Archive | September, 2011

Dugin vs. Traditionalism: A Closer look

Aleksandr Dugin

Aleksandr Gelyevich Dugin (Russian: Алексaндр Гeльевич Дyгин) is a Russian political scientist who came to prominence by promulgating a theory of geopolitics known as Eurasianism in his book Foundations of Geopolitics. He was a key member of a number of Third Positionist groups such as the National Bolshevik Party, which was an anti-liberal political organization critical of American interventions in the former Soviet Union. To some degree, he credited the Belgian theorist Jean-François Thiriart and Evola as inspiration.

In recent times, Dugin has become an increasingly mainstream fixture in the Russian intellectual élite.  It should be said at this point that many of Dugin’s political views have merit, and indeed some portions of his outlook are difficult or impossible to deny.  However, the focus of this article is not upon the Dugin’s theories themselves, but rather their genesis, and we will attempt, here to briefly analyze the relationship between Evola, Guénon and Dugin.

Evidence

The original basis of Traditionalism, as promulgated by Guénon was that, in high antiquity, a “primordial Tradition” (also referred to as “perennial wisdom,” or sophia perennis) had been revealed and existed among mankind.  As time progressed, the world and its people became decadent, slothful, and increasingly disconnected from this Tradition.  In the so-called “Kali Yuga” or “Iron Age,” there remain only a few traces of this Tradition, which manifests itself in the teachings of the major world religions.  Traditionalism, then, is a rejection of the myth of progress that had commonly been accepted throughout the 20th century.

Such a view was accepted by Julius Evola, whose works such as Revolt Against the Modern World and Men Among the Ruins, advanced Traditionalist theory.  Whereas Guénon expounded a religious and spiritual theory of Traditionalism, Evola expanded this to show how the religious and spiritual effects manifested in political and social phenomena.  In other words, Evola, though he has his differences, presents us with the utilization of Guenon’s ideas.  This can be seen readily in how Evola treats politics: while the “old” Traditionalists were not concerned with Politics, Evola does delve into politics.  Dugin, however, is explicitly and overtly political in his outlook.  It is Evola then, along with the other figures of the European New Right who influenced him, such as Alain de Benoist and Troy Southgate, who form the crucial link between the older Traditionalist school of  Guénon and Evola.

Dugin, however, does not reject modernity as definted by Evola or Guénon in its entirety.  In fact, he proposed “modernization without Westernization” in 1997.  While citing the two Traditionalists frequently in his work, it seems that his own theoretical work is geared towards an abstraction of these themes, and whilst Evola explicitly rejected the myth of progress, the national-Bolshevik idea coincided with the renewed sense of progress in Russia.  Moreover, On more than one occasion, Dugin has even proposed Alistair Crowley as a Traditionalist.  This shows a remarkable misunderstanding of the original Traditionalism, as Guénon had condemned Crowley as being a stark anti-traditionalist.

Verdict:

If Dugin is a Traditionalist, then he is the founder of a uniquely Russian interpretation of it, which instrumentalizes the original ideas of the 20th century Traditionalist scholars, but re-packages them so as to be useful in Dugin’s political Third Way-oriented worldview.  This is not to say that Dugin was not influenced by the Traditionalist school of thought, but rather that it does not play a major role in Dugin’s own thought.  And while it is true that there are plausible links between the Third Way and Traditionalist schools, the Third Way must be viewed first as a political system, and not as an entire worldview in and of itself.

Posted in Europe, Politics, Russia3 Comments

Commemoration of Corneliu Zelea Codreanu

“Capitanul” Corneliu Zelea Codreanu, born on this day in 1899.  Codreanu was a charismatic Romanian anti-Bolshevist politician, and the founder of the Legion of the St. Michael the Archangel (Legiunea Arhanghelului Mihail), later known as the Iron Guard.  As an organization which was rooted in the notion of achieving national development, the Iron Guard embraced a revolutionary spirit with the goal of bringing about the transformation of all society, and combined with its heroic and revolutionary ideology the teachings of the Orthodox Church.

