A Lesson from Ivanhoe

How will we rise?  That is, if we rise.

I’ve seen the 1952 movie Ivanhoe, based on the novel of the same name.

Before I get to the lesson alluded to in the title of this post, I’ll critique the one big problem of the story – the depiction of the Jews as an unjustly persecuted people, a noble breed, more learned and sophisticated than the crude Normans and Saxons. Further, having British-American beauty Elizabeth Taylor playing a Jewess is absurd; the reality is actually this. And no, being a convert to Judaism (as Taylor stupidly was) does not count; conversion does not change your genes nor your phenotype.

That out of the way, we will now consider what I consider the real lesson of the story. The subtext of the plot is the long-simmering tension between ruling Normans and ruled Saxons in England after the Norman Conquest. The end of the movie is described by Wikipedia thus:

King Richard and his knights arrive to reclaim his throne. Prince John grudgingly kneels before his brother. Richard then calls on his kneeling people to rise, not as Normans or Saxons, but as Englishmen.

Therefore, one unified people, one nation, is forged from these previously feuding elements.  Hopefully, the analogy to the White racial situation is obvious.  

We need a leader, or set of leaders, who will call our people to rise, not as Nords or Meds or Slavs or any atomized ethnicity, but as Europeans.

We need to forge the European Nation, the Imperium of the West, out of these previously feuding elements.

That is the lesson we should learn from Ivanhoe.

Unfortunately, we are instead stuck with “leaders” who preach to us that Asians are superior to Whites in all respects.

Is it any wonder why the European race is on a collision cause with disaster and eventual extinction?

Will the lesson ever be heeded?  If not now, then when?  If not by us, then who?

The Sallis Vision

Endgame.

All men dream: but not equally. Those who dream by night in the dusty recesses of their minds wake in the day to find that it was vanity: but the dreamers of the day are dangerous men, for they may act their dreams with open eyes, to make it possible. - T. E. Lawrence

My critics may aver that I am always negative and do not do anything other than criticize the “movement.”  Long time readers of my work know that is not true.  Regardless, in this post, I will stress the positive, the constructive, and sketch an outline of what my endgame is. In other words, what is the Sallis vision?  What kind of state do I want to see come into being?  What kind of future do I envision for the White race?

A starting point would be to read this.

Let us proceed.

Pan-Europeanism, Political structure

Unlike the “movement” I support genuine pan-Europeanism, focusing on the interests of ALL peoples of European descent worldwide, not just some fraction thereof (i.e., Northwest Europeans only - typical “movement” Nordicism).  ALL means ALL, not just the “movement’s” favorite groups. There will be no intra-European castes, no “borderline” cases or grudging acceptances, no second or third (or worse) class status. There needs to be a clearly defined ingroup, and then the ingroup is the ingroup. All for one and one for all. If the fetishists cannot accept that, then we will not accept them.  On the other hand, the “movement’s” embrace of non-Whites (that they do while at the same time rejecting White ethnics) is not acceptable. Ourselves alone. Non-Whites have their own lands.

There will be an integrated Imperium structure, optimally consisting of all of Europe (including European Russia), as well as most or all (depending on what occurs) of Diaspora lands (USA, Canada, Australia, New Zealand – perhaps parts of South Africa as well).  Similar to Lowell’s Imperium vs. Dominion distinction, there will be a balance between those issues dealt with at the higher level of Imperium (high politics and grand strategy, foreign policy, military policy, large scale science and technics [including space exploration], racial policy [including immigration control as well as eugenics], pan-European cultural projects [including civilizational/High Culture issues], and whatever economic [in the broadest sense) issues arise).  On the other hand, there will be local sovereignty (Dominion) on most day-to-day issues, without the nitpicking micromanagement of the EU. National boundaries will be maintained and the demographics of nations and peoples also maintained – there will be no panmixia among the nations of Europe; local national ethnic and cultural identities will be maintained (although of course there will be some intra-European mixing in the Diaspora, as has been already occurring).

Interestingly, a Sallisian Imperium would exhibit more national sovereignty and homogeneity than the behavior of so-called ethnonationalists. My Imperium would not have non-Hungarians using Budapest as a flophouse and crash pad and would not have anti-Romanian aliens living in Romania, bedding Romanian women while attacking the Romanian people and culture. There will be none of the ethnomimperialist hypocrisy of "ethnonationalist sovereignty and homogeneity for me but not for thee." The Imperium would be a Confederation of European peoples and nations.

The underlying political structure will be of a National Socialist/fascist type, but with a sane and flexible manifestation (see below).  Aspects of “totalitarian democracy” can be useful here.

Sanity and flexibility

National Socialism and fascism are linked in the popular mind to war, concentration camps, secret police, cults of personality, etc. I propose a “sane” form of National Socialist fascism in which war is restricted to self-defense (or some other type of defense of vital interests), order is maintained as reasonably as possible, freedom is maximized to the extent possible while maintaining collective action, and the Imperium is managed by a leadership cadre rather than some personality cult "Fuhrer.”

This form of government needs to be flexible enough to conform to the particularities of specific national cultures and mores.  For example, Russian national socialism, or that of many continental European nations, could be somewhat more authoritarian that that of Anglophone countries, where the populations and political culture has always been characterized by a greater degree of personal freedom and balance of power within the government.  The former nations would also tend to be more amenable to a highly centralized national government, while the latter may be more comfortable with a degree of decentralization. In all cases, the same basic ideology and the same political foundation would apply, all ultimately overseen by the Imperium’s elite, but in the degree of local sovereignty there would be the aforementioned flexibility in precisely how the political control would manifest.

Race and eugenics

The state would be for people of European descent only; in Europe in ethnically homogeneous states, and in the Diaspora in the mixed European states that exist, but with all non-Whites removed. Eugenics would be practiced, but in a sane and responsible way, preserving national identities and genetic interests to the extent possible, and rejecting rapid “transhumanist” changes. Populations do change over time due to a variety of reasons even in the absence of mass migration (e.g., from selection and/or genetic drift) and these mechanisms are wholly compatible with genetic interests in evolved populations (indeed, such interests are tied to adaptive fitness, which at times requires some changes in genotypes/phenotypes). Thus, a prudent eugenics policy that is also broadly preservationist is reasonable. See this on Yockeyian Genetics. I agree with Strom, racial purity is something to strive for in the future, it is not something that existed in a mythical past.

Ethics and morality

We need to build The New Man:

And it is even more salient today. If there is ONE single thing I would advise White racial activists to do today, it would be to emphasize, to focus on, character and moral rebirth, to focus on The New Man.  With that, anything is possible. Without that, nothing is possible. Although ideology, science, intelligence, strategy, et al. are all crucially important, they take a back seat to character and moral integrity.  You cannot build a worldwide revolutionary movement on a foundation of quicksand; you cannot build a victorious movement on a foundation of freaks, grifters, phonies, frauds, the morally defective, perverts, liars, gaslighters, deranged fetishists, tin-foil-hat conspiracy theorists, individuals with all sorts of completely superfluous hang-ups and bizarre theories, weaklings, traitors, and all the rest. We have to remake ourselves before we try and remake the world.

The New Man will be the foundation of the moral and ethical state:

There needs to be a moral structure to the state, independent of pure adaptive utilitarianism. Now, that moral structure can (and should) be used instrumentally to favor adaptive, EGI-focused ends. But the moral structure should exist not only for the purpose of promoting a racial state and for making the pursuit of EGI, of adaptive fitness, more palatable to the population – keeping in mind that humans are apparently evolved to benefit from some sort of religious/spiritual beliefs – but has benefits in its own right. Indeed, there needs to be a balance between a "pure ethic" of unrestrained pursuit of genetic interests, and morality that constrains the unrestrained pursuit of absolute EGI, a pursuit that can lead to “maladaptive genetic atomization.”....

…What can we say about this sense of morality?

Morality can be independent of religion, although, historically, in the Western civilization (and in Late Antiquity), The Moral State was associated with Christianity. Readers of this blog know that I am hostile to Christianity. However, there are certain elements in (Europeanized) Christianity that can be of benefit to society if – and only if – these ideals are limited to one’s own people, rather than to all of humanity (in other words, particularism vs. universalism), and are tempered by adaptive interests and pragmatic prudence.

Science and Technics, Futurism, anti-Traditionalism, but with maintenance of Humanity

Readers know I strongly support science and technics, embrace Futurism, and loathe “Traditionalism.”  The Sallisian state would look to the future, not to the past, and would enthusiastically support advances in science and technics and indeed all in forms of knowledge. The stupid embrace of “Traditionalism” by the “movement,” if manifested in a state system, would result in Luddite backwardness, the destruction of the hope for a brighter tomorrow, eliminate the possibility of a higher humanity, and leave us at the mercy of enemies, like the Asians, who have no scruples in using whatever techniques to achieve power and domination. Thus, “Traditionalism” is a deadly danger.

