1.There’s memory in the blood.
Is it for nothing that your ancestors have fought and clawed their way through life to deposit you here?
Do you think they left you nothing more than a name?
There’s memory in the blood.
You have skills and talents you can’t explain;
Fears and anxieties that rise to inexplicable provocation;
Echoes of Vengeance unfulfilled.
The sharp flint eyes of sandstone you got from great-grandfather;
The easy airy moves like water from a wise woman lost to the mists of time.
In the marrow the double helix stores old lessons and drives.
Inclinations that seem to be from another time, another life.
Some nights you have dreams of past lives. You can’t remember or explain them but you’re not scared because it’s just a reminder you’re where you need to be.
You are here.
You are now.
You are home.
Old dreams hold the shape of water.
2. At the very heart of liberalism is the idea is that the highest good in life is to be an autonomous, self-determining individual. Therefore, whatever is predetermined in life is a hindrance, a limitation, a box, a prison that the individual has to be liberated from.
The biological facts are predetermined, therefore we have to escape from our sex, our race, our ethny. All that matters is what we choose for ourselves, or (as per Jordan Peterson) what we achieve for ourselves.
And so man doesn't get to identify positively with manhood (as this is a "box" to be escaped from); nor does he get to identify with his own larger communal/ethnic tradition. There is no coherent basis for defending this tradition, as for right-liberals there are only self-creating individuals who have escaped the older identities.
If you assume that you live in a society that only exists as a collection of self-creating individuals with no distinct ties to each other, then what is there really at the larger level to defend? A person with this mindset will think that everything is OK, as long as the economy is healthy enough for individuals to pursue careers.
This is what so-called Conservatives believe in!
3. Andrew Bolt once wrote that he believed in:
“The humanist idea that we are all individuals, free to make our own identities.”
Consider the implications of this.
It means that identity doesn't really connect us to anything much. I begin and end with myself. It's the same problem that modern liberalism always faces. If I am free to make something however I like, then that something loses most of its meaning, as it could be anything at all depending on my own subjective whims.
And that is what modernity wants me to think about my identity: that it doesn't mean very much, because it could be anything, because it has to be freely chosen in any direction according to my own subjective preferences. My heritage and bloodline – all do not and should not matter… because I did not choose them.
The ancient world had a different understanding of identity. A given identity was significant enough to orient me in my sense of self;
to connect me to transcendent sources of meaning;
to orient me, in part, to my telos (to the ends or purposes for which I was created);
to connect me in a significant way to a particular people, place, culture, history and tradition; and
to inspire a love for the good within my given identity and within my particular tradition and therefore to inspire a willingness to uphold and contribute to the particular culture, society and way of life that I belonged to.
The Traditional notion of identity engaged me in a way that the modern/liberal one does not and cannot.
And that is one reason why man, if he continues to pursue a liberal outlook, will fall alone.
4. Race is an Ethos, not just an Ethnos.
I viscerally feel myself as biologically Chinese but on one level you could say it is merely the race to which I belong. What of the race whose reality I inhabit? I speak poor Chinese. I barely relate to various aspects of Chinese culture, though lately I’m acquiring a taste for it. I don’t observe all the rituals.
Many of my expat colleagues are not ethnically English, and yet they possess that particular character of the English race. In that sense they are English and being English is their life-world / world-feeling as Oswald Spengler called it.
Human biodiversity is real, I accept that. But to believe that it is only biology that creates culture is to commit a grievous error. Geography, historical and material circumstance – the importance of these cannot be understated in the formation of a racial spirit.
To posit race as a purely biological phenomenon is to reduce man to a crude automaton. It is to bind his fate by Nature’s strings to his blood, his sinews, his genetic inheritance, all of which are predetermined and do not allow him an element of choice. But we must surely know, that man is a choosing creature.
He alone of all the animals can choose what he can be. Animals are animals by nature of them not being able to help what they are. But a man can be a beast if he so chooses (as indeed the bovine character of many people walking around will attest).
So to a certain extent the white nationalists aren’t completely wrong… blood and soil are worth fighting for. Blood, as seeing in your lineage of your race and your people as passed down the ages something worth preserving. Yours is the inheritance of 3.5 billion years of survival through wit, talent, strength, and sheer luck. Your DNA is the patrimony of a long line of ancestors that won the game1.
This is why almost all human societies, and certainly all successful civilisations, place a value on knowing who your father is. Bonobos don’t know their father. Which is why bonobo males don’t invest in offspring. Likewise, men in cultures that do not place a value on the lineage of the father do not exhibit the sort of behaviours required to make society great for their children. Why would they?
What is soil but the graves of your ancestors? Consecrated with their sweat and tears, the milk of sacrifice, it accrues over time and becomes more hallowed. More worthy of being cherished and defended. The oldest soil is dear indeed.
Knowing this, loyal sons and daughters would do everything within their power to ensure that the land of their ancestors is not easily surrendered to interlopers. Because they understand that, just as one does not invite a stranger to tread on his ancestors’ grave, one does not simply invite a world of strangers to dance on the collective ashes of his people.
I don’t think you grok how incredibly unlikely this is so let me illustrate with an analogy. The odds of you being being born are 400 trillion to one. That’s the equivalent of winning the lottery 28 million times in a row. That’s the equivalent of flipping a coin 30,000 times and it landing on its rim every single time.
Based.