Corneliu Codreanu was born in in the Romanian town of Huşi, the son of a Ion Zelea Codreanu, a schoolteacher.  The elder Codreanu had been a colleague of the intellectual luminaries of his time, such as A.C. Cuza, who also influenced Corneliu later in life.  In 1919, after moving to Iaşi, Codreanu found Bolshevism as his new enemy, after he had witnessed the impact of Bolshevik agitation in Moldavia.  The Iron Guard would later continue to be an inspirational and prominent political movement which opposed all the trappings of modernity, such as Freemasonry, Freudianism, homosexuality, liberalism, atheism, Marxism, and Bolshevism.  His influence, albeit an oblique one, on Strasserism, is also evident from a cursory study of history.

Codreanu, who began his career in the wake of World War I as an anticommunist politician, would become the co-founder of the National-Christian Defense League.  His greatest legacy though would be the Iron Guard, which rallied the intellectuals and working class.

Today Codreanu is often considered one of the forefathers of the Third Positionist. movement, Codreanu left his lasting influence with the Traditionalist theorist Julius Evola, from whom this site takes much inspiration.  Evola was reportedly “dazzled” by Codreanu, who would later write: “one of the worthiest and spiritually best oriented figures that I ever met in the nationalist movements of the time.”  The Romanian-born Mircea Eliade, a Traditionalist historian of religion, fiction writer, and was also influenced by Codreanu’s movement in the earlier 20th century.

In 1938, he was accused of sedition by Romanian Bolshevists, and brought to trial.  The two consecutive trials were marked by irregularities, and Codreanu was forbidden to speak in his own defense.  His legal team was prevented from preparing pleas, and he lost the trial and was sentenced to prison and hard labor.  Later that year, he would be murdered by Bolshevists on November 30, 1938.

In a Romanian Television poll conducted in 2006, Codreanu was voted the 22nd among 100 greatest Romanians to have ever lived.

Posted in Current Events, Site News2 Comments

Ten Years Later: The Role of Liberalism in 9/11

September 11th was a horrendous incident. The killing of innocents is deplorable and appalling in any part of the world.  As extensive as the damage to property and loss of life was, it does not compare with the damage done by cultural liberals and by liberal internationalists who seek to extend the hegemony of secular and liberal imperialism over the nations of the world.  In many places around the world, secular liberalism has failed, and the people living in such societies now face an unprecedented assault on their civil liberties and property rights, while in other nations, people face the ill effects of liberal interventionism in political and cultural affairs.

Although the events of September 11th have been seriously lamented in the press, there must also be a serious inquiry into the causes and perpetrators of this event.  If such an analysis can be faced with honesty, then it should come as no surprise that there are political and cultural dimensions that contributed, and indeed justified the attacks on the United States as a cultural and a political identity.  The political dimension is exemplified through internationalism and interventionism, which has been the prime motivator for the dislike of the United States in not only Muslim countries, but many European, Latin American, and Asian nations.  The cultural dimension is exemplified by organizations such as the ADL, SPLC, American Civil Liberties Union, the National Organization for Women, People for the American Way, Planned Parenthood, Amnesty International, and Human Rights Watch, and by individuals like Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Nancy Pelosi and Barbara Boxer.  To a lesser extent, it is also represented by the mainstream media, by Hollywood, and by the American music industry.

What could have caused the monotheistic affirmation of “Allahu Akbar!” to ring through the streets of the Muslim world?   The fact is that had America not been a hedgemon, and merely been a small decadent state, it would be ignored by the rest of the world, including the Islamic world.  The cultural left was responsible, since the end of World War Two, for the deluge of decadence and immorality in every sphere of human life, and combined with the interventionist tendencies, the deluge overflowed the boundaries of America comparable only to the pagan barbarity of the ancient Gauls, Celts, or pre-Islamic Arabs.