But there is another danger – that of hyper-rationality, of becoming so obsessed with science and, especially, technics, that we lose our humanity, confusing means with ends.  And here I do not only mean "transhumanism” or “AI takes over and kills off humanity” scenarios, but also Last Man” outcomes such as in The Machine Stops, or the cost of hyper-rationality in the “tale of the machines” in Gene Wolfe’s The Book of The New Sun -see here:

To paraphrase and summarize – humanity reached the stars by giving away the wild part of themselves – essentially becoming emotionless technocrats – and then the thinking machines (AI), who hated their human creators, decided to ruin those human creators by re-introducing to humanity paradigms that would rekindle humanity’s interest in those “wild things.” Thus, humanity became distracted away from pure science and technics and the galactic empire collapsed.  The lesson here is that – besides not trusting AI – humanity should not give up its “wild” side, its human soul, for the sake of technology; instead, humans need to achieve their objectives – “reach the stars” – while remaining fundamentally human. Thus, in relation of Heidegger’s whining, we need not become entrapped into a technological spiritual mindset – pure instrumentality – in order to “be scientific.”  On the other hand, we cannot evade the price that must be paid for science and technology – while science is a tool, it is an expensive tool, and what has to invest in a degree of rationality and empiricism to achieve science and technics. One must strike a balance – the mind must be scientific while the soul remains human.  But we cannot hide in the hobbit hole, while others reach the stars. The White Man cannot give up his Faustian birthright because of fearful, backwards-looking traditionalists. 

We must remember that science and technics are tools. And, we must also remember that we cannot derived values from tools. Our values must derive from our humanity, our reality as evolved organisms, and our sense of morals and ethics.  Science and technics must be used to achieve those values, but they are not the values themselves.

High Culture

One of the major components of the confederation-wide activity is constructing new cultural artifacts, particularly those of a pan-European civilizational High Culture nature. And, consistent with my Overman High Culture essay, one key component of this is to transition through the Spenglerian cycle, from the (probably, but not definitely) exhausted Western Faustian High Culture to a new High Culture, one suitable for the tasks at hand for European Man.

The rigid, dogmatic Spenglerians will screech and cry that the birth and direction of a High Culture is a purely innate, organic process that cannot be planned and directed by human effort. That will be doomed to failure, they aver, and they would gibber about pseudomporphosis and the like, claiming that any attempt to guide the creation of a High Culture would distort its expression.  Needless to say, I disagree with that view. 

It would seem that an examination of the beginnings of the West calls the rigid Spenglerian view into question. It was not inevitable that Christianity would come into being and, once it did, that it would eventually become the faith of the Roman Empire of Late Antiquity.  If that did not occur, then the history of the West would have been radically different. Even if the Western Roman Empire still fell, which likely it would have done eventually, and even if a new “Faustian” Western High Culture came into being, that new High Culture would have been significantly different had Christianity not been an integral part of it.  Indeed, was Christianity a Magian pseudomorphosis of the Western High Culture?  In any case, the fact that the West has been Christian was not an inevitable part of its organic growth, but a characteristic contingent upon certain specific historical events – accidents of history one might say – and decisions made by specific individuals, such as Roman emperors. So, if something as fundamental to the Western High Culture as European Christianity was a result of human decision and historical events, then why can’t the direction of a future European High Culture also be similarly modulated by human decision and historical events (events themselves of course affected by human decision)?  This is particularly so given that we today are conscious of the Spenglerian paradigm, a situation that obviously did not exist in the past.

I would like to believe that the sort of state that would come into being would manifest thus:

…Our European Mission is to create the Culture-State-Nation-Imperium of the West, and thereby we shall perform such deeds, accomplish such works, and so transform our world that our distant posterity, when they behold the remains of our buildings and ramparts, will tell their grandchildren that on the soil of Europe once dwelt a tribe of gods. - Francis Parker Yockey

Factual Truth vs. Practical Truth

Live not by lies – Aleksander Solzhenitsyn.

In the last section (“ethics”) of On Genetic Interests, Salter discusses the distinction made by David Sloan Wilson (in reference to religion, but the concept is generally applicable to varied memes, paradigms, and beliefs) of factual truth vs. practical truth. Factual truth is what is in accordance (to the best of our ability to determine) with objective reality, it represents the results of empirical materialist inquiry. Practical truth is what people may believe, often regardless of facts and of objective reality, which may be adaptive to believe even if false. Thus, the relevant quotes from Wilson, in more detail than what was quoted by Salter, can be found reproduced here:

Rational thought is treated as the gold standard against which religious belief is found so wanting that it becomes well-nigh inexplicable. Evolution causes us to think about the subject in a completely different way. Adaptation becomes the gold standard against which rational thought must be measured alongside other modes of thought. In a single stroke, rational thought becomes necessary but not sufficient to explain the length and breadth of human mentality, and the so-called irrational features of religion can be studied respectfully as potential adaptations in their own right rather than as idiot relatives of rational thought…If there is a trade-off between the two forms of realism, such that our beliefs can become more adaptive only by becoming factually less true, then factual realism will be the loser every time...Factual realists detached from practical reality were not among our ancestors. It is the person who elevates factual truth above practical truth who must be accused of mental weakness from an evolutionary perspective.

At first glance, Wilson seems correct. This, of course, as stated above, doesn’t only apply to religion. Yockey’s Imperium is inspiring to many, including myself, and promotes some Whites to act in an adaptive fashion in defense of their Race-Culture, despite the reality that much of the book can be considered “”irrational” practical truth rather than empirical factual truth.  See more here.

Myths about the history of a people, nation, race, etc. may fall into this category, beliefs in the goodness and superiority of your people, even if not based on reality, may fall into this category – indeed, many memes, paradigms, and beliefs could in theory be adaptive even if false and nonsensical.

But if you look at this issue more closely, if you consider net effects, costs vs. benefits, the situation in modern society, and the pitfalls of basing adaptive fitness on irrational beliefs and falsehoods, one begins to see flaws in Wilson’s argument. The initial superficial acceptance of Wilson’s assertion falls into question once one more fully considers its implications.

Consider the following:

• Assume that the adaptive fitness of your people is dependent on practical truth X.
• Practical truth X is false; it is contrary to factual truth.
• Enemies of your people’s adaptive fitness expose this falseness to your people, destroying their faith in X.
• Therefore, with X delegitimized, adaptive fitness suffers and your people are endangered.

Nietzsche’s “God is dead” essentially dealt with the collapse of hardcore Christian religious faith in the West under the concentrating light of science and free intellectual inquiry. The resulting nihilism has in part led to a crisis of confidence in the West, depressed birthrates, and promoting surrender in the face of militant Islam. Some say we need a revival of the Christian faith to battle this, but that is like trying to put the toothpaste back into the tube.  And there are other problems with Wilson's approach, particularly with respect to religion, as the next section of my essay will illustrate.

Alternatively, an enemy of your adaptive fitness and that of your people may twist practical truth X into a meme that is now openly destructive of that adaptive fitness, a distortion of X made easier by the reality that X is false and has no objective grounding in factual truth. Another possibility is that X was originally based on something truly maladaptive, but was modified by your people to become adaptive, but now is leveraged by enemies of your people's adaptive fitness to be maladaptive once again. Think of how (Christian) religion can be used to promote mass immigration and other maladaptive choices to White populations, even if religion has been in the past adaptive at a national level, and may still influence fitness on the individual and familial levels.

Yet another scenario could be as follows. Imagine that rejection of science leads to short term enhanced fitness; a people that rejects science, and embraces the most irrational religious beliefs, reproduces better than others (there are data supporting higher fecundity for the religious and/or for those less educated and/or for those with lower IQs). Very well. That may work in the short term. But what if the population is faced with some sort of existential catastrophe that could have been prevented, or could be effectively dealt with, by science, and the rejection of science results in the population’s diminishment or possibly even their extinction? What if they are conquered and enslaved, possibly exterminated, by a competing people who accept science and are skilled at technics? 

It would seem therefore best to have practical truth that significantly overlaps with factual truth; it is best for your practical truth to have a firm grounding in objective reality, or at least to be at least minimally defensible based on some degree of concordance with facts. 

Let us again consider Imperium and other work from Yockey. Actually, much of the most “irrational” and nonsensical aspects of that work have minimal effect on the work’s main message; further, the most key aspects of the work could be viewed as defensible in light of objective reality and/or are issues that are independent of truth vs. falsehood and are a matter of choice and will. Thus, I do not believe that support for Yockey’s work necessarily invalidates the points made in this essay. The importance of factual truth remains even with Yockey's work.

