Notes from the East

Eastern Europe.

I believe I have a fairly good grasp about some of the fundamentals of Eastern Europe, not only from “theory” – reading, etc. - but also from practical experience. 

I have traveled in Eastern Europe several times, focused on that part of Eastern Europe that Huntington terms “The Orthodox Civilization.” It is crucial to note that this was not as a tourist in hotels, but as private guest of ordinary people, in their homes, living as they did, participating in their normal daily activities, “going native,” so to speak.  I also have known a significant number of Eastern European immigrants here in America, from both the area Huntington (but not Yockey) would consider “Western” (i.e., Catholic Eastern Europe) as well as the aforementioned "non-Western" “Orthodox" cultural area. Many of these are people who – like the people I met overseas – lived under the communist regime and can compare that to both the situation in their homelands today, as well as to Western Europe and, especially, to the USA.

Some general impressions:

Were/Are they Western?  Yes and no (and this really applies to both sides of Huntington’s Eastern European divide, albeit a bit more to the Orthodox side of course – Yockey was more right than Huntington; Catholic Eastern Europe is NOT the same as Western Europe).  

My experience is that when these people come to “the West” there isn’t much difference compared to people originating from Western Europe, so even if you do not want to include Eastern Europe as civilizationally part of the West (I’m agnostic) – although it is of course racially "Western" in the ‘White European” sense – the people are certainly assimilable to the Western High Culture. In their own nations?  Sort of a gray area. Certainly, they are NOT non-Western in the same way as non-Europeans are. But neither are they the same as Western Europeans (Western Europe both north or south – while the first split in Europe genetically is north/south, culturally it is east/west).

Again, it is sort of a gray area.  Being part of a grander Europe (today unfortunately in the EU and hopefully in the future in a pan-European “Imperium”) will cement the “Western” aspects of those nations, while at the same time preserving their uniqueness. It is a matter of emphasis – being a unique and distinct part of the broader West (or what comes after) or being something else entirely. This is something that will require more analysis and discussion in the future.

The more wide awake among them are skeptical of the changes that have taken place in their homelands, favor a sort of nationalistic socialism (many of course do not want to hear about “national socialism” but likely would identify more with “national bolshevism” or another form of patriotic and ethnocentric racialist socialist “communism”), take a fatalistic view of the low birth rates (among natives) in their homelands, etc. Some of them have opinions and politics that would make them natural adherents to the Far Right parties and organizations that exist in their nations. Unfortunately, the people I knew did not support those parties, or at least did not identify as such, even though there may have been some sympathy for those far rightist groups.  Reasons?  In many cases, the same reasons for not supporting the Far Right as in the West. They didn’t want to “waste their time” or “throw their vote away” with a minor party, instead gravitating to the more centrist mainstream parties. They were turned off by “extremism” and some of the Nutzi, Type I tendencies of the Far Right. They were influenced by “right-thinking” opinion from the West, and considered that an embrace of the Far Right would endanger their nation's prospective EU membership and make Western Europeans look down on them (see below).  Pro-Russian elements didn’t like associations of the Far Right with “Nazism” and “Fascism.”

These people, used to communist censorship, and believing the West was “free,” did not believe or were not concerned about “hate speech laws” and censorship in the West.

They really do not like Gypsies. And with good reason. I had some experience with Gypsies in their adopted Eastern European habitat (unmixed Gypsies look, and dress, just like low caste, dark skinned Indians, and behave like a mix of South Asians, Negroes, and Hasidic Jews – culture of the first, criminal behavior of the second, and ethnocentric insularity and separateness of the third), and I heard of plenty of stories from Eastern Europeans of being victimized by Gypsies. Balkanoid Eastern Europeans also hate Turks, again for good reason.

Those people (the ones overseas in their own nations) – many of them had healthy racial instincts and did not want to live among non-Whites, yet many believed the leftist propaganda that non-Whites, especially Blacks, were “oppressed” in the USA. If you tried to explain the racial facts of America to people who have never lived here, they did not believe it and thought you were nuts.  However, those who come to America quickly learn the truth. I was bemused to witness an interaction between the two types of individuals – an immigrant going home to visit and a stay-at-home native.  Stay at home native: “When are they going to give the Blacks in America their rights?”  Returning immigrant response: “The Blacks in America have more rights than the Whites do.”  The former thought the latter was nuts. One has to live in a reality to overcome propaganda about it.

I wasn’t there to do a FMA-like “bang East Europe,” but I at least observed that the (young) women there were more slim and attractive than the ghastly landwhales in “the West.” There were always unexpected surprises in this regard. You would go into some small shop, like a small ramshackle hardware store next to a local transit shop in a big city, and inside would be a very beautiful woman behind the counter. You’d go to the local food store and see young women looking and dressing like models. The people behaved civilized on public transportation – a relief to those of us who have experienced feral Coloreds on American public transport – although some of the men apparently have never heard of the concept of deodorants.

They have an inferiority complex with respect to Western Europe.  One of the times I was there was right before some of the nations formally became part of the EU; they had been more or less accepted and were just waiting for it to be finalized.  Talking to some of the more educated professionals there, I got a sense of what their pro-EU attitude was about.  I expressed my skepticism and warned them they would regret joining – not because of some asinine “ethnonationalist” opposition to a “European Union” but because the EU as currently constituted was (and still is) an anti-European monstrosity that represents the interests of everyone in Europe EXCEPT for native Europeans. I told them that they would eventually be subjected to alien immigration and that they would be made subservient to their Gypsy population, who would be privileged over them in the eyes of the leftist globalist EU elites. I warned them about the soft totalitarianism of the West. My objections were scoffed at (these were people who grew up, and lived, under communism and thought that, surely, “the West was free”) and they asserted that “being in the EU means that we are part of Europe.”

The main point for them was not economic hand-outs or the right to migrate to Western Europe (or protection from Russia or whatever). It was their need for acceptance, to be considered as equals, as Europeans, by Western Europe (in their minds, the arbiters of being European), and, somehow, by being in the EU, they would become akin to Western Europeans, and differences between West and East (that they saw as disadvantageous to themselves) would be largely effaced.  They wanted to become full-fledged and respected members of the “European community” and EU membership was the answer. And of course, they expressed this inferiority complex in other ways as well, but the EU situation was the clearest, most direct example - "being in the EU means that we are part of Europe” – they needed and wanted an indication of acceptance from the West.  They felt like their identity as Europeans required validation and legitimization from the SJW West that was already suffering bitterly from liberal globalism, multiracialism and multiculturalism, and a loss of civilizational identity.

Clarification: I am NOT saying that all Eastern Europeans had (or have) such an inferiority complex - just those ones I interacted with overseas, and some of the ones I have known, and know, in the USA.  And I certainly do NOT believe that the inferiority complex is justified (see below).  This account is descriptive only at this point, not prescriptive. Prescription follows.

Conclusion: All in all, these are good people, in many cases with a tragic history, who were misled into thinking that they needed some sort of legitimization from Western Europe, people hoodwinked into the EU disaster, people who were unsure of their civilizational place between West and East. Ultimately, they belong associated with the West. They do not need legitimization from anyone; perhaps the opposite will one day be true, Western Europe will require acceptance and legitimization from the East. In any case, long time readers of my work know that one (of several) major area of disagreement I have with Yockey is Yockey's considering of Eastern Europe as "the other," completely separate from the West (although he first mentioned that individuals from the East can be assimilated and later talked about "Western possibilities" in Russia - accepting albeit somewhat condescending).  All parts of Europe - east and west, north and south - need to be full equals in an Imperium.