On the social scale, although they would seldom admit it for fear of criticizing a “non-white” people, liberals are violently opposed to the way of life in Muslim countries.  While some of these liberals became the so-called “neoconservatives,” others stayed liberal and joined the ranks of the media, or became members of radical activist organizations.  Furthermore, many leftists sympathized with Israel, which in its initial stages was a leftist state, as exemplified by the kibbutz and its distribution of labor.  The left, in fact, hates the socially conservative atmosphere of many cultures, including the Islamic culture of the Middle East, and the Confucian culture of China.  To them, those cultures represent something which is totalitarian, barracks-like, and patriarchal.  Indeed, in the early 20th century, when strong Nationalist and Populist movements held sway in Europe, many on the right looked for a potential ally in Islam, and the Traditionalists also thought highly of the Islamic system.  Evola, for instance, praised Islam, saying that it contained “a traditional completeness,” while Guenon and others converted to Islam.  On the other side of the spectrum, leftists like Orianna Fallaci, were deriding Islam for not abiding by the standards of Western leftism.

The extensive network of media, non-profit organizations, politicians (both “Democratic” and “Republican”) are crusading today not for Christianity, but for secularism, and herein lies the problem.  Although there have been wars between Islamic and Christian powers in the past, the conflict can be in no way compared to these conflicts. From Hollywood, where movies containing drug use and sexual perversions are rampant, to the promotion of gay rights by the American embassy in Pakistan, to non-profit organizations which distributed contraceptives to Muslim girls, values which are not only anti-Muslim, but anti-Christian, are being promoted extensively by political elites.  These same political elites have opened up American borders to millions of illegal immigrants, begun unjustified wars, promoted racial conflicts for their own gain, and have undoubtedly done irreversible harm to American society at home by promulgating the welfare state.

In 1925, decades before September 11th, Rene Guenon wrote the following:

To be resolutely ‘anti-modern’ is not to be in any way ‘anti-Western’; on the contrary, it only means making an effort to save the West from its own confusion. In any case, no Easterner who is faithful to his own tradition would view matters differently, and it is certain that there are far fewer opponents of the West as an attitude, than of the West as it has become identified with modern civilization.

There are those today who speak of a ‘defense’ of the West, which is odd, to say the least, considering that it is the West, as we shall see later on, that is threatening to submerge the whole of mankind in the whirlpool of its own confused activity…

The Islamic critique of American culture, then, cannot be dismissed as a mere “hatred of freedom,” and though it does not always match the Traditionalist outlook, is similar enough to give it some merit, and cannot be dismissed so easily.  Many Americans can agree that American culture is increasingly decadent and vulgar at all levels.  They would also agree that since the 60′s, there has been a cultural clash between the cultural left and right, which witnessed the destruction of the family, the secularization of society, and the eroding of human morals.  If this was disturbing to American conservatives, it must also be even more deeply disturbing to devoutly religious Muslims who not only have to endure the destruction of their homes by the American military, but also see their way of life threatened by relentless cultural assaults from left-wing organizations.

It is unfortunate that today America has not learned from the mistakes of the past.  In the end, both Muslims and Westerners face a common threat: the threat of liberalism and globalism, both of which are intertwined with each other: liberalism is like a virulent disease, and globalism the vector that carries it.  Liberals must not only apologize to their fellow Americans for September 11th, but they should apologize to the world for the cultural damage they have done prior to that incident, and the post-September 11th environment.  Meanwhile, America as a whole needs to not only cease and desist from its entangling alliances, dreams of nation-building, and interventionist politics, but needs to reassess its cultural orientations.  The people who are interest in self-preservation should join Muslims in condemning the global moral degeneracy that is produced by liberalism.

Posted in Politics0 Comments

Ten Years Later: Are the Lessons Learned?

This article was contributed by Xiaochen Su in London.

The ceremonies are certainly as solemn as they have ever been.  Across the nation, people remembered that pivotal day exactly ten years ago, when America bore witness to a whole new kind of terrorism.  As buildings collapsed and lives lost, the Americans everywhere were forced to come to realization that the mighty economic and military strength of the only remaining superpower are not enough to protect themselves against a few skilled and determined “foreign operatives.”