Attempting to build an infrastructure of adaptive practical truth on the weak foundation of irrational, objectively untrue, and/or unproven memes leads to an instability that puts adaptive fitness in potential future peril. The danger that discovery of the falsehood of the practical truth can be used to delegitimize the adaptive fitness, the genetic (and other) interests, based on that practical truth, will always exist. That does not seem to be an evolutionarily stable situation.

But what about arguments that a reliance on practical truth has indeed evolved, proving its evolutionary stability and effectiveness? 

We no longer live in the same environment that our ancestors evolved in. Practical truth independent of factual truth becomes more and more unstable in a world full of flexible strategizers, hostile to you adaptive fitness, who have access to the Internet, with facts available instantly and instant global communication to spread those facts and to invalidate your practical truth. Even before the Internet, there were other forms of mass communication and even before that, books, schools, and intellectuals, all of which were targeting the falsehoods possibly inherent in practical truth. 

A major objective of the Sallis Groupuscule is a the formation of a Far Right with a firm basis in objective reality, embracing science and technics, compatible with intellectual inquiry, and striving to get practical truth to converge on factual truth to the extent possible.  I object to rigid dogmas of the Far Right and, in general, the equally rigid identities we have of Right vs. Left (e.g., if you are of the Right, you have to be a “Flubro” hostile to public health measures against covid-19) and of the fixed identity of the "movement" (you have to believe in HBD “race realism” or Nordicism or whatever). I want to promote flexible thinking, evaluating ideas on their own merits, while at the same time still being adaptive.

Thus, the issue of factual truth vs. practical truth is of great importance to my political work in all of these endeavors.

Ultimate Salter to Proximate Yockey

Up close and proximate, redux.

I have long been interested in melding the work of Salter on ethnic genetic interests – genetic interests being ultimate interests – with the ideas of Yockey, which, with its focus on High Culture, can be viewed as more proximate (issues other than [purely] genetic interests).  For example, see this.

The relationship between ultimate and proximate interests can therefore inform approaches concerning the merger of the Salterian and Yockeyian paradigms. In my analysis of Salterian ethics, I endorsed Salter's mixed adaptive utilitarianism (MAU):

Finally, while the MAU puts limits on the degree to which genetic interests can be pursued, people and ethnies must still have the freedom to advance (not merely defend) their interests within reasonable bounds…That this can be done via the MAU has been argued in Salter’s book and also in my comments above; I would promote a rather aggressive version of the MAU, but one that still incorporates limits and which respects certain proximate interests…in my case, I would value society-wide proximate interests, such as Yockey’s call to actualize a High Culture, over mere individual rights…

Note the mention of Yockeyism there. Thus, a prudent MUA, even one that is aggressive, is compatible with broad proximate interests, such as Yockey’s Imperium idea that is based on High Culture. Of course, there is a strong association between ultimate and proximate interests in this case. After all, a Yockeyian Imperium could safeguard the interests, including the ethnic genetic interests, of the constituent European ethnies constituting that Imperium. On the other hand, a focus on ultimate interests can lead to Yockey’s (proximate) Imperium, with the explanation for that stated above. In the last analysis, the reason that the various European ethnies belong to the same High Culture is their membership in the same continental race, hence the fact that those ethnies have related racial ancestries (genetic kinship leading to overlapping ultimate interests). It is therefore difficult to untangle ultimate from proximate interests in this case.  And that entanglement is important for what follows in my analysis.

The last parts of the last section of Salter’s book, the section on ethics, are crucially important in this regard. Salter considers whether it is ethical for the pursuit of ultimate interests to frustrate the proximate interests of others. In those cases where the distinction between ultimate and proximate interests is very clear cut, Salter concludes that it is ethical to prioritize the ultimate over the proximate, it is appropriate to frustrate some proximate interests in favor of ultimate interests, although he also stresses that genetic competition, and the freedom to conduct that competition, should be allowed.

However, as Salter notes, it is often difficult to clearly distinguish what are ultimate interests from proximate interests, and this is particularly true in those cases where the pursuit of ultimate interests is conducted through the pursuit of proximate interests - i.e., proximate interests advance ultimate interests.  Indeed, this is more often the case than not. Thinking about approaches to enhance ultimate interests, we can consider that those approaches typically involve promoting proximate concerns about things such as wealth, status, various other resources, etc. Thus, given all of these considerations, Salter concludes that in such cases, it may be fair to prioritize proximate interests over ultimate interests (after all, again, the line between the two is often blurry). Salter states that this would conflate with a support for individual rights. Now, I wouldn’t go as far as Salter here, but would modify the statement to conclude:

In those cases where proximate interests can be reasonably seen as supporting ultimate interests, it can be appropriate and ethical to privilege those proximate interests over a set of lesser, non-existential ultimate interests.

Putting it another way, proximate interests that support and advance higher-level ultimate interests should be prioritized over lower-level ultimate interests that may conflict with those proximate interests.

This applies to the Salter-Yockey axis thus:

• The Yockeyian High Culture Imperium is a proximate interest that may (from the ethnonationalist perspective) conflict with claims of ultimate interests from “petty nationalist” ethnonationalists who insist on maintaining exclusive smaller state entities of more concentrated genetic interests.
• However, proximate Yockeyian interests are not clearly distinguished from ultimate interests, since the pursuit of Yockeyian ideals can advance a broader, higher-level, set of ultimate interests – the ethnic genetic interests of Europeans as a whole.
• Pursuing European-wide genetic interests against those of competing racial-civilizational blocs also protects the genetic interests of the narrower national ethnies that constitute the broad European peoples – narrower ethnies that by themselves would be unable to effectively compete with those other racial-civilizational blocs.
• Thus, the proximate interests of Yockeyism could, and in my opinion, should be privileged over the alleged ultimate interests of petty nationalists who favor smaller and more exclusive concentrations of genetic interests, and thus it is appropriate and ethical for Yockeyian proximate interests to frustrate ethnonationalist ultimate interests.

As an addendum to that argument, I state that it is possible to pursue a Yockeyian solution without necessarily damaging the narrower interests of individual European ethnies; the Yockeyian solution does not need to entail panmixia or any other real damage to smaller concentrations of genetic interests.  Indeed, those small concentrations may end up being better preserved, in the long run, by the Yockeyian solution.  On the other hand, a relentless pursuit of petty nationalism would make the Yockeyian solution of Imperium untenable, endangering all Europeans. Thus, not only is the ethnonationalist claim to their narrow genetic interests not existential – their ultimate interests can still exist within the Yockeyian framework – but one can argue that long-term genetic continuity is best assured by being part of a larger power bloc.

Thus, it is ethical to frustrate non-existential petty nationalist ultimate interests in favor of Yockeyian proximate interests that have as their net result advancing both the broader and the narrower sets of genetic interests.

The Salter-Yockey tension of ultimate vs. proximate interests is therefore dissipated and a more coherent whole emerges.  Critics may claim that this coherence is contingent on certain caveats (such as a commitment to preserve smaller-scale ethnic particularisms), but this is the case for every biopolitical scenario, including those promoted by those same critics.

Salter follows the ultimate vs. proximate question with the issue of competing ultimate interests.  Of note is the section on how competing ultimate interests relate to kinship overlap. When the competing ethnies are closely related, then the competition should conflate to cooperation. In those cases where ethnies are closely related, with significant kinship overlap, such as members of the same continental race, then “mutually beneficial strategies” are optimal. I agree, and I suggest that the Yockeyian solution – a Western Imperium based on High Culture – is one such strategy, a strategy that I advocate.

Note that Salter’s concern with “bounded rationality” is related to this; thus, I summarized:

Salter notes that “bounded rationality” – our inability to ever know everything necessary about a problem or issue – is a good reason not to advocate for the pure ethic of unbridled pursuit of genetic interests…dividing a larger nation into smaller micro-states of more concentrated kinship may be seen as maximizing EGI, but if this division weakens the ability of the populations involved to defend their interests against aggressors (or achieve some other beneficial goal that requires a certain size threshold), then net adaptive interests would suffer. Maximizing EGI, trying to squeeze every last drop of genetic interest from a situation, may backfire. In addition, the possibility of kinship overlap between populations is another reason not to be too radical in the pursuit of EGI, particularly within continents, since some people on “their side” may be more genetically similar to you than those on “your side”…The bounded rationality problem, coupled to the possibility of kinship overlap, therefore suggests that a degree of flexibility in the pursuit of EGI is optimal, since errors in interpreting kinship and the best methods for pursuing adaptiveness may result in serious, perhaps irreversible, damage to adaptive interests…

Given kinship overlap between Europeans, the extreme ethnonationalism championed by the petty nationalists "may result in serious, perhaps irreversible, damage to adaptive interests." Of course, one can question whether these petty nationalists have any rationality at all, forget about "bounded rationality." This also relates to my distinction between a pursuit of “gross genetic interests” – attempting to maximize genetic interests without consideration of costs and benefits and what the ultimate outcomes are – and “net genetic interests” – pursuit of optimizing benefits vs. costs with respect to genetic interests so as to provide the best final outcome when all factors are properly considered.

