The Ascetic Will and the Revolt Against Post

The Ascetic Will and the Revolt Against Post-Modernity: Ethical Nationalism in Theory and Practice

For the serious and thoroughgoing Nationalist, theory and practice are necessarily intertwined. Without a solid grounding in the theoretical, the activist is the proverbial sailor without a compass, cast adrift in a limitless ocean of ineffectiveness. He has little or no chance of achieving his goals, to the extent that he has clearly understood goals at all. For him, to act is to look through a glass darkly: a void of meandering nothingness, cut off from any semblance of a coherent framework. His destiny is oblivion, doomed by a lack of clear purpose or understanding. Conversely, those few with a clear sense of who they are, what they believe in, and where they are going, are typically caught in a tangle of abstractions bereft of any genuine attachment to the theories they posit, as they too become enmeshed in the cosmopolitan swamp: eating, drinking, and consuming the same soul-devouring products as the substandard proles they despise. Indeed, present consumerist society has become one giant 'marketplace', to borrow Nietzsche's term, a veritable deus ex machina of global entanglement, catching even those who know better in its web.

Understanding that a proper foundational theory provides the basis for needful action, it will be this work's aim to create sufficient consciousness by which the thinking man can act in unison with his theory, and thus help to starve this beastly order of multicultural deformity; this so-called state-body of zombified, atomized epsilons divorced from that sense of greatness which was so characteristic of their ancestors.

As the foregoing indicates, the plan of action we will articulate is fundamentally revolutionary, both in its aim and focus. Still, it is a revolutionary schema which seeks not to wipe the slate clean, create a 'year zero', or implement similar babble, but a credo firmly dedicated to their opposite - a Burkean appreciation for historical memory: that which understands that we are links in a chain with a responsibility to both those who came before, and even more importantly, those still to come. It is this 'revolution of the dead' that hearkens forth, offering a stern elderly rebuke to the childlike denizens of irresponsible consumer culture, so endemic in our age. Thus the modern Nationalist, like the fabled conjuror of Endor, stands at the forefront speaking for those now gone, all but forgotten by today's historical amnesiacs.

The Nationalist opposition has long been in need of an interdisciplinary conceptual framework. It is only with such an understanding that serious action can be undertaken. First and foremost it must be philosophical, especially as it relates to man's existence and his proper relation to the larger social whole of which he forms a part. It must also be socio-psychological. Only by a proper understanding of man's needs and motives can a realistic political program be molded. To think in strictly political terms, to formulate idealistic approaches independent of the underlying currents which create the conditions by which political activity can be actuated, is to build castles in the air. Politics is the art of the possible, said Aristotle, and the possible is generated by a confluence of forces beyond but intertwined with the political. The psyche, the social, the economic - all of these and more encompass a broad mosaic which must be comprehended in toto so as to create a comprehensive systemic outlook needed for sustained political effort.

Starting philosophically, man is a social animal, with a need to belong. His natural state is not that of a rootless atom born only to buy and sell. Much recent political theory, and its classical and neo-classical economic attendant, especially as propounded by what we will call the Anglo-French tradition, has taken the doctrine of economic man as the starting and end-point for all further investigation. While there is no doubt that the need for material acquisition is a major force in driving history, to think solely in these terms is a gross oversimplification of social science. Throughout recorded history men have been guided by far more than a desire for booty. They have even fought (and died) for such seemingly quaint causes (at least quaint as measured by our self-appointed elites) as village, fief, fatherland, and nation - wholly normal considerations, but considerations falling outside the typically normative 'scientific' mechanism of rationalist and determinist economic dogma. Speaking psychologically, man naturally seeks fulfillment in things greater than himself, a facet of his nature noted by J.S. Mill and others. To deprive man of an attachment to a larger whole, to reduce him to a mere consumer divorced from a fellow-feeling of group identity, is to alienate him. Indeed, that so many in present society seem overwhelmed by a sense of 'quiet desperation' can be ascribed to the post-modern consumer state's displacement of our formerly healthy sense of community. That man's sense of belonging, and further, that his sense of belonging is most naturally sustained by affiliation with those like himself, is axiomatic. Big business elites and their cronies in academe might like to wish this away with pleas for the latest techie gadget, but unfortunately for them, man's sense of well being, both moral and spiritual, cannot be satisfied merely by the newest Xbox console.