 Shock and sorrow are bound to be accompanied by a certain degree of irrationality.  In the wake of the disaster, the Americans became blinded by their emotions.  They simply entrusted the government with handling any responses to 9/11, thinking that perhaps, amid their own sense of helplessness, their political leaders can come up with solid plans for revenge, for compensation, and for comprehending what was really going on that day.

 With the emotionally distraught constituents casting aside their usual doubts of government policies, America had unprecedented political unity in the years after the disaster.  People threw away their common senses of constantly questioning government actions, simply by arguing that the time was for immediate actions against the perpetrators, not incessant squabbles among voters and politicians that make inefficiency the norm in American politics.

With the voters voluntarily casting themselves aside and foreign states sympathetic with American sufferings, the politicians at Washington, DC were able to freely script foreign policies in the post-9/11 era with little domestic or foreign resistance.  They had the opportunity to reshape American image, and redirect American interests abroad to take into account that whole new factor of threat on the American homeland.  Yet, instead, our leaders simply accentuated the need to increase, even further, the presence of America in every corner of the world to stamp out existence of the “foreign operatives.”

Ideologically, the mission represented an almost coerced execution of liberal internationalism.  The creations of new democracies abroad are supposed to be supported by the locals and Western nations as institutionalization of social equality and legal fairness needed for economic progress.  Yet, under the propagandistic calls of the post-9/11 American government, democracy itself almost became a propagandistic concept.

 It was and still is democracy for the sake of democracy.  America sought to quickly turn around anti-American public opinions in foreign countries through direct and indirect oppositions to unpopular long-time rulers.  Insurgencies are supported by financial and military means, and the costly supports are justified to the increasingly skeptical populace back home as galvanizing support for “freedom seekers.”  Somehow, the government and the media succeeded to convince the public that there is direct correlation between the mere existence of militarily created, messy, unrestrained popular democracies and a decrease, even disappearance, of terrorism.

Ten years after the formulation of the liberal internationalist mission, the American government has persisted in its execution.  Despite costs of billions of taxpayers’ dollars and tens of thousands of deaths in innocent American soldiers and local civilians, the politicians are still determined to carry out the policy to its bitter end.  Washington is not giving up until every last “oppressed people” can have a taste of that sweet joy of “freedom.”

Surely enough, the increasingly aggressive military deployment has been instrumental in encouraging “freedom fighters” everywhere.  As witnessed by events across the Middle East from Libya to Egypt to Syria, any thuggish gangs vowing to fight against the non-elected local government is hailed by America as nobly fighting for freedom and democracy.  It did not matter what background they come from as long as their guns are pointed at “dictators” and not at America.

But the question remains whether America and the world at large has become more secure against future flairs of fanaticism that has been the root cause of 9/11.  As popular fanaticism continues to overthrow long-established regimes in the Middle East, the answer cannot be too reassuring.  After all, popular uprisings, unlike what has been long proclaimed by American liberal internationalists, have been caused by economic and social reasons, rather than simple desires for greater political participation.

Ten years of turbulence resulting from movements to establish democratic rule has not brought about economic development or social equality.  The newly rich and powerful emerged from Western-sponsored “democratic elections,” while the vast majorities of those who fought on the frontlines of the movements are left in exactly the same social and economic statuses as before.

It is only a matter of time before those involved realize the grim reality.  And when they do, they will realize the ludicrousness of the American liberal internationalist vision.   Then, it would only be a matter of time before the disgruntled once again turn their guns away from the “evil despots” of their native lands and back toward America.  The American voters, in renewed shock and sorrow, will have pay for their blind trusting of foreign policies to self-centered politicians.