Note that in On Genetic Interests, at different parts of the book, Salter advocates for smaller states and also for larger civilizational blocs, so advocates of each approach can find quotes supporting each of those alternatives. My analysis is of course my own; Salter himself may agree or disagree with my views on this issue, I do not know.

There are some other quotes in On Genetic Interests of relevance here. Thus:

But in the modern context individuals are defenceless unless they participate in powerful group strategies, foremost being the state.

That could be re-written (also with American spelling) as:

But in the globalist context individual ethnies are defenseless unless they participate in powerful group strategies, foremost being the Imperium.

Also, see this: 

There are profound ethical implications in making the state simultaneously the champion of a nation's interests in the international scene and a disinterested arbitrator of family interests within the nation.

Re-writing:

There are profound ethical implications in making the Imperium simultaneously the champion of a civilizational bloc's interests in the international scene and a disinterested arbitrator of national interests within the Imperium.

So, on a larger scale, what applies to an individual nation protecting genetic interests can also apply to the Imperium.  This included being an arbiter of competing national interests within the Imperium, although, remember, given kinship overlap, that internal competition should be muted, particularly compared to competition between more genetically divergent civilizational blocs. That is, again, my view; I do not speak for Salter.

In summary, I believe that the Salterian and Yockeyian perspectives are compatible, particularly when one considers the ethics of balancing ultimate and proximate interests. Hence, Imperium can support the ultimate interests of all persons of European descent worldwide.

The Apotheosis of Francis Parker Yockey

Support Imperium, not deification of the man.

Hero worship is always a problem. When that hero worship results in shallow adoration that disregards, or defies, the “hero’s” ideas and ideals, it is a serious problem. It is an even more serious problem when faux-worship is used in an instrumental fashion to promote the interests of grifters and/or to promote ideas and ideals that oppose that of the erstwhile “hero.”

An example of this is the apotheosis of Francis Parker Yockey (“The Cult of Saint Francis,” to borrow Coogan’s term) by some in the “movement,” particularly by hardcore ethnonationalists, individuals whose divisive petty nationalism is in opposition to everything that Yockey believed in and was fighting for, for the very Imperium idea that Yockey died for. When someone is deified by people who oppose what the “demigod” believed in and, in this case, died for, this is very unfortunate indeed.

Some may point the finger of accusation at the Sallis Groupuscule – they would say, "don’t you praise Yockey (and have a picture of him at EGI Notes), while disagreeing with him on certain key issues?  Isn’t that a shallow deification?"  No.  As I have written before, we need to understand what Yockey’s main thesis was, and we need to distinguish the fundamental from the peripheral aspects of his work. Applying the Pareto Principle, the rule of 80-20, we can determine that the main thesis of Yockey’s work, the 80%, was the idea of Imperium, the Unity of the West. All the rest, the other 20%, is peripheral - the bizarre and wrong-headed ideas about biological race and about science, the Spenglerian “pessimism,” the negative attitude toward Eastern Europe, etc.  See my views here.

…it is clear that pro-White activists have had a number of problems with Yockeyism. The issue of biological race is often foremost among these…Yockey lacked the training and empiricist mindset to address Nordicist theory head-on, so he side-stepped the issue by equating biological race differences to what he termed “vertical race theory” to be considered outdated and wrong, in favor of the "new idea" of  "horizontal race.”  Another point of controversy is his objectively wrong opinions and dismissive attitudes toward science; there are also his attitudes toward Eastern Europe (see below), as well as the issue of “Spenglerian pessimism.”  

The major point I make in this essay is that those issues are all peripheral in the sense that they are not the fundamental idea promoted by Yockey, not his fundamental thesis.  Some of those issues are related to his main thesis, no doubt, but they are not fundamental to it…The main thesis of course is the subject of his last chapter, and the title of that chapter and of the entire book – Imperium.

So, if we are going to avoid a superficial and/or mendacious apotheosis of Yockey, if we reject deification, we can examine his views with an eye toward both objective truth and subjective utility for Imperium, and accept and reject parts of his worldview as is relevant for those objectives.  Of course, if we identify ourselves as “Yockeyians” of a sort, it makes sense that we promote his fundamental Imperium idea, otherwise why be Yockeyians at all?  However, in the absence of the deification of Saint Francis the Demigod, we need not feel like we are committing blasphemy if we reject other areas of Yockey’s thought. 

Therefore, the accusation against the Sallis Groupuscule is not legitimate. As a supporter of Yockey’s fundamental idea of Imperium, I am a legitimate Yockeyian, but because I engage with his ideas on their own merits, and do not deify the man, I can and do disagree with some of the more peripheral aspects of his belief system. That is in fact the complete opposite of those who constantly attack the idea of pan-Europeanism and of Imperium, but who engage in a shallow deification of Yockey the man, substituting a superficial Yockeyian apotheosis for a principled support of the main Yockeyian ideal. If you proudly promote divisive petty nationalism, what purpose is there to celebrate Yockey’s birthday, or breathlessly reveal “previously undisclosed pictures” of the man, or sell his books (other than to make money, always a driving force in the “movement”)?  Imperium the idea is more important than Yockey the man.  Rejecting the former but making the latter into some sort of holy saint, some sort of tin god, does Yockey’s memory no justice. He was a man of ideas and of political action, not a fetishistic totem for those who want to use him instrumentally to promote reactionary concepts totally antithetical to his most important Idea.

Individuals who engage in a de facto deification of Yockey while simultaneously rejecting Yockey’s main idea of Imperium are not serious people and/or they are being radically mendacious. Genuine Yockeyists, pan-Europeanists who support Imperium, are not interested in an apotheosis of Francis Parker Yockey, particularly when this deification is promoted by divisive ethnonationalists, the same sort of petty nationalist Culture Retarders who Yockey despised and opposed. Support the Idea of Imperium; do not deify the man.

The apotheosis of Francis Parker Yockey is most typically the product of Type I activists who tend toward hero worship of "men on white horses" (see: Trump, Donald), but who are intellectually shallow (persona over ideas) or who are mendacious grifters who exploit Yockey’s appeal to further other agendas, even agendas that are anti-Yockeyian.

Type II activists who respect, not deify, Yockey do so because they support, and indeed admire, Yockey’s fundamental idea of Imperium.

Apotheosis is not the proper outcome for a martyred political soldier; instead, admirers should carry on that martyr’s work.

More Yockeyian Prescience

From Imperium.

This dividing of the Western Civilization between the two extra-European forces occurred as an instance of the Law of Political Plenum. European States were individually unable to wage war after 1945 because of the enormous requirements in industrial establishment and man-power. These existed only in Russia and America. Europe collectively thus became a political vacuum, because of the individual political incapacity of the States of the Western Civilization.

Thus, this is akin to the political weakness of European states in a pure ethnonationalist scenario. Even nuclear powers like the UK and France lack the population base and industrial power of larger nations. And if that is the case for them, what about, say, Estonia? Does anyone actually believe that China takes seriously nations like Belgium or Portugal? The ethnonationalists talk about “alliances” - an alliance is defined by mutual assistance against a common threat, a reciprocity of interests.  France and Latvia can make an alliance, no doubt. The purely material benefit to Latvia is obvious.  And to France?  Well, if Latvia become a vassal state, and allows its territory to become a staging area for French forces, if, politically speaking, Latvia becomes an appendage of France, then France can benefit. But then Latvia can ask: Whither sovereignty?  At least as part of some sort of racial nationalist European Union, the smaller nations together will have a say; more to the point, from the standpoint of power politics, the Union is the Union and it is not the case of “France defending Latvia” but of “the Union defending itself” – with both France and Latvia being integral components of that Union, a Union that, in its organic solidarity of its members, does not require transactional exchanges as part of so-called "national alliances."

To him who supplies protection also goes obedience. It will go either voluntarily, as the result of persuasion, or as the result of force. 

That applies to the France and Latvia example above, or any other such “alliance.” Obedience is the price of protection. Whither sovereignty? At least be an organic part of the entity providing protection, instead of being one unit subservient to another separate one.

This Yockey quote also applies to today’s America.  The state can no longer – or will no longer – provide protection to its White citizens.  Do those citizens therefore owe any obedience to that state?

Looking at the organism inwardly, the amount of protection and the amount of obedience, and the quality of these things, describes the inner strength of the unit. 

In that case, America is inwardly weak, indeed.

Where the protecting force is within a Culture and the area and populace protected also belong to the Culture, the obedience will be full, natural and voluntary, on the part of the Culture-bearing stratum at least when the issue is the existence of the Culture.

