To any who might be interested in reading a couple thousand words worth of losing essay please, feel free, to peruse what follows. Below is my entry in the The Occidental Quarterly On Line's essay contest on secession and racial nationalism. Although some of the essay is old hat to racial nationalists, I'd like to think that there are a few new ideas introduced as well. Methinks TOQOL didn't like it because it wasn't in a strictly academic style. I wrote it intending to inspire.

The Question of Covenant

Man is a social animal destined to join in honored covenant with others and to earn his place among them. This fact begs the central question in human affairs as the specifics of man’s political covenant must shape not only society but men themselves. And so, quite rightly, the question of how men should live has been contested both with philosophy and by combat throughout history. Even indifference will see the character of a civilization change with the passage of time and so the question of reform or of political legitimacy must reoccur. Today we find that the question of political covenant is again an urgent one.

To forge a new way we must slough-off all of the addendums and assurances that congest post-modern politics and get re-acquainted with who we are. And we are men. We are white men who will not break faith with our Fathers or forget the harrowing ages through which they came. Ours is a creed without remorse and those of our line who abandon it risk awakening in a world without sense. They risk oblivion.

To say that we are men means that we understand that our feet forever stand in different worlds. In our rational aspect we respect truth and the authority of the scientific method as applied in specific applications. Yet we also understand that consciousness exists apart from the natural order. Be it a side effect, an adaptation, or a divine gift, our consciousness is as real as our flesh and like flesh it has dependencies.

Science cannot explain consciousness nor can it give self-conscious life meaning. Yet sentience and purpose exist in all peoples as the raw life-energy that sets the human world in motion. And just at the world is varied, so too are its inhabitants necessarily diverse in order that they should fit rightly into their hard-won places on terra-firma. And for some animals, for sentient men born to die, fitting is no easy trick. For this reason men look back as well as forward, and behind them they gaze into history and then beyond history into myth which teaches them that they are myth-born, and as such charged with responsibilities and imbued with significance.

And life, in the face of death, needs significance because although vanity, fear, and appetite, may keep men alive, these things alone are degenerative, and men weaned on mean instinct alone are soon enough not men at all.

And so, firstly, race is a sustaining myth. It is man’s psychic reliance on the unbroken triumph of survival that stands between meaning and unmeaning, between sentience and void, and between moral an immoral. Know this. And know that those who recast history against any race seek to break this connection, drive the subject race mad, and destroy it.

After meaning, the second trick to fitting-out men for their niche is political covenant. Interdependent yet alone, cooperative yet selfish, these are but some of the sentient contradictions that must be governed in order that men may thrive. Governance means law, and just lawmaking requires communion among those who will be governed.

Human to human communion is imperfect and in law anything unstated is left to assumptions which, later on, can lead to strife. These truths mean that perfect law, or perfect covenant, is impossible. So the practice of covenant must begin as a practical exercise that seeks to reduce obstructions to political communion. It must begin preemptively as a process of parsing off as much discordant human material in concordant groups as is reasonably possible. Thereafter, each group must make its own way.

Covenant has this racial prerequisite because kindred peoples, having grown up together over eons, share lore and biology, and so share more assumptions about how and why, or about right and wrong. These commonalities lead to more reliable communion, which fosters trust and lets individuals see more of themselves reflected in covenant. To say it simply: Healthful racism is key to allowing men lives that are as orderly and contented as their natures permit. Healthful racism helps men move forward more often than against each other.

This is our creed. We White Nationalists hold that race is a necessary consideration in the formation of political covenant, of government, and so we are troubled, urgently troubled, by the character of post-modern political affairs which champion multiculturalism and, in so doing, must necessarily destroy cultures while wasting finite treasure and energy in civil strife.

Consider those human traits that make civil society work. There are several. Industry, sociability, and honesty are certainly a few. But oft overlooked and likely the cornerstone of a livable system is modesty, the sort of modesty that respects boundaries between people. On issues concerning another’s property, another’s feelings, or another’s opinions, decent citizens are inclined to give that “another” full authority. On the whole, better people would rather apologize and leave a situation wherein they made a misstep into another’s affairs than be socially inappropriate.

In a racially homogenous society these modest qualities are useful ones. They lead to order and establish a code of civilities. But these same sensitivities are real handicaps in a multicultural society wherein political competition for power and resources must occur between different races.

For economic reasons alone, political infighting for unearned resources is an inefficient and destructive eventuality of multiculturalism. But far worse than material waste, is the conditioning effect multiculturalism has on men themselves.

If the first lesson multiculturalism teaches is that political competition for unearned resources has an equivalent value to productive labor, then its second lesson is that political competition is an amoral pursuit, and that to move forward in that pursuit the political practitioner must be persistent, divisive, and a cultivator of public grievances. In other words, he must be as immodest as possible while encouraging immodesty in his constituency.