Posted in Current Events0 Comments

Music, then and now

To the ancients, music had a certain metaphysical quality, which is why it was used frequently in ceremonies and rituals.  The ancient Aryan hymns of praise, the bhajans, were linked not only to the activation of various “centers,” but they also served to praise the divine.  To Pythagoras, music was a manifestation of  the divine construction of the universe, because harmony, rhythm, and sound could be controlled by precise mathematical proportions.  To both the ancient Greeks and Aryans, the world of music represented a microcosm of the general world, in which disorder became order.  This pattern could also be found in the Far East, where the Taoists recognized the tones of the scale being the ordered system which arises out of primordial chaos.  In the New World, musical chants were used in the ceremonies of the Amerindians in a similar fashion.

This traditional pattern was repeated in the later Christian world.  St. Augustine would declare, “Qui cantat, bis orat” (He who sings, prays twice), meaning that ordinary speech is mundane, but that a musical setting beautifies the prayer.  Under the Church, a rich system of worship and ritual music developed, corresponding to the times of the year and the celebration of various events in Christ’s life and resurrection.  The Islamic tradition also sets the words of the Qur’an to a melodic system, in order to exalt what is believed to be the “Divine Speech”.

During and after the Enlightenment, the patronage of music shifted from the Church to the monarchs of old Europe.  Music had not lost its sacred character, as these monarchos would often commission works for their chapels, but music became increasingly secularized.  However, it was during this age that those we now know as the veritable giants of Western classical music emerged: Bach, Mozart and Beethoven, just to name a few.  And, even when music became secularized, its character remained heroic, able to move and inspire its audience, as one sees in the operas of Wagner, or the monumental symphonies of Mahler.

The state of modern music needs no introduction: it is merely part and parcel of modern popular culture.  The vast majority of the music in the modern world insists on a repetitive and standardized simplicity that can only be compared in a negative sense to the most primitive of tribal music.  It could be argued that modern popular music, especially the kind seen in the West, is of less value, because even the songs of primitive tribal groups serve to communicate myths, or in the case of certain African tribes, are a source of communication.  In Europe or Asia, the simple folk-songs of the working classes also served as a type of basal mantra for their identity.  Popular music lacks even these utilities, and serves only to gratify the listener with inane stories, or for the so-called musicians, who are in reality vainglorious individuals, to promote themselves.  The genres of rap, hip-hop, and R&B are some of the most intellectually – not to mention rhythmically and melodically deficient music the world has ever heard.  Even the most formal sort of music one can encounter in the modern West, the Broadway “musical” is shallow and incompetent.  Modern popular music is also technically unimpressive – there have been few contributions to the technique of any instrument contributed by any modern “artist”.

The popular singer: An image of individualism without personality and crass consumerism

Our analysis of modern music, however, cannot stop at its external features.  Like everything else in the modern world, the outer appearance of phenomena have underlying causes.  The formal element of “pop culture” is basically anti-traditional by its very nature, appealing to the lowest common denominator of society and meant for standardized consumption by the general masses.  By extension, the majority of its music, through which culture manifests its collective creative prowess, with a few isolated exceptions, is the culmination of pure and simple “entertainment”.  The majority of modern music thus exists in a state of artistic Limbo in which the artists are neither ideologically mature, nor infused with any creative enthusiasm.  The result is mere noise which, though possessing the rudiments of  melody and rhythm, is the polar opposite of the great works of the past.  They are at best sentimental but ultimately vapid, chaotic but lifeless, while often displaying the elements of the decadent societies that formed them.

People may object to the description of modern music as being sentimental and say, that in song or music, emotions and arts must be expressed clearly and earnesly.  After all, music is independent of propositional thought, and directed towards the inner soul.  In response, it would be necessary to point out that the emotion which seemingly arises from modern music, like everything else in the modern world is a counterfeit, and at best displays a neutral face in regard to Tradition.  In many cases, modern music serves as a way to display the chthonic aspects of society, and even the things from which a positive outlook might seemingly be delivered can be regarded as purely incidental.