In America, the ruling elites are in part from outside the Culture of the West.

The existential nature of the Law is also shown by the fact that if a State is unable panto protect an area and population within its system, that area and population will pass into the system of another State that can protect and has the will to protect. The passing may be by revolt, it may be by war. It may be by negotiation, particularly if the protecting State allows a quasi-government to exist in the protected area, which can make a private understanding with other powers to deliver to them the population and territory.

This is the outcome.  If America is unwilling to protect White Americans, then White America needs to pass into another state system – preferably one they themselves create.

In a country where the cant of morality exercises a monopoly over political vocabulary, politicians cannot speak openly even to one another. The propaganda terror necessary to maintain such an absurd type of political terminology in contradiction to facts ends by weakening from within governments in such countries. Anyone making a purely factual remark becomes suspect, and some of the best brains have found their way thus into the concentration camps.

That is today’s America. Politicians cannot even speak honestly and openly about race, and purely factual statements result in social pricing and deplatforming – possibly eventually into actual concentration camps. Do Whites owe obedience to such a system?

Prescient Yockey

All from Imperium.

But the greatest opposition of all has not yet been named, the conflict which will take up all the others into itself. This is the battle of the Idea of the Unity of the West against the nationalism of the 19th century. Here stand opposed the ideas of Empire and petty-stateism, large-space thinking and political provincialism. Here find themselves opposed the miserable collection of yesterday-patriots and the custodians of the Future. The yesterday-nationalists are nothing but the puppets of the extra-European forces who conquer Europe by dividing it. To the enemies of Europe, there must be no rapprochement, no understanding, no union of the old units of Europe into a new unit, capable of carrying on 20th century politics.

Here, Yockey has foreseen today's ethnonationalist filth, the absolute scum ruining White racial activism.

Every political unit in history has exercised in need, and sometimes not in need, its organic power to determine the inner enemy. If it does it soon and proceeds thoroughly, the danger is past. If it procrastinates and takes half-measures, it ceases to be a political unit.

The US government under Trump has refused to act against the Far Left inner enemy, even when that enemy has been setting up separatist enclaves on American soil, openly defying American law, forcing the President to hide in a White House bunker, and assaulting a sitting US Senator. Thus, America is ceasing to be a political unit.

If it exercises this power when there is no need, it is merely persecuting its own population…

The US does nothing against criminal leftists (anarchy), while it persecutes Whites in general and law-abiding White rightists in particular (tyranny).

…and is sowing seeds of hatred that will one day bear surprising fruit. 

We’ll see about that. So far, Whitey has shown the capacity to shamelessly accept unlimited abuse and humiliation.

The organic ethic of the relation of the statesman to his political unit applies also to conduct of this type. The statesman has no organic right to dispose wantonly of the lives of the populace. To send subjects to their death in a war against a power not a real enemy, a war which thus by its very nature must be unsuccessful, or to declare a group as an innerenemy when it does not contain the real possibility of constituting itself as a true political unit, is vicious, non-political conduct in both cases. Such a man exposes himself to the organic sanction that Destiny often imposes in such cases.

That describes WWI and WWII…so what was the “organic sanction?”

This organic right to determine the inner enemy is not always exercised in the same manner. It may be open: arrest, sudden attack, shooting down at home, butchery in the streets.

Gee…that sounds like what’s been happening to Whites in 2020.

It may be concealed: drawing up of punitive laws general in their terms but applying in fact only to one group.

Precisely.  That’s the perfect description of anarcho-tyranny.  The law doesn’t apply to Coloreds, Jews, White SJW militants, etc. – it is only enforced against normal Whites, particularly right-wing Whites.

It may be purely formless, but nonetheless real: the ruler may attack verbally the individual or group in question. 

White Privilege!  White Supremacy!  And all the other blood libels against White folk.

Such a declaration may be used only to intimidate, or it may be a method of bringing about assassination. 

Indeed.

It may be economic pressure— such a tactic is naturally the favorite of Liberals. A “blacklist” or boycott may destroy the group or individual.

Yockey foresees deplatforming and “cancel culture.”

It goes without saying that the exercise of such a right has no connection whatever with any written “constitution” which purports verbally to distribute the public power in a political unit. Such a “constitution” may forbid such a declaration of inner enemy, but units with such constitutions have never hesitated in need, and have often invoked such procedure independently of need. 

The US Constitution is becoming increasing meaningless under anarcho-tyranny.

Is America a State?

Apparently not. 

Yockey from Imperium:

Every non-political human grouping of whatever kind, legal, social, religious, economic or other becomes at last political if it creates an opposition deep enough to range men against one another as enemies. The State as a political unit excludes by its nature opposition of such types as these. If however a disjunction occurs in the population of a State which is so deep and strong that it divides them into friends and enemies, it shows that the State, at least temporarily, does not exist in fact. It is no longer a political unit, since all political decisions are no longer concentrated in it. All States whatever keep a monopoly of political decision. This is another way of saying they maintain inner peace. If some group or idea becomes so strong that it can effect a friend-enemy grouping, it is a political unit; and if forces are generated which the State cannot manage peaceably, it has disappeared for the time at least. If the State has to resort to force, this in itself shows that there are two political units, in other words, two States instead of the one originally there.

It seems we have now reached the point in America where the internal friend-enemy disjunction between Right and Left is so strong that there are separate political units operating within American territory. In this sense, according to Yockey’s definition, America is degenerating to a point where it cannot be considered a State; it is not a single integrated political unit that can “maintain inner peace.” There are two possible outcomes here.  By far the most likely outcome is that the Left becomes the State in the sense of being 100% identical (instead of the 90% identity of today); thus, America is restored as a political unit, and becomes a Far Left SJW State. The far less likely scenario is that the Right musters opposition to this, so that the split becomes permanent and America can no longer recover as a State; it no longer is a political entity with a “monopoly of political decision.”  

As regards the “Old America” – and here by “Old” I merely mean the moderately anti-White globalist leftist state we had intact relatively recently – that’s already gone. The REAL Old America, the traditional America, died long ago. The point now is that its successor, the multicultural global empire State, has a foot in the grave as well.  Blue-haired SJW fatty America is the new norm.  Colored Supremacy America is the new norm.  Marxist America, Bio-Leninist America, is the new norm. Unless the Right resists - and then we will have dissolution.

This essay, and the original news story about Democrat war gaming, is further support of the idea that, from a Yockeyian perspective, America is already a failed State, as it already contains within it distinct entities with a friend-enemy distinction who are vying for power. However, the essay is shockingly (but not surprisingly, given where it was published) naïve about Trump. What makes anyone believe Trump will order war gaming or have any interest in it?  What evidence is there that Trump will actually order American troops to prosecute a civil war?  What evidence is there that Trump will make deals to “return America to pre-1965 demographics?”  If we look at the last four years, what evidence is there that Trump will do anything except hunker down in a White House bunker and tweet “LAW AND ORDER!” while bragging about Black employment rates?  Indeed, Trump may sit back silently as his DOJ prosecutes any US troops that fire upon leftist insurrectionists.

Other news:

Have you noticed that the recent talk of alien technology being publicly admitted has faded away?  Compared to BLM, who cares, right?  The talking heads always got it wrong when they speculated that proof of intelligent alien life (that we do not actually currently have of course, but let’s speculate what would happen if such proof was produced) would cause societal upheaval; if the Little Green Men landed on The White House Lawn, all hell would break loose, and things would never be the same.  No, given the state of degenerate, low-IQ, pop culture, Negro-obsessed America, no such thing will happen.  People would just shrug, and instead go back to rioting over dead Black criminals, or agonizing over “microaggressions” committed by “Karens” and “Beckys” against Negress hair. We must remember what is important.  Those Little Green Men will just be bashed over the head with bike locks, lasers shone in their eyes, and their flying saucers set on fire.  Meanwhile Trump will tweet “Law and Order” and talk about the Black employment rate.  MAGA!

It does say something about dumbed-down America that the most popular post in the history of EGI Notes is this.  Not my refutation against Lewontin, not my work on EGI, not my discussions about Yockey and Codreanu, not the critique of ancestry testing – no, not even the attacks against Der Movement - instead, a post about gay celebrity David Bromstad.

Sallis weeps.

Celto-Germanic Nordic Northern Italian Futurists.  Not quite as Nordic as this fellow, but close, real close. As opposed to this damn Negro.

But, but, but…I don’t understand.  According to the great and good Desmond Jones, Italy is 100% ethnically homogeneous, and will remain so, forever and ever, until the end of time, amen.

Hobbit hole alert!  Heidegger and his anti-Faustian, anti-Futurist philosophy has been one of the tragedies of the Right. That the rambling prose of this fraud has been elevated to near-worship levels by the Type Is is not surprising, but the rest of us simply see overly verbose (taking a chapter to state a concept that could be more concisely summarized in a single paragraph – or sentence) hot air defending a purely subjective view as man being subject to immutable forces and constraints against which struggle is pointless and counter-productive. Taken to its extreme, this will lead Whites to cower in their hobbit holes as Chinamen rocket off into space.  Disgusting.

