In a recent video, Richard Spencer outlines potential outcomes of the Trump administration’s push for immigration reform. Will Trump give up and sell out white America? Will he reach some less-than-desirable compromise? That last, according to Spencer, is most likely. He notes that if the worst happens and no agreement is reached, the possibility for politically-respectable reform in America is doomed. In that case, he says, the Alt. Right will have to lead the way in figuring out some “new immigration paradigm”. He gives no hint of what that would look like. Given the Alt. Right’s eclecticism and inability to form a consensus about strategy, I’m not holding my breath for their miracle cure.
I have my own suggestion; and, before anyone stops reading, thinking I’m a self-important prig who wants to implement a maverick plan, know that what I’m about to suggest is, in my opinion, a Christian approach, based on previously conceived economic and political models. My contribution here, if I’m contributing anything at all, is in seeing how these seemingly-unrelated modes of thought, are applicable to the current “immigration” crisis. I read wide and deep and believe there are materials available not commonly understood or known about in the Alt. Right milieu. Those who know me or follow my Facebook rants wont be surprised to hear me, once again, harping on the old “counter-economics” and “grey market” approach. I’ve begun referring to a Christian amalgamation of these ideas as: “microseccesion”
The first thing to understand about a Christian approach to political theory, including economics and practical strategy, is that, as integral Christians, we’re most concerned with persons. This attitude opposes the attitude of modernists who are most concerned with abstract, impersonal, political machines and vehicles (like states). Man’s mind is *not* the measure of all things. When the modernists – even those in the Alt. Right – approach the world in that way, they run rough-shod over individual human dignity, oftentimes, using rhetoric claiming to champion that very dignity. But man is not meant to be a cog in some rationalist machine. Rather, we’re meant to exist in communion with the living God, whom we know through the human connections we have with our family, community, and race.
There’s a workable, cheap, and “do-able” way to apply this to the immigration crisis. And Spencer’s right – implementing it will require a huge paradigm shift. Namely: we must give up the modernist notion of a “state” – that is: give up the notion of an impersonal, bureaucratic, machine which ostensibly obeys its constitutional “programming” (programmed by the oh-so-wise socialists and political theoreticians). We simply do not have the logistical ability to topple the current state machine nor could we re-institute one of our own even if we had the chance. To do so would require major military action, billions of dollars, support from hundreds of thousands of dedicated people, and who knows what all else. And yet, time and again, Alt. Righters beat their fists bloody against the impenetrable wall of statism.
But imagine, for a minute, what would happen if we gave up trying to build a new nation-state machine. Imagine if we shifted from being political nationalists to being romantic nationalists. Imagine if we begin thinking of ourselves as “aliens in this world” and considered our relationship to family and extended tribe and race, as more important that military control of a geographic area. If we made this mental shift, we could, overnight, begin associating with each other in ways that are, at present, still legal, but would help build group cohesion.
See, there are two main problems with “immigration”. The first is the problem of geographical proximity. Who really wants to live near a bunch of savages who have rapine and pillage on their minds? Crime rates soar and believe me (speaking as someone who had to suffer through government education), when a man is terrified on a daily basis, he cannot achieve his full potential, be it physical, spiritual, or what have you. Being geographically close to these pillage-minded peoples, leads to a dramatic decrease in the quality of life and value of white cultural expression.
The second problem is state-ordained economic pillage. When we invest in the US dollar (that is: when the majority of our wealth is in some form of the dollar-denomination), the government takes that, whether directly through taxation, or indirectly through inflationary spending, and gives it to the immigrants (and other hostile, pillage-minded minorities). They’re weakening