Amerika

For various reasons, the Caucasian race and its ethnic subgroups tend to be highly moral, altruistic, and generous people. We are also the least ethnocentric of all the races of man. Nevertheless, this comes with a high cost, which is, we often fail to recognize moral options when such options are self-serving; sometimes the moral thing to do is to help yourself and not others. Or, to put it differently, sometimes it is moral to let everyone’s own self interest dominate.

What modernity has missed is the brilliance of allowing autonomy, sovereignty, and supremacy to every people, which logically includes one’s own people. In a sense, the old saying “every man is a king in his own castle” holds weight on individual levels and on group levels; most of our modern moral problems stem from not allowing each group of people (within reason) to exert supremacy and autonomy within their own lands. One could and should argue that this kind of supremacy is a human right afforded to all groups and peoples. It is a far cry from the absolutist “supremacy” thrown at Caucasian interest groups by the mainstream culture; that kind of supremacy seeks to have global dominion, which, is a questionable goal to begin with. Thus, Caucasians should not only make the case for their own relative white supremacy within their own white lands, but should also advocate for the supremacy of all peoples within their native lands; these two goals are morally complementary, interdependent, and benefit the entire world rather than our people alone. This does not mean that we must involve ourselves like world police into every specific squabble and turf-war; it is enough to promote a general principle and to allow its specific ramifications to reasonably play out amongst others.

The notion of white supremacy has become a slur ever since the 1950s, mostly because agitators have forgotten that there is a large difference between absolute supremacy and relative supremacy. They have also forgotten that relative supremacy is a right of all people on Earth. There is really and truly more than enough land for each people to be a king in its own castle. We can and should — as far is reasonable and possible — advocate for the rights of every race in this respect. But this necessarily means that our own rights to a relative racial supremacy within Europe and the West are legitimate. We should not shy away from the term “supremacy” in any way. What makes the term morally reprehensible in the eyes of detractors is the absolutist notion of it, but it is rather easy to clarify that a relative notion of supremacy is all we are asking for, and is the minimum right of all peoples everywhere. Blacks, Asians, Hispanics, Indigenes, and Whites all deserve the right to be supreme in their own lands; this is not tongue-in-cheek. Racial supremacy is not a dirty word… it’s a human right for every race within its own relative context.

The amount of violence, war, and terror which occurs in the name of groups fighting for relative supremacy is astronomical. So much good would be accomplished if the West dropped its moral utopian fantasies of a single human race sharing resources in an absolute manner. The West can continue to morally advocate for all people (like it always has), while maintaining its own relative racial supremacy in its own lands. If each people had a supreme right to its own general territory (within reason), most of our global problems would vanish overnight. It is the modern insistence on a de-racialized globalist utopia that drives so much needless violence and disharmony amongst peoples today. Every race ought to feel it has a homeland free of interfering foreigners, special interests, and fifth columns, where it can exert its own relative supremacy. When people feel crowded up next to a sea of vying and competing interests, with no refuge or home to fall back on, they rightly feel like aliens.

When Caucasian interest groups dodge the white supremacy slur, they are losing ground on an important issue and a potential excellent clarification. White nationalism, white identity, and white advocacy is white supremacy. Anyone who acknowledges or advocates for the white race is a white supremacist. But because we have dodged the term, few know what it actually means beyond a mere slur. White supremacy of a relative kind, as in supremacy in one’s own rightful territory, is a moral right. And there is no more appropriate term to use. White nationalism looks random and excessive without the principle of supremacy to justify it. White identity looks artificial and kooky without supremacy to contextualize it. White advocacy seems overblown without a real white supremacy under attack and threat by others. So, yes, we must admit that we are white supremacists and that white supremacy is under attack. But we must also admit that every race has the same right; in other words, the supremacy of the white race is not mutually exclusive with the supremacy of other races.

When most races hear the term “white supremacy,” they recoil in fear. Why? Because for them (and for most of the modern world) white supremacy is mutually exclusive with the supremacy of other races. We are trained to think narrowly about these issues and to conceive of things in absolutist terms. We falsely rush to conclusions that the only kind of racial supremacy is a globalist, absolutist, and totalitarian domination of all races by a single supreme race. In a sense, this is morally reprehensible, if not totally useless and unnecessary. Unfortunately, Caucasian colonialism has given the world the impression, rightly or wrongly, that whites want world domination when they speak about supremacy. Moreover, white supremacy has often become a fruitless conversation about theoretical superiority of various traits and qualities, or about a biological supremacy which makes one race inherently better than another. But this is also not the kind of supremacy which truly matters. Even if one race is biologically superior than another (whatever that means and however one evaluates it), it makes no difference on the global stage; every race has a right to exist and to be a king in its own country. So, we can argue that white supremacy of the relative kind is truly what we are after as Caucasian advocates. This brings crystal clarity to our movement and diffuses tension as each side is immediately aware of the needs and desires of the other; nothing is hidden or obfuscated, and no ulterior motives exist.

White supremacy is the ‘canary in the coal mine’ for the supremacy of all other races; when white supremacy is attacked, little do other races realize that their own supremacy is under attack. The same globalizing forces which threaten the white race equally threaten the existence of other races; when the whole world has mongrelized, it will surely be brown, but not a brown anyone can call their own. No more will there be distinctions between Hispanic, Black, Indian, and Indigene – every colored race will lose its own racial identity just the same. When one man is no longer king of his own home, all men are no longer kings in theirs. Thus, the white race has a moral obligation to alert all people of these existential racial threats.

While the white race is uniquely persecuted all around the world, little do the other races realize they too are running headlong into their own eventual suicide. So then, for all races to be supreme, the white race must be supreme. We must admit we are white supremacists, and so we must also advocate for the supremacy of all races just the same.

Tags: pan-nationalism, white nationalism, white supremacy