Another objection would also say that Classical music existed for the entertainment of monarchs and nobles.  This is true, but a creative and lively process was at work in the cantatas of Bach, the symphonies of Mozart, or the concertos of Brahms.  Whatever degenerative forces had been present in the musical community had taken over and began the slow process of decay from within, which ultimately resulted in the sort of music we have today.  To quote the indomitable Richard Wagner:

Only when a body’s inner death is manifest, do outside elements win the power of lodgement in it—yet merely to destroy it. Then, indeed, that body’s flesh dissolves into a swarming colony of insect life: but who in looking on that body’s self, would hold it still for living?

Returning to the original prospect, the themes of modern music must be regarded as being far from representing any Traditional outlook on life.  The vast majority of modern songs merely describe a meaningless or counterproductive life, glorifying criminality, or else they exaggerate ideas of sexualized romance.  In contrast, even secular operas of the late 18th century concerned themselves with the same material that the ancient Greeks were concerned with – that is, comedy (in the literary sense), and tragedy were the prime devices to display a concern with the indispensable themes of heroic virtues.  This, while being a literary problem, is also a concern, given the subject matter for today’s music.

Both Plato and Nietzsche would have been surprised by how dangerous America’s indulgence in music has proved to be.  Modern “popular” music is deficient in every way, and historically has been the vehicle by which elites promote vices among all classes of people, and falsely leads people to conclude that achievement is synonymous with materialism.  Because vice is the central dogma of modern music, and it promotes a lifestyle which is incompatible with an organic outlook on life, such music, those who promote it, and those who listen to it are little more than harmful parasites upon society who prey upon impressionable youth and corrupt their morals.

Such parasites must ultimately be excised before the damage done by them is too great.

Posted in Culture5 Comments

America and ameriKwa

America and ameriKwa

America and ameriKwa are two ideas that represent the various aspects of the same geographical region.  The former, in its most literal sense, is a geographical designation which represents the landmass which separates the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans.  On a different level, it also metaphorically represents a nation which was founded some 200 years ago, when the descendants of British colonists living on the said continent revolted against the Crown and established independence.  In other contexts, it refers to a hedgemonic entity which arose from the imperialistic and interventionist nature of the said nation.Culturally, America is synonymous with the evolution of the nation from its inception until the post-WW2 era.   It is dominated by a sense of place and of history which is derived from its English ancestors.  It is concerned with the protection of property, but not its excess, and it is opposed to the therapeutic welfare state.

ameriKwa: the capital of quantity

The notion of “ameriKwa” is something quite different.  It does not refer to a place or a nation in the classical sense, but rather, is indicative of a type of civilization whose characteristics Evola termed the “reductio ad absurdum of the negative and the most senile aspects of Western civilization.”  While America can be assigned a number of positive traits, there are none to be found in ameriKwa, which is indeed the most recent manifestation of America.  Such negative traits of ameriKwa include the rootless nature of its culture, the fusion of consumerism and politics, its rampant egalitarianism and its liberal decadence.  Put another way, ameriKwa is the concept of the rejection of the organic society, and the embracing of the artificial anti-culture which is grounded in individualism and decadent modernist thinking.

We need to only observe the current state of ameriKwan society to understand what lies underneath its veneer of freedom, equality and benevolence: rap music, Hollywood movies which promote every form of degeneracy, dancing, violent racial conflicts, the crime in the streets and a generation of children born out of wedlock to a future of hopelessness are an example of some of these things.  In ameriKwa, the inversion of old orders are present everywhere: the irreligious are lauded to the heavens whilst those of faith are persecuted, and the most degenerate of individuals occupy high places once reserved for the most virtuous or intelligent.  Even as Hitler so concisely rendered his commentary on American society, “Everything about the behavior of American society reveals that it’s half Judaized, and the other half negrified. How can one expect a State like that to hold together?”