The doctrine of economic man, while not sustainable in the sense of providing for the basic needs of the social-psychical, has achieved sufficient predominance to establish its hegemony in terms strictly structural, that is to say that it drives societal change and remolds our institutions to the point where try as we might, we cannot remain unaffected. All of us are dragged along, even if kicking and screaming. Such 'progress' is the very concrete legacy of the Anglo-French tradition: Quesnay and Locke, Smith and the Physiocrats, Say, Lord Acton, even Bastiat and the less conspicuous Anglo-Dutch ethicist Bernard Mandeville. As was said in another context: "What hath God wrought?"

The solution, of course, is a renewed sense of perspective, and a proper prioritizing based on sound ethical principles. We should not seek to delegitimize the profit motive - far from it as it has contributed immensely to what we have accomplished - only reduce it to its proper sphere. Nor is this the least bit untoward, much less hostile to the essential underpinnings of the capitalist system. It has always been deemed prudent to balance the desire for profit with the needs of the community, in areas ranging from the control of dangerous drugs to the zoning of risque establishments. Our problem is not the acquisition of material gain, but its enthronement over all else. The love of money, that which the Bible says is the root of all evil, has been relieved of all the checks which formerly made it a tempered good. Having become an almost invincible instrument for destruction, it is leaving traditional communities, nations, even whole peoples leveled in its wake. This transformative process can only be reversed by a reduction in the desire for the material in the scale of values. An ethics of culture, of the folkish-national, must overcome the dominant ethos of materialism. In fact, the focusing current of our time, that which can be said to be driving all other currents, is the ethical struggle between the folkish and the economic; a duel to the death between the values of blood and tradition on one hand and the money power on the other. To borrow from Maslow, a new hierarchy of needs must be constructed with the narrow whims of a small band of multinational plutocrats pushed asunder in favor of the needs of Western culture and its people.

This of course is not to say that Nationalists are themselves uncorrupted by today's consumerocracy. As previously stated, they are not. They do however tend to have a proper enough outlook to have at least an inkling that they should know (and act) better. That stated, adherence to theory is not necessarily transmissible to practical activity. Regrettably, Nationalists invariably indulge in many of the same buying preferences as their more herdlike peers. They buy most of the same products, nearly all of which are produced by multinational (and anti-national) corporations in often hostile countries. That they, and indeed everyone, should cease doing so is self-evident. The prospect that they will do so is far more thorny, and will require a new resolve that we will now discuss.

A clear disjunction exists in this matter. It is well and good to decry the anti-majoritarian policies of a group like MALDEF and to take appropriate corrective action to counter them. But it does little to move the ball to then turn around and buy products from companies like Ford, which assist such groups financially. (Of course, Ford funding of MALDEF is just the tip of the iceberg. A cursory review of the 'charitable' giving of most major corporations reveals a windfall of cash for most any left-wing outfit one can think of.) One must practice what one preaches, both for the effective furtherance of one's cause and for the avoidance of the laughable absurdity displayed by funding the enemy, even if indirectly. (A particularly poignant example of this was seen at the site of an anti-porn rally in the 80's where the rally's coordinator was found to have purchased refreshments from McDonalds, only to be informed that McDonalds was then one of Playboy magazine's foremost advertisers!) The lesson learned: Know thine enemy, but know also who funds thine enemy.

In addressing similar criticism of her own buying practices, Jan Crouch, wife of Trinity Broadcasting Network (TBN) founder Paul Crouch, stated that it is unrealistic to expect people to apply selective buying, snidely quipping that "you have to eat." Naturally, but this is a flippant dodge, contemptible in its quaintness, as with some effort one can avoid buying from the wrong sources, and where necessary, do without. For the serious Nationalist, this is quite simply a must. To rail against illegal aliens and then buy Mexican lettuce, to decry the increasingly menacing Chinese war machine and then buy tools stamped 'Made in China', or even to criticize something like gun control or eco-extremism and then pay for the output of leftist celebrities who support such things is to give aid and comfort to the enemy and make a mockery of any claim Nationalism has to authenticity. In keeping with Gandhi, that ultimate Nationalist champion of consumer boycotts, we must be the change we wish to see.

In the third essay of his On the Genealogy of Morals Nietzsche says that asceticism is 'hostile to life', that the ascetic life constitutes a 'self-contradiction'. To avoid confusion it is useful to point out that he is assailing what we may call religious asceticism, that is the belief in the mortification of the flesh in the pursuit of some religious or perhaps more broadly, philosophical ideal. As Ayn Rand used to say, we must check our premises, and if one fails to do this, Nietzsche's highly debatable contentions make some modicum of sense. Ultimately, however, Nietzsche's argument is beyond the scope of our discussion, for what is proposed here, what we will call temporal asceticism, does not emphasize denial in pursuit of heavenly bliss, much less a 'hostility to life', but a life affirming method by which Western man can preserve himself, and through him, what we have traditionally come to see as Western culture.

