conscious of these qualities. However, it is another to believe that people as morally justifiable and worthy of advocacy.
As clinically demonstrated by Gregory Hood, it is this second challenge–establishing an uplifting identity–which Whites often struggle with, due to their psychological oppression in media, tertiary and cultural institutions. That Whites’ DNA is called an abomination; miscegenation is applauded; we are constantly linked to genocidal tendencies, all bespeaks the West’s demoralised, anguished state.
If believed, as many do, that the very existence of White people yields contemptible or even evil consequences, this leads to 1 conclusion. That is, any act to advance White interests is intrinsically immoral–and must be openly decried whenever explicitly or implicitly done so. Case in point: President Trump, the man elected to cut immigration into the US, has in office supported higher levels of immigration–thus empirically speeding up White displacement. But because ‘Make America Great Again’ re-energised a consciousness fundamentally Euro-American in character, and his Twitter feed occasionally fuels these fervours, President Trump has also been called a ‘White Supremacist’.
Thus, the first task in any patriotic or nationalist ambitions, should be to explicate our coherent and worthy identity.
After this metapolitical exercise, everything else falls into place. And unless this conception is sufficiently inculcated into the public consciousness, ultimately, identity is the hill we shall fall upon.