The ameriKwan lifestyle can only be compared negatively to a neurotic one, with their material wealth only partially covering up their interior formlessness and barbarism.  In all aspects of life, the need for accumulation and the subservience to the material creates a world in which people are bound by economism, and in which all of culture, media, and government exist to subject people to further indignities at its own hands while also inflicting severe damage on the natural world.  The condition of modern ameriKwan society causes young people to be frustrated in their expectation of meaning in life by endeavoring to satisfy material needs and creating artificial ones.  Out of this, a new value system arises, which includes democracy, individualism, freedom, tolerance, diversity, and secularism – one which is clearly at odds with the Traditional outlook on life.

The transition from home life to the office was especially difficult on the American woman.  Hysteria, neurasthenia, psychoneurosis and other neuroses were quick to take root in the female population after they gained their so called “liberation,” and spread to the rest of society.  By the end of the 70′s, nobody was was safe from the medico-cultural virus of neurosis.  In this respect, in modern times, internally and externally, America is the epitome of a deformed society with no identity, no real past and no real future.

The America that Never Was

What remains of America is ameriKwa, and under the steel-and-concrete cities, and behind the facades of Wall Street or Congress, is a world depraved and corrput to its heart, a soulless world rotting away.  People around the world must thus heed the call against ameriKwa, and preserve their own ethnic and religious characters without without pretending that the promises made by ameriKwa of democracy and freedom will better their lives.

Having defined the character of ameriKwa, it should now be clear the gravity of the cultural struggle which various peoples around the world are currently engaged in.  To put it concisely. it is the former is the world of being, while the latter is the world of ceaseless becoming.

Posted in Current Events, North America, Society1 Comment

Is the Breakup of the United States imminent?

Is the Breakup of the United States imminent?

In his 1981 book, The Nine Nations of North America, Joel Garreau argues that, because of the vast differences between several parts of North America, the many national borders are irrelevant, and, that indeed, the United States and Canada are not just two nations, but nine nations.  In its time, the book was hailed as a classic text on the current regionalization of North America” by American intellectuals.

Garreau’s idea that borders are essentially artificial must be taken in the proper context; they are not to be used in a sentimental sense which would make them easily appropriated by people who advocate massive immigration between nations.  Quite the contrary, Garreau’s idea establishes the opposite: that in defiance of the widely-accepted idea of huge superstates encompassing many different peoples, a smaller and localized nationalism, maintaining the local character of the people is needed.

The nine hypothetical nations of North America, according to Garreau

Indeed, the borders of the United States and Canada are artificial, with even less historical justification than Russia’s dominion over Siberia or China’s over its various regions.  In the case of the latter, Russia permits certain areas to form autonomous republics, many of which have the limited right of nullification, or the right to enact legislation at odds with the federal constitution.  China allows some autonomy in its outer regions by designating them as “autonomous regions”.  The United States was formed by the westward expansion of the Federal Government, incorporating land formerly belonging to the Red Indians into the newly-formed nation.  The American system also differs considerably, with a bloated federal government which maintains a “one-size-fits-all” outlook on their authority.  In reality, then, the “United States” is just that: 50 sovereign states in a union and that union can dissolve just like the Soviet Union did.

Perhaps, the nature of the Americans, as noted by Francis Galton, is nearly a recipe in itself for disaster when combined with a tyrannical but incompetent government.  As Galton once said:

The North American people has been bred from the most restless and combative class of Europe. Whenever…a political or religious party has suffered defeat, its prominent members, whether they were the best, or only the noisiest, have been apt to emigrate to America…Every scheming knave, and every brutal ruffian, who feared the arm of the law, also turned his eyes in the same direction. Peasants and artisans, whose spirit rebelled against the tyranny of society and the monotony of their daily life, and men of a higher position, who chafed under conventional restraints, all yearned towards America. Thus the dispositions of the parents of the American people have been exceedingly varied, and usually extreme, but in one respect they almost universally agreed…They are enterprising, defiant, and touchy; impatient of authority; furious politicians; very tolerant of fraud and violence; possessing much high and generous spirit, and some true religious feeling, but strongly addicted to cant.