In all models of multicultural democracy immodesty pays, because pushy, unrepentant people, either individually or en masse, are advantaged when considerate, modest people cannot respond in kind. A perverse dynamic grows up in these democracies. Minority peoples and their champions farm history and philosophy to build arguments that attack the moral legitimacy of the predominant races. Compensation is demanded by the aggrieved and it is given in the form of treasure, preference, and the public depreciation of the predominant races and their traditions.

In the face of this assault the predominating races, the White races, are somewhat handicapped in protecting themselves. One reason for this is that non-Whites, namely Jews, own many White institutions, particularly the ones that disseminate news and critique culture. But another constraint of equal import is that same modesty that has so long characterized the common stock of White citizenry.

Modesty, of course, has its limits, and since assailing the legitimacy of a race is nothing short of violence, White people get angry at their accusers. But modest people are soon embarrassed by anger, especially when public forums, Jew owned forums, define that anger as “hate.”

The definition “hate” is disingenuous. The hate that media ascribes to indignant whites is more truly called anger. The presence of mind to cause and then condemn another’s anger, while keeping up the doubletalk that first made them mad, is demonstrative of calculated hate. Anger is an honest emotion and often clouded. Hate sets a conscience free and lets the mind work any dirty trick it can conceive.

In the multicultural paradigm the more considerate or modest a people is, the more disadvantaged they are. The same is true for individual fitness in such a society. Multicultural democracy then, is a social model that conditions for selfish, hateful, and even sociopathic people. Indeed, this theory of degenerative conditioning goes a long way toward explaining the epidemic of scandal, welfare cheats, violence, and civically amoral conduct of all kinds that has flowered in Western Societies since the ascendance of the multicultural model.

The mechanism for advancing multiculturalism is social revolution and the philosophy whose precepts arm the revolutionaries is called Cultural Marxism. The popular name for Cultural Marxism is Political Correctness.

From without and within, Cultural Marxists attack traditional institutions with Politically Correct isms like feminism, anti-racism, and egalitarianism. Remarkably, only people possessing modesty enough to respect others are made pliant or otherwise manipulated by these ideas. Hateful or sociopathic people are immune to their effects.

A purely selfish man, for example, is unconcerned for others and so cannot become distressed by the feminist accusation that he is sexist. The only alien perspectives that matter to such a man are the ones between him and appetite. Indeed, only a man who both cares about women and hopes to take on traditional masculine responsibilities can find a feminist hurtful because she attacks the work and sacrifice he would make.

Likewise, accusations of racism or race-hate won’t bother a truly hateful racist because that label is already his own. The smear “hate” only hurts someone who needs to believe, and to have others believe, that hate does not define them.

Lastly, charges of inequality and claims for compensation are blatant requests for consideration and, patently, can only mean something to the considerate. A person who doesn’t have an intuitive sense of social justice cannot be compelled by words to concede guilt and give treasure.

Again, Cultural Marxism exploits the kind of people who are most inclined to respect other people. None of the implicit complainants in the above examples, neither the feminist, the race-hustler, nor the preference seeker, needs to possess the same decent character that must preponderate among the people they accuse and successfully manipulate. So while sociopaths and other malcontents can gather within the legions attacking a society’s founding races and their institutions, those beleaguered institutions can only bend to assailing demands if they are helmed by modest, considerate people – or until the are helmed by the Marxists themselves and tradition is overthrown.

This respective imbalance of character between the forces of traditionalism and Cultural Marxism has deleterious consequences long before a civilization passes the point after which it must collapse. And one consequence is the indenture of man’s better qualities to some of his worst. It means a dysgenic imbalance between the forces that vitalize society and those that hollow it out. It means an end to the hegemony of those institutions which allowed Western Civilization to reach its height, just as it facilitates the rising babble that soon sacrifices freedom to equality.

A new age dawns, an age in which men increasingly realize the finite nature of their lonely planet. For the first time people recognize that there are limits to growth, to resources, and to horizons. Efficiency is a guideword for this age and to follow that guide we need systems that do not waste treasure and life-energy in hustles or on masses of discordant humanity who are entitled for no better reason than pity.

As in ages past the future is undecided and the bygone is history, and in time history will become myth wherein we will find the temerity to overcome, the meaning to endure, and the imperative to sacrifice. This is the story of race. It is a cycle that must not be broken because it is life. It is the unseen trick behind the ascendance of sentient consciousness.

If human life is to survive, if it is to go forward in possession of its better aspects, then we must minimize the coming calamity. We must destroy multiculturalism and return to peoples the fellowship and responsibilities of their respective identities.

We White Nationalists are ordinary men and women. We are people who recognize the moral imperative for a society that selects for and rewards those characteristics that have always been the best aspects of our people. Freedom, patriotism, civic trust, and familial responsibility are some of these characteristics. In the multicultural paradigm they mark a fool. In a kindred society, a White society, they mark a citizen.