Revolutionary asceticism, or the Ascetic Will, is the will to sacrifice for the sake of a higher purpose. It is consistent with the time honored mythos of Blood and Soil. It seeks not to deprive us of basic amenities, or even luxuries, but to withhold from the nation's deadly foes their sustenance. Moreover, it is healthy not to view abundance solely in terms of material acquisition, but where necessary to join Thoreau, that luminary of soil-centered rusticity, in exclaiming, "a man is rich in proportion to the number of things he can afford to leave alone."

Nietzsche's often ranting prose attacking the supposedly 'decadent' nature of ascetic ideals has little relevance to an ideal of action in this world. Given his premise that ascetic decadence lies in its focus on the other-worldly, his criticism is nugatory; in fact, Nietzscheans, especially the superficial ones, should be warned: not only is a Nietzsche-based criticism of the Ascetic Will offbase, but it isn't even germane. As in the case of a matador eluding a bull, it is sidestepped entirely.

We began our discussion by contrasting the more action-oriented Nationalist with the abstract. It is now time to resume the discussion of that dichotomy with a further delineation and perhaps, just perhaps, provide a means by which the two can be reconciled, or possibly more realistically, complimented.

Adam Smith's legacy, for all of its faults, bequeathed one principle of real clarity in making sense of practical affairs, that is the division of labor. Usually understood in strictly economic terms, it has a less narrow significance which is far less understood: it applies to organizations and movements as well. While a strenuous application of the Ascetic Will can merge component parts, i.e. combine the thinker with the doer (even if in different percentages depending on the individual subject's temperament), it is probably more practical that different tasks or strengths can be disseminated among different people. Not only is it probably unrealistic to expect everyone to be a bibliophilic man of deeds, it isn't necessary, and may not even be desirable. Those familiar with the law of comparative advantage will understand that a man, even if superior to another in a given field, is sometimes better served handing that task to his inferior, as by doing so he enables himself to pursue an endeavor where he is even more well suited, thus increasing the profit gained thereby. Just as Smith's famous pin factory vastly increased productivity in assigning tasks to those best situated to carry them out, the Nationalist movement can best see its prospects improved by similarly delegating tasks, and in doing so help alleviate much of the ignorant infighting stemming from those who would self-righteously cast aspersions on those who see little benefit in every single activist joining pyramid groups seemingly dressed for a masquerade ball or leaving endless litter on the lawns of Middle America.

Such musings of mechanics aside, let us understand this much: Through the Ascetic Will the aims of Revolutionary Nationalism can come closer to fruition; indeed, it is not too much to say that without it they have little chance at all. Just as the revolution of the mind precedes the revolution in the streets, let us recognize that the revolution of the wallet precedes the revolution in the streets!

Western man, stop feeding your enemies. Starve the beast, and watch his whole world come crashing down.

It is seldom recognized that a political entity lacking a common identity has little else but commercial incentives to turn to for social cohesiveness. A raceless chaos knows only one color - green. As the American republic experiences its continuing transmogrification into an amorphous empire, we can expect our political culture to intensify this experiment in patchwork economism. Such a makeshift system lacks sustainability. The purpose of the Nationalist opposition will be to pick up the pieces when the structure collapses. Like the Hapsburgs, America's hubristic elites are set to fall prey to their own pollyanna delusions: the self-inflicted victims of a suicidal multiculturalism. A nation, that is one deserving of the name, maintains its viability only in respecting the traditions and norms which makes a people think of itself as a distinct unit. Recent history is a chronicle of empires overextended, encompassing peoples mutually hostile, thus leading to imperial overstretch and inevitable implosion. A state system which has assumed the nature of a polyglot is not a nation, but an empire, and an empire America has become. Its destiny is to follow the well tread road of others before it; to make the same mistakes and meet the same end. Alas, having failed to learn from history, America is set to repeat it.

The age of empire is over. Its last dying gasp came with the death of an even then anachronistic imperial hodgepodge, the Soviet Union. In retrograde reversion to a political organ which matured in the late medieval period, saw its decline in the Age of Enlightenment, and its final dissolution in the violence of the Great War, the United States has resurrected a corpse. Serving the interests of a clique representing the interests of an internationalized capital, America has embarked on a desperate course, preordained to cast its fate with its imperial predecessors. Woe betide those puffed up 'intellectuals' and power brokers who think they, and they alone can resist the tide of history, for there is no turning back. As was noted almost a century ago, the graveyard of destroyed empires is littered by the bones of dead policies. The American Empire is doomed, and the Nation, waiting to be reborn, stands ready to bury it.