What happened to conservatism? It punts on the defining question of our time: whether nations have a right to exist

Inspired by this question, I decided to distill my answer to its essence as concisely as possible:

Who killed conservatism?

Why did you switch the label? Why are you calling the name I call myself to refer, for example, not to what Ted Cruz and Donald Trump have in common (and they have more in common than what separates them) but to what Jeb Bush and Barack Obama have in common (and they agree with each other on all points where I disagree.)

John C. Wright

What changed? Nationalism used to be assumed. Now it’s not.

Used to be, everyone was a nationalist. Liberals, conservatives, Democrats and Republicans, all nationalists. Suddenly many ideologues simultaneously began selling their countries out for globalism (because many were infiltrating agents for Global Socialism), and conservatism had no answer because its ideology had neither the spirit nor the explicit premise of nationalism. The same is true for liberalism and libertarianism, these ideologies are now dead letter and irrelevant because they fail to address a question whose answer was assumed when these ideologies were designed.

The existential struggle of our age is between those who would replace all nations with an undifferentiated mass of individuals, and those who would preserve one or more nations.

The Progressives, Communists, and Socialists are all self-consciously globalists, which is why they continue to be relevant in the struggle to destroy national boundaries, nations, and nation states. Conservatism took no explicit position on the national question, so when they implicitly threw in with the globalists the word itself became a shibboleth.

The Alt-Right is the only right that matters now.

The #AltRight believes in three things:

  1. Nationalism.
  2. Western civilization.
  3. Winning.

Everything else is negotiable or a means to one of those three ends.

Vox Day

I’m a Nationalist Christian. Used to be you could just say “I’m a Christian” because the modifier was assumed. I oppose National Socialism because Socialism is purposefully designed to subvert and destroy Christian charity, but I will ally with Nazis against Global Socialism.

About Aeoli Pera

Maybe do this later?
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to What happened to conservatism? It punts on the defining question of our time: whether nations have a right to exist

  1. A.B. Prosper says:

    I’m a full bore nationalist. Social Nationalist (the proposition that a nation is defended by its unique culture) , Racial Nationalist (the proposition that a nation is defended by it racial makeup) and Economic Nationalist

    I’m don’t automatically oppose Nationalist Socialism (not the same thing as NDSAP but close kin) if the technological employment bottleneck requires it. Simply, if we get too many Craigslist outcomes (creates 35 jobs, destroys 35,000) without a corresponding increase in other areas and in personal incomes as percent GDP than some sort of small S socialism is inevitable anyway and its best to be prepared.

    I also don’t assume anyone is Christian. Certainly if there is partition, there will be smaller purely Christian states but practicing believing Christians are basically unknown in Western and Northern Europe and declining in all White areas, including Orthodox Eastern Europe and the maybe the US, which might be an an outlier.

    This doesn’t mean Christianity is doomed or won’t recover but it does mean we could be reaching a point in which Christianity is a thing of the 3rd world, mainly African and Mestizo with some Asians.

    I don’t want to tie the west to those cultures or to cultural assumptions White people seem to have rejected so I tend to want policies that take that into account.

    Also while you are absolutely correct about Social Democracy and its ilk eroding Christian charity and private initiatives, its often the fact the initiatives while just are inadequate, A properly apportioned social democracy isn’t perfect but it can eliminate almost all hunger , homelessness lack of basic medical care and other necessities.

    Its quite difficult to make work in the US simply for cultural and racial reasons but its not inherently flawed and I suspect as technology destroys jobs is going to get larger.

    As I always tell people, be careful automating away jobs and if you do don’t gloat otherwise you might as well go vote Socialist and get it over with because it what you’l; get anyway.

  2. Vejiortan says:

    “The existential struggle of our age is between those who would replace all nations with an undifferentiated mass of individuals, and those who would preserve one or more nations.”
    I think you’re confusing two different notions here.
    The organizational level – Nations or global Empires
    The human level – ethnically homogeneous groups or undifferentiated masses

    The american or french notion of nationalism doesn’t oppose mass heterogenization.
    Actually, many pre-modern empires preserved local majorities better than some modern nations.

    Keep in mind that once you have convinced the majority of people that every member of their nation is essentially the same, it’ll be much easier to convince them (or their descendants) that everyone on earth is the same.
    So egalitarianism is an inherent aspect of nationalism.
    We can think of modern ideologies as the bastard children of jacobinism – each of them has inherited the three traits Egalite, Fraternite and Liberte.
    Nationalism got more Fraternite, less of the other. Communism got more Egalite.
    This way, we can even differentiate between sup-types of modern ideologies: Trotzkyism was Egalite and Liberte, whereas Stalinism was Egalite and Fraternite.

  3. bicebicebice says:

    If you remove all the nations on Earth… you are still going to be left with one nation on Earth, the last one. Is the internet a country, or more sphere oriented? Muh website! xD

    Makes no sense. Of all the races, “whites” love building countries the most. While some just likes to tear them down. Itz a feature!

    “As above, so below” https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CGfVtfmW8AAuTSk.png

  4. podrag says:

    This post is nice and all but the title isn’t ‘Aeoli’s defining Magnum Opus on the Psychology and Sociological Position of those Exhibiting Unusually High Parietal and Occipital Cranial Mass’ and therefore I’m going to slate it in the press

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s