Question – are those Fort Collins patriots going to be indicted and prosecuted by Antifa Don Trump’s DOJ?  MAGA!

Norman Lowell Interview

Legion Europa.

I am reproducing below the interview I conducted with the great Norman Lowell back in 2002, as part of the Legion Europa project.

Interview with Norman Lowell

by

LEGION EUROPA

A UNIFYING IDEA

1 How and why did you get involved in the pro-Western movement?

When in my teens, I began to realize that something was wrong with the way world politics were evolving. It was obvious to me then, that both World Wars were fratricidal and of no benefit to the West. The betrayal of the Hungarian uprising was perplexing, Then came the "wind of change" and the undignified exit by Britain from the colonies, followed by the cold war, with one blunder after another, handing out territory and raw materials to communism, from Angola to Mozambique.

In the eighties I traveled extensively in Southern Africa, witnessing the crucifixion of Rhodesia first hand. While there, I came to realize the uselessness of conservatism: "we are fighting for our blacks" and all that. I remember that a conservative organization "The Save Rhodesia Campaign" had invited Gary Allen, a "right-winger" from the USA, to give a series of lectures in SA and Rhodesia, to which I attended. I noticed he reserved his most sarcastic retorts at question time for the most honest, patriotic Afrikaans who spoke openly about the need for the continuing separation of the races. An over-bloated gourmand, one evening after a typical gastronomical orgy of his, during which he kept wiping his soiled fingers on his shirt, Gary admitted to me he was Jewish! It suddenly dawned on me what we were up against.

At that time I sought and spoke with valid persons, one of whom was SED Brown, editor of the SA Observer, an erudite man who had been in the intelligence game for years with the British Army. He opened my eyes as to this world wide malady affecting the White Man, what it was all about: that Capitalism and Communism are two sides of the same coin, flipped regularly by the same international-mnipulators. From then on, I resolved to join the fight. From a bitter young man, groping, hitting out in all directions, I started formulating a plan of action and a philosophy for combating the Decline of the West.

2 What is the political and racial situation in Malta? Why establish a Pan-Aryan movement in that country?

Genetically, the Maltese are European, of the Alpine/Dinaric type. A perfectly assimilable minority within the great Europid race. In this context it is relevant to note the findings of Dr V Wyatt, an expert on poliomyelitis, as reported in The Times of Malta of the 23 July of 1982. Dr Wyatt found that although the climate in Malta was similar to that of the Middle East, the disease affected its Maltese victims in the same way as it affected Europeans and North Americans. It was quite different from the symptoms found in Middle Eastern and African patients.

Malta, in the Mediterranean, is a tiny island, but of great Spiritual significance for the Europid. Up to forty years ago, Malta had only one black. A bread, street-hawker called Pawlu it-Tork (Paul the Turk). So ignorant were the Maltese about blacks that they termed him a Turk! He was treated with civility by all - he was more of an oddity than a threat. That was all the non-Europid population in Malta. We were a homogeneous population, a materially poor but proud nation. We were strong in moral fibre and knew where we stood.

Gradually however, over the years the Christian clergy, the do-gooders, the "Third World Groups", started a steady, brainwashing campaign for the admittance of "refugees" into this overpopulated island. This brought the gradual infiltration by Arabs and blacks, masquerading as refugees. First they came in tens, in little boats. Then they started coming in their hundreds. They found hospitality from a naive people, misled by those two pernicious enemies within. A combination of rapacious capitalists seeking cheap labour and the eternal do-gooders, providing the capitalist with what he needed. An incongruent symbiosis between Christian clergy and Catholic capitalists.

The religious collectivists, those who have lost their bearings, their original message, have now become indistinguishable from the communists. In fear of the international-mnipulators, who lash them mercilessly through the controlled world press and TV, these clergy lay the groundwork, the psychological predisposition for our naive population to accept, to aid even, these hoards of alien invaders. The pernicious political-priests then channel these intruders to the employers, those callous capitalists who exploit them to the full. These catholic-capitalists in turn, assuage their conscience by donating massive amounts of cash, in charity, to the do-gooders, amply advertised on TV!

The so-called refugees, after undercutting the job-market and appropriating our jobs, to the utter carelessness of our politicians and glee of the capitalists, are now increasingly cohabiting with our women. TV brainwashing depicts blacks and minorities as role models, or heroes or else, poor displaced persons to be pitied. Our women eventually succumb to this incessant propaganda and are breeding an ever-increasing army of half-castes. If this goes on and unless drastic measures are taken to stop the rot now, within fifty years, Malta will become the Haiti of the Mediterranean. A microcosm of what is to befall White nations, all over the world.

Our traitor politicians meanwhile, on both sides of the house, unanimously signed a "Refugee Bill" giving the option to squat and remain for years, board and lodging free, to the decision and whims of the intruders! They only have to declare themselves as refugees and they become immune. They can't be booted out till after a long, arduous and costly exercise, taking months. We in Malta have lost our sovereignty, our defence of our nation's territory. What is now likely to happen is a Maltese-flag-junk-vessel carrying thousands of aliens, gate-crashing our shores, thereby setting an unprecedented collapse of security - much like Raspail's nightmarish prediction.

Like Britain, Malta steadfastly resisted invasion during World War II. Like Britain, it is being taken over, not by cousin race, as were the Germans and the Italians, but by hoards of TB, aids-infested blacks! What a sorry destiny for two brave islands: Great Britain and George Cross Malta.

Obviously, I just couldn't witness the betrayal of my country without doing anything about it. In January 2000, coinciding with the launching of my book Credo: A book for the very few, I formed my Movement: IMPERIUM EUROPA. I started speaking out, openly and without fear. Gradually, a small group of dedicated young men came forward and joined me. I organised them, imbued them with the fervour and idealism needed for this battle of ideas.

Our aim is that Malta, this Sacred Island of Melita, this land of honey, will be the first liberated nation in the whole, White World - liberated from the enemy within and the enemy without. Malta, at the southernmost tip of Europe, could ignite a flame that would set Europe ablaze. An IDEA, like a seed could spring to life anywhere. An IDEA whose time has come, is unstoppable!

This is my dream, my goal: that this IDEA of IMPERIUM EUROPA born in Malta, would capture the imagination of all Europids and bring that unity, which is imperative for the survival of this minority of biological aristocrats.

3 In general terms, what are the sorts of things you do in Malta? Have you been successful?

The newspapers here have been closed to us. One of two, leading English dailies has a catholic priest as editor! Now, one knows that the basis for an editor are facts, whilst that of a priest is faith. How the poor fellow manages to reconcile his conscience, when confronted daily with moral, ethical, social problems, I just cannot imagine.

So, as leader of our movement, I take every opportunity to be heard on radio and TV. For a long time our message was followed on national radio in a program The Voice of Freedom. I spoke most Fridays from 11pm till 6am the following morning. We had a huge audience, inundating us with valid questions, indicating that ordinary people, from all walks of life, are thirsting for knowledge. Once made aware of certain problems and dangers, people become alarmed and want to know more.

Now, even radio has been barred us. So I have decided to include Lowell Speaks in our website, were I will give weekly broadcasts on a broad range of subjects. Rather than commenting on current affairs, my talks will be based more on principles and ideology. For only a firm, ideological underpinning can nurture future leaders.

We have appeared on numerous TV programs that broke audience records. We confronted "the best" the establishment could pit against us. Obnoxious TV hosts, columnists and journalists, aided by the usual members of the tribe, tried their best to put us in bad light. Every time their efforts boomeranged, boosting our image, prestige and increasing our membership. Some Adherents are household names and if divulged, would make many gasp in disbelief.

We are not many, but the quality of those who join us is high and the enthusiasm, heartening. Modest in numbers, our influence is by far greater and we have succeeded in shifting the ideological confrontation to the Right. Ideas that would have been taboo just five years ago are now openly discussed and debated. Most important, despite the censorship, when we speak, people listen.

4 What is the underlying philosophy behind IMPERIUM EUROPA? Behind your book Credo What is it that you wish to accomplish?

My political philosophy is expounded in my book Credo: A book for the very few which can be downloaded through secure server from our IMPERIUM EUROPA website. Basically, I had started from a firm believe in unfettered capitalism, till I realized that this would mean the disappearance of the Europid race. It is all right preaching capitalism, which inherently denies race and racial differences, to a racially conscious minority, with a burning sense of mission for world power. A group that for two thousand years has steadfastly refused to assimilate within the host nations - while at the same time influencing and distorting the host culture. This group can use capitalism, thrive through it, corner the market, primarily because they act as a cohesive, racial group, a tribe. It is this, that gives this racial-minority such awesome power, out of all proportion to their numbers, within a free-market economy.