One of the major possibilities for the breakup is the ever-widening political divides between Americans.  A few Americans are opposed to the current Obama regime and favor limited government intervention in property rights, some Americans favor the status quo of continued wars and interventions which have gone on since the end of the Second World War, while yet others wish to use the current conditions to pass and uphold every sort of socialist legislation such as hate speech laws, gun laws, immigration laws, socialized medicine, social activism and secular humanism agendas in schools.  Such people also want to expand the authority of welfare state and turn it into a Freudo-Marxist secular regime, while increasing big brother/nanny state police powers and many other laws and regulations that subvert individual freedoms given under the Constitution of the United States.

The American economy is not in good shape.  In a society which is materialistic and in which people demand their bread and circuses, this translates into a decreasing trust in the American government’s abilities.  Reckless deficit spending has caused our federal government to amass a fourteen trillion dollar debt.  The American dollar has lost its value significantly in recent decades, fallen by 1000% since 1950.  In other words, goods which cost $10 to purchase in 1950 cost $1000 today.  With such crippling debt, excessive spending on wars and entitlement programs, the American economy cannot be sustained.  Those who depend on the government dole for their bread will also revolt against the government.

Desolation: The Future of America?

At some point in the not too distant future I surmise that a significant segment of the population will rebel against this government.  Another crack in the American dam is noted by Toynbee, the noted British historian, who noted that:

First the Dominant Minority attempts to hold by force – against all right and reason – a position of inherited privilege which it has ceased to merit; and then the Proletariat repays injustice with resentment, fear with hate, and violence with violence when it executes its acts of secession. Yet the whole movement ends in positive acts of creation – and this on the part of all the actors in the tragedy of disintegration. The Dominant Minority creates a universal state, the Internal Proletariat a universal church, and the External Proletariat a bevy of barbarian war-bands.

There exist today in America, in fact, many dominant minorities who are willingly subverting the interests of the United States for their own purposes.  Certainly, America is also fracturing along racial lines.  Even under the Obama regime, people of different ethnic groups are finding it difficult to co-exist, as evidenced by the rampant crime in American cities.  Latinos have come to dominate the American Southwest and display more loyalty to their Hispanic brethern across the border then they do to the United States.  Native Americans, perhaps the biggest victims of the Federal Government, also have a compelling case for secession, as does the former Confederacy.  The Catholic Knight points out that secessionist movements have already cropped up around the country.

What would a hypothetical re-drawn map of America look like?  On one extreme, it could resemble Europe during the Dark Ages: a vast continent composed of many small states and fiefdoms.  As the Union collapses, and states secede, different nations might arise, citing commonalities in their regional lifestyles.  For instance, the former Confederacy might form a single nation, while some West Coast states form another.  Some Canadian provinces might join with former U.S. states, but Quebec will certainly become its own nation.  The entire Southwest might be absorbed into Mexico, or certain Northern Mexican states may secede from Mexico and join the largely Hispanic Southwest.  Indian nations might also secede.  There is no telling how many nations America may be broken up into, and it is certainly possible that Garreau was rather kind in making his predictions.

Another proposal for what a Balkanized North America may look like (click to expand)

Those who are unlucky enough to witness this collapse will have to weather the initial storm of violence and social unrest before more stable and localized societies are formed.  Such an event may take a few generations.  Eventually, an equilibrium might be established, or these newly formed states could degenerate further into violent conflict.  If future generations are fortunate, a few centuries of peace and prosperity may arise out of these smaller nations, forcing people to return to a smaller ecological niche.  Unfortunately, history has been shown to be cyclical and not linear, and perhaps one day in the future, a new Union of North American states will be formed at the great expense of the people living there, thus initiating the cycle once more.

Posted in Current Events, North America, Politics, Society24 Comments


    Leave a Comment

  • Stay up to date

  • Subscribe to the RSS feed
  • Subscribe to the feed via email
  • Follow us on Twitter!

Find us on Facebook

Traditionalist Books


More books...