Posted on

Identity as a Moral Imperative – The Path Forward

Identity.  Ideology.  Ethnic Nationalism.  Civic Nationalism.  Spend any amount of time on a right wing forum where free speech is allowed, and it will not be long before you’re introduced to the great debate of our time, which is how can nationalism succeed?

There are civic nationalists who believe the only constrain upon national development is the willingness to adopt and share certain ideas.  In our American context, these include life, liberty, and property, respect for our national symbols like the flag, and generally trend toward tolerance with respect for tradition.  President Trump has governed in this fashion, creating opportunity for all Americans, and such thinking ranges from the Alt-Lite to mainstream conservatism.  The right likes this formulation because it allows them to maintain what has become the default position in the West that individuals make up our society, and our future extends outward strictly from those rights:  Libertarianism with a moral flavor.

Conversely, there are ethnic nationalists who make certain observations about the present and the future in assessing nationalism.  With respect for individuals, they also look at how different groups behave to see who support these ideals of life, liberty, and property.  They look at how white people of European extraction vote 60% and upwards for Republican, a de facto endorsement.  They also look how two-thirds of Latinos and Asians, as well as nine-tenths of blacks vote Democrat.  Such stark differences belie the possibility these variations are merely accidental.  Does the left effort to build a plantation mentality and support welfarism matter?  It must.  But it is also true these people emerge from more collectivist cultures, whose very inclination is hardwired in culture and potentially genetics to support socialism?  Looking at what sorts of governments exist in their native lands, the question is worth asking?

Nationalists want to see a stable and successful America built upon core values.  Few would take dispute with the ideas of morality, responsibility, and liberty.  But identity is harder, because the question of who belongs brings up a more fundamental inquiry.  Are we blank slates like Descartes suggested, where we use reason and act as individuals?  Or do we bring our cultural baggage with us, through genetics or through environment, most likely both, and are certain people therefore just less likely to sustain the core principles of western civilization under any circumstance?  The left calls this question racist and runs away shrieking, and the civic nationalists, from fear, refuse to ask.  But the question is valid.

To understand what nationalism can be in America, we must answer the question definitively of who will support our values.  We understand individuals who share these, of all races, can and do benefit.  And yet, as a contradiction, we also understand certain groups are far more likely than others to work for values based upon hard work and opportunity rather than just group advantage and opportunism.  We also reject this idea out of hand the left presents that the values upon which America were built were designed to inherently restrict minorities:  If that was the case, why are western nations and America specifically so willing to try to share our liberty and prosperity with minorities?  Such generosity disproves the false claim that prebuilt prejudice was behind the Constitutional values.

Debates about these topics rage for pages and hours, but I suggest our current political environment actually proves a more comprehensive test to advance this inquiry.  President Trump has worked tirelessly for the civic nationalist cause, creating opportunity for minorities that passes anything ever seen historically.  Unemployment rates are at all-time lows, the economy is prospering, and barriers to entry have been removed at every interval to success.  If minorities want to choose opportunity over welfarism and individualism over collectivism, there will never be a better test than 2020.  Let’s see, if given success, if they choose to endorse such action with their votes, or if they prefer instead to give control over to others as they have tended to vote for at least a half century.

If the minority voters shift toward Republicans in sizable numbers, which we’ll define here as 5% or more, then it would seem the civic nationalists might have something of a case.  But if they do not, and instead vote just as frequently or even more strongly for Democrats, then I think nationalists have to ask this question:  Having done everything possible to present our ideas of opportunity and responsibility with real world benefits to the minorities, and seeing them reject these out of hand, is it not imperative that to protect nationalism that we understand the ideals America was built upon will only exist with a white supermajority?

Should that supposition prove true, and such evidence as exists is compelling to the case, if the right is to preserve America as it has ever been, does it not have to inherently then work to advance the interests, numbers, and influence of the white majority?  I realize such a statement is profoundly uncomfortable for people who believe in individualism, and yet, paradoxically, if it is demonstrable only one group will support individualism as a preferred course of action, do not those who support individualism have to gather in strength with those of that same group to protect liberty?

Time will soon tell if the ethnic nationalists are right, but the more important question is does the right have the courage to act clearly in asking these questions, overcoming the intimidation the left uses to control them, and developing policy and politics to preserve the nation?  The National Right is leading this effort, despite overwhelming scrutiny, because truth matters.

Our moral imperative is to protect our nation, which evolves from those core ideas of morality, liberty, responsibility, and identity.  There will always be a place for those who choose an identity concordant with what America has always been who come from wherever and are legal citizens.  Remove that false canard that is used to repress reason.  But we may discover that America needs to be white to be free.

No majority-minority state in this union votes Republican.  And you see what the Democrats offer.  You must realize by now the reason they support open borders, loose immigration, and amnesty is because of the millions of voters they gain.  They won California.  They’re working on Texas.  And soon enough, should trends hold, they will have a strangle lock to favor socialism within a generation.

Whether you are an ethnic nationalist, civic nationalist, or just an American who believes in liberty, such an outcome should scare you.  It’s why we must answer the question now about how well we can integrate minorities  into the fold of traditional American ideas.  There’s something inherently fair about trying to do things the nice, moral, and just way.  Trump is our test and our olive branch to begin reuniting the nation.  But should his efforts ultimately be rebuffed, then unless we wish to surrender all the gains we worked to ensure he achieved, we must deal with reality as it is, and admit that liberty does not exist absent white identity.

I close only by saying supporting identity then becomes a moral act.  For if you offer learning and knowledge, as well as other support to someone who comes to you, and they rebuff your generosity instead wanting to simply take what you earned, is it not moral to stand up in common cause with those who are the builders and workers and say you cannot simply take indefinitely?  You would expel such people from your home for their theft and malfeasance, and we must be no less resolute.  This issue gets confused by racial appearances, but at heart, it is really a cultural issue, which is no nation may exist where whole groups CHOOSE to take more often than they give.

In addition to those minorities who do not contribute, those who push such folly within the majority, need to be opposed, confronted, and removed from impact just as forcefully.  The alternative is the loss of this nation and we cannot abide surrender to blackmail.  Because whether white or minority, America has no need for people who don’t want to contribute, and in such resolve, we might realize the cultural nationalism needed to further this just beginning restoration.  Identity matters because ideas matter, and the ideas we fight for are the ones which inspired our Founders and our entire civilization.

Leave a Reply