So, I had to find a way so that the creative genius of the White Man, the innovator, the producer is never stifled - and yet this individual, though free and unshackled, still feels part of the volk. More, this preserved sense of nationhood is sublimated into a greater sense of nationalism, a supra-nationalism: that of IMPERIUM EUROPA.

The IDEA of IMPERIUM EUROPA is gaining increasing attention at the highest cultural and political levels. Geo-political think tanks are giving it increasing importance. Gradually this IDEA will permeate downwards and, in a couple of years, reach the market place in Brussels!

The Imperium will mean that Western Civilization will become organically whole: Spiritually, Racially, Culturally, Politically and lastly, Economically. The nonsensical and ultimately suicidal policy of "export or die" - where the Europid gives away his every innovation, which is then used against him - will be relegated to the dustbin of history, where it rightfully belongs.

An IMPERIUM EUROPA would mean a vast market of one billion Europids, the most intelligent humans on the planet. It would enable them to survive, surrounded by the burgeoning billions of the Third World. Europids are the only ones capable of producing a food surplus. Thus, we will only have to barter food for whatever we need from outside the Imperium.

And this, is precisely what I wish to accomplish. My vision is that of an Imperium, on a planetary basis, uniting all Europids, wherever they may be. An Imperium led by The Elite. An Elite beyond parliaments, parties, politicians, prostitutes and pernicious, political priests. A new Aristocracy of the Spirit - an Aristocracy based on meritocracy. An Elite of a quarter of a million, spread over the Imperium, High Culture Bearers: An Order of Men as were the Templars and Teutonic Knights. They would be the guardians of the Imperium. Their sole concern would be Spirituality, Race and High Politics. This Elite will forge a new Science of the Spirit.

A top priority will be an Ordensburg, a center of studies for The Elite. A vessel, adequate to sustain the Spiritual capacity, the impulse necessary for the radical reformation of present society. Sited hundreds of miles from anywhere, preferably at Omsk, at the center of the Eurasian landmass, or "World-Island", this Spiritual-intellectual university is of the utmost importance. For world history is nothing else but the struggle for power of competing Elite, with their concern with the secrets of nature, as they seek to positively impact and alter the entire culture, structure and direction of society. Always ahead, in anticipation of the next advancement necessary, in the evolution of the race the Elite, with its aura of prestige and pride infuses, implants that Spiritual impulse into the masses. These, in complete freedom of choice, may continue to live their ordinary lives, so long as the imperative of Race is safeguarded.

A continuous planting of the best seed for the future of the race, the Elite improves itself over time. As with the apex of a pyramid, just a slight turn, a shift in emphasis by the Elite as it evolves, greatly affects the whole base, the people. Principled stimuli often have far reaching results. Hence the importance for the highest standards, molding these veritable SuperMan on earth: living Zarathustras.

Life at the Elite Ordensburg will have definite organizational characteristics: a principle-centered existence that is applied to day to day affairs. An increasingly esoteric, hierarchical Elite seeking that mystical knowledge of the Race, wherever it may be found: The Egyptian Temple system, The Essenes, Cathars, The Grail quest, The Templars. A synthesis linking the White Man to his mythical, pre-Christian, unadulterated past and propelling him to his future. A galactical quest in the fulfillment of his destiny.

For our next step, our next adventure, will be the terra forming of Mars and the other planets, within the solar system. The Europid will colonize these planets for himself. Then onwards, towards the furthest reaches of the universe, till we come face to face with Godhood - and finally, fully realize ourselves!

5 Why do you think the "Right" has heretofore been kept out of power? Why the lack of success?

During the immediate post-war years the Right in general was associated with Nazism and Fascism and therefore, had a bad image. One remembers the valiant efforts of Sir Oswald Mosely to start Union Movement, in the immediate post-war years, and the virulence of the opposition he encountered. Even when it managed to win a few seats, up to very recently the Right was kept out in the cold in the democratic, musical chairs and partitioning of ministerial posts and perks. Later, with the initial victories of the Right in various European countries, it was internal division that became the primary cause of failure to capitalize on this success.

Nothing saddens me so much as the divisiveness of the Right. Our enemies, the international-manipulators, use this weapon in order to keep us divided and ineffectual. I have seen it happen many times during the past twenty years. In Britain, with the National Front and later, the BNP, throwing away their initial successes out of the window with their internal, interminable squabbles. Often, of a purely personal nature, the clash of personalities.

Even in France, with Le Pen treated as a pariah for years, the Front National could afford the luxury of a split. And the same in Italy, with the MSI and AN going their respective ways.

In the USA, with a myriad of Right wing parties and groups vying for attention. The mutual damage of a Duke and Buchanan candidacy.

Now at last, the Italian Left has finally been defeated by a Right Wing coalition including Alleanza Nazionale, a party of strong views and a fairly complete ideological underpinning. This victory was possible because, for once it was the Left that was divided and afforded the chance. Of course, if Berlusconi had to disappear from the political scene his party, a Liberal party with no political grassroots, would disintegrate, its voters flocking to AN, giving this Right-wing party an outright majority.

The same has happened in France. The Left fielded ten candidates, hacking at each other; and Le Pen emerged victorious. The lesson is clear: together we stand, divided we freeze! So really, the Right has only itself to blame, if it has been so ineffectual throughout all these years. We did it all on our own!

6 To what do you attribute the recent success of the "Right" in Europe? Will it last? More importantly, will these folks get anything done, or is this more of the game of electoral politics?

With the fall of the Berlin Wall, communism and with it Euro communism and the Left in general, became ideologically bankrupt. There is very little ideology left in the Left. I mean, ten percent of French voters cast their votes for a Trotkyite! What is left is a wishy-washy socialism that has adopted nineteenth century, Liberal economic and fiscal policies.

This political vacuum has undoubtedly been a boon to the Right. Right wing parties are gaining parliamentary seats and credible majorities all over Europe. But even at such an early stage, the signs are ominous. Poles are reclaiming land from the Ukraine. Germans want Danzig and the Czech Sudetenlands, threatening a veto against the Czech Republic's application for European membership. The Italians demand Istra. Hungarians claim land from the Romanians, while the Bulgarians want their piece from the other two. We have seen it all before!

Moreover, a more insidious political danger is that the Right in power, by itself or in coalition, runs the risk of eventually loosing its identity, its soul. This is inevitable in a prolonged democratic power-game, where compromise is the art of the game. For it is the system that is inherently faulty: Democracy, the counting of heads, like sheep and lowering of standards to the least, common denominator. It is the system that the Right has to destroy and replace, once in power, making way for a real democracy amongst peers: the Elite.

For in our future world the masses will be kept out of politics. They don't belong there. Politics will be the realm of High Culture Bearers, not millions of minions casting their useless votes every five years.

The fight is on two levels: ballot and bullet. Parliamentary pow-wow and an extra-parliamentary, revolutionary onslaught on all fronts: A total cultural war, waged by the Activist, every Free Spirit, every Thought-Action Man, on the present decrepit system. War in the arts, music, theatre, universities; war against hypocrisy and democracy, a fragile form of government founded on mediocrity, equality and fear. A total war to topple that tottering totem. And always: Memento Audere Semper.

The Revolutionary Right has to infiltrate, enfeeble, disorientate the main-stream parties. The more the confusion, the exasperation of the common people, the better! Meanwhile, Right Wing parties in parliament can promise the security the electorate clamors for. A two pronged attack on a degenerate, democratic system that has had its innings - and which are rapidly coming to an end.

7 Can we win? How?

We are winning! Despite our weaknesses and divisions, the Right is taking over the world of Ideas. We have managed to appropriate the ideological high ground. We are making good use of the Internet - certainly much more so than the Left. The Right is spreading its message effectively and eloquently, with a language that is at once sharp, but not cutting. We are becoming masters at convincing the undecided.

Our enemies sense our success and see all this. That is why they are screaming for the censorship, curbing of the web - with themselves as censors, naturally! This must never be allowed to happen.

We of the international, Radical-Racialist-Right-Revolutionary-Reactionaries: Pan Aryanists, whose common aim is the survival of Western Man, must band together. All Leaders of the various Movements, should join in an umbrella organization on the Internet, protected by an encryption system, which no government agency can break. We can then start planning, planetary power.

A hermetic Imperium within the net, enabling a dynamic, dialectical debate amongst the various factions, no matter how disparate. Let us call them Legions. The initial resolve to join must be sincere, with no personality clashes, or negative attitudes, allowed to spoil such an important undertaking. Only the Leaders, those who have proved themselves, the precursors of the Elite of the future, will be represented. This will ensure less contribution to confusion, and more conclusion.

