Wednesday, May 3, 2017
Ethno-Nationalism and Pan-Europeanism can co-exist
I don't see ethno-nationalism and pan-Europeanism necessarily as opposites. I see them as useful partners. One can be locally ethno-national but also unite with others for pan-European interests.
In a way, the most effective way of managing a society is on the ethno-national level. A secure and well-governed nation will get along fine with neighbors. Look how Norway, Sweden, and Finland got along.
It's like the human body. The liver is what it is, heart is what it is, eyes are what they are, and etc. They all have separateness and uniqueness. But they also work together for the good of the whole. For the whole body to work well, each organ must guard and play its unique role.
Excessive ethno-nationalism undermines pan-Europeanism because each nation will only think of 'my people' against other ethno-Europeans.
But excessive pan-Europeanism will also undermine white power since 'whiteness' is generic and bland as sole/core identity.
In a way, both white power in both US and EU waned and dissipated because of the promotion of pan-identity whereby each people became cut off from their ethnic roots. Without core roots in heritage and history, they sought new identity from pop culture that is all about fads and fashions. Whiteness is like 'tree'. But there are different kinds of trees. Different trees can co-exist in the same forest but they must maintain their uniqueness as well. Oak is an oak, and birch is a birch. If both are called 'tree', then neither is very meaningful.
Imagine if Japanese, Chinese, Vietnamese, and Koreans dropped core ethno-identity and just opted for pan-Asianness. It would be Zzzzzzzzz. It'd be like one of those generic 'Asian buffets' that offers dishes from all Asian nations but without particular expertise or flavor.
The fact is each Asian nationality can maintain and defend its core ethno-identity and, at the same time, recognize what all Asians have in common and work for common goal. That way, 'narcissism of small differences' can be avoided.
In a way, the golden age of European cooperation was soon after WWII. It led to the rise of homogeneous European nations(like the article 'Us and Them' by Jerry Muller detailed in FOREIGN AFFAIRS), and each felt secure and safe. Thus, they were more likely to cooperate with neighbors. In contrast, the anti-ethno-nationalist USSR and Yugoslavia eventually fell apart, often violently.
Another thing. I think Alt Right can be an international movement and not just a white one. By that, I mean Euro-Alt-Right can work with other Alt-Rights around the world for the common goal of nationalism and anti-globalism. So, let Arab Alt Right defend Arab world, let Asian Alt Right defend Asia, and let Western Alt Right defend the West.
The message that the Western Alt Right can send to non-whites is that the Alt Right respects all national sovereignties of all peoples and nations. In contrast, globalism seeks to undermine not only Western national sovereignty but national independence, cultural autonomy, and territorial integrity of all peoples. Indeed, look what globalism did to Libya and Syria but turning them into open borders nations for terrorists. Globalism seeks to Palestinianize all gentiles. Palestinians used to be masters of Palestine. Now, they are a people without a home. The ONLY nationalism that globalism hypocritically respects is that of Israel.
So, even though Alt Right in the West is a white movement and must be, it can inspire similar identitarian movements all over the world. Alt Right must send a message that what globalism does to the West today, it will do to rest of the world. It already happened in Iraq, Syria, and Libya. Open borders were imposed on them through invasion and US funding of Jihadis who cross through national borders.