As often happens when rivals or contestants meet and talk to each other, a mutual respect for the qualities of one another, gradually matures. This will lead to a convergence of parallel aims, thus strengthening the synthesis. A hermetic Imperium of IDEAS before the actual installation of the coming, inevitable, unstoppable: IMPERIUM EUROPA.

Legion Europa could be this vehicle for such a plan of action. Within this vehicle, this form, let the debate rage on. Within the vessel of Legion Europa all IDEAS will be discussed, analyzed till a Pan-Aryan, political philosophy, A UNIFYING IDEA is adopted - One that can assure us world victory. Our target date to be 2012: Anno Zero!

The importance of this meeting of minds of Leaders cannot be overstressed. Permit me to refer you to your question No 4 and to which, en passant I had answered: "As with the apex of a pyramid, just a slight turn, a shift in emphasis from the elite as it evolves, greatly affects the whole base, the people. Principled stimuli often have far reaching results."

8 Explain this Unifying IDEA

The beauty of the Right is that, of its very nature, it is so varied, so vibrant, vigorous. This is strong propulsion for translated action. Problem is, most of the time, all this energy is scattered, unfocussed, at times turned inwards.

Only A UNIFYING IDEA can remedy this waste. An IDEA to fill that vessel, Legion Europa, I spoke about earlier. An IDEA strong enough, a magnet so powerful as to draw together, to a convergence, all the forces of the Right. At the same time each group, sub-race, retaining its identity: ethnic and cultural.

In my view, such an IDEA can surely be an IMPERIUM EUROPA. An Imperium on a planetery basis, uniting all Europids, everywhere. An Imperium not of bankers and bureaucrats, but of High Planetary Politics and Peoples, with a central authority, embodying both the Political and the Spiritual. A center, to which all Europids will refer and relate. A hub, whereby all parts of the Empire would feel organically whole, while retaining the specific peculiarity of each region. Retaining initiative, diversity, interaction, castes, classes, character, personality, hierarchy; all converging to a superior IDEA.

An Imperium for Europids only - and none else! An Empire with ever expanding borders, within which the travesty of democracy will have no place. For an Imperium is by its very nature, expanding or dying. It is fuelled by an ambition for power, through an iron will of The Elite. A power over oneself and adversaries and adversities.

As I said earlier, our unbeatable weapon will be food. The White Man's ability to grow a food surplus. We will use food as a political weapon, in order to further our Imperial aims. We will barter food for all that we need from outside the Imperium - nothing else!

Our lingua-franca will be Latin, the language of ancient Rome and the root language of most European peoples. Any Europid within the Imperium would be able to communicate with another, in Latin, wherever they may meet.

The Imperium is male, dominant and sets itself no limits. It grasps every opportunity for expansion, penetration and domination. As a practical example, the present state of the economy of Argentina would be an ideal pretext for IMPERIUM EUROPA to extend into South America. We would take Argentina, a White country, within our fold.

An Imperium of Regions as against the artificial nation-states - uniting the four Europid cousins: the Anglo-Saxons, the Teutons, Slavs and Latins.

Two White rings will encircle the globe, North and South of the Equator. To the North, the Imperium will stretch from Ireland to Vladivostock. Across the Bering Strait it will join a Nova America, or Vinland, comprising Alaska, Canada and a re-dimensioned White USA.

In the South, the White Man will be the undisputed lord over White Africa, South of the Congo River and the Great Lakes. Through the promise of food, we will force the ungrateful Negrid northwards, leaving him to the tender mercies of the Arabs. Australia and New Zealand will become a White continent reserved solely for the Europid. A short, sharp repatriation programme would send all the Asians back to their continent. The sub-Amazonian White-cone, as well as the Panama Isthmus and its adjacent territories, will be the White Man's sole preserve.

9 What do you think of the conflict between the Pan-European/Pan-Aryan faction and the Nordicist/Nordishist faction? What is going on here?

Tragic, truly tragic. The urgent need for the White Man today, be he Swede, German, Russian, Spaniard, Greek or Italian is to band together - or else risk disappearing off the history books. We are too few, too scattered, to permit ourselves the luxury of divisiveness, ethnic exclusivity, ethnocentricity by a minority of a minority, inter-Aryan rivalry or worse; feuds and fratricides.

The four European cousins: the Anglo Saxons, Teutons, Slavs and Latins can together form the mightiest Imperium ever seen on earth, and which would ensure the survival of the Europid. Once the Imperium is in place, then we may proceed with a eugenics programme, a judicious mixture amongst the cousin Europid, sub-races. This can only fortify the Europid race as a whole.

One should remember that, just a few centuries ago, the Ottomans reached the gates of Vienna. That the Arabs overran Spain and large tracts of France and that, without the brave stand of Southern Europeans, who bore and took the brunt of the fighting, Arabs would have turbanized Father Xmas, up in Norway.

Even The Hero, in his Reichstag speech of Dec 11th, 1941 acknowledges this repeatedly:

"And when the Roman legions defended Italy in three terrible wars against the attack of Carthage from Africa, and finally battled to victory, in this case as well, Rome fought not just for herself, but also for the Greco-Roman world which then encompassed Europe.

"Whether it was the German emperors fighting back invasions from the East by the Unstrut or on the Lechfeld, near Augsburg, in 955, or others pushing back Africa from Spain over a period of many years, it was always a struggle of a developing Europe against a profoundly alien outside world.

"And when Spanish heroes stood against Africa, they defended not just Spain, but all of Europe as well.

"If the Slovaks, Hungarians and Romanians had not also acted to defend this European world"

"If Italy, Spain and Croatia had not sent their divisions"..

and on and on.

Should Nordicists ever make the mistake of separating themselves from the rest of the White World, it would be only a matter of time when we would all be submerged and perish, piecemeal.

10 How would you reply to those Nordicentric activists who claim that an IMPERIUM EUROPA would result in a general panmixia of European groups and, hence, destruction of "Nordish" phenotypes? How would you reply to those who say that this would be a "Fabian conquest" (their words) of Nordish Europeans by non-"Nordish" Europeans?

I am not suggesting anything of the sort! Everyone, within IMPERIUM EUROPA would be free to choose his place of abode, his region, his job, his partner, his way of life. Capitalism within a Racial Context in an IMPERIUM EUROPA. This is the crux of it all. It would ensure the survival of all the branches of the European family. The Anglo-Saxons, the Teutons, Slavs and Latins would all remain what they are - it is their choice. Nobody is ramming anything down anyone's throat.

The formidable strength of a worldwide IMPERIUM EUROPA would guarantee the defense of the Mediterranean Northern Littorial and hence, the Nordics from the burgeoning billions of assertive Muslims. It would be a defense of Nordics and Slavs from the Mongolian billions of the Far East. Australia, with its low White population, huge expanse of empty territory and thousands of miles of undefended coastline, would surely need the protection of such a union of European peoples. Likewise, All-White-South-Africa would be shielded from the covetous eyes of India, whose objective since World War Two, has been that to replace the Negrid in Africa by its own, surplus population.

Why should Nordics be so apprehensive? Why should they be so myopic? Why should Nordics fear assimilation by Southern Europeans? Mediterraneanids and Nordics are genetically closely related. They are completely compatible genetically, as offspring from the two sub-races clearly reveal. The Race of the "Battle Axe People" have left incontrovertible proof at Val Camonica, Italy, that they were Indo Aryans, with genetic affinity to the Nordic-Atlantic, Franco Cantabrian Cro-Magnon, as well as with the Scandinavian Fossum civilisation.

And what Mediterraneanid wants to live in Norway or Sweden for that matter? It is the Skandinavids, who are moving south and living in European Mediterranean lands. Here in Malta, we have had numerous cases of young Nordics in their teens and early twenties, on holiday, barricading themselves in hotel rooms or guest-homes, refusing to go back home! We have had the police actually intervening and hauling these youngsters, boo-hooing onto their planes! Come on let us be realist!

11 What advice would you give activists throughout the White world?

We are getting stronger, bolder. Our enemies will again try to divide and throw us in disarray. Now at this crucial stage, is the time for a clear vision and firm action. We all must do our bit, however small and humble it may be. Every positive action by each Activist leads us a little nearer to final victory.

The Internet could bring undreamed of options for the Activist in the way of learning, diffusion of ideas, participating, communicating with those still unaware of the life or death struggle, going on between us and our mortal enemies. The outcome of this struggle is our survival as sub-species till the end of the 21st century. All this now depends, not on others but on ourselves: each and every one of us. The future we dream of, wish to create, is in our hands - our own individual responsibility. Only our actions will ultimately decide the issue - and be our legacy to future generations.

12 Any parting comments?

Yes: - Magna Europa est Patria Nostra!

Norman Lowell

IMPERIUM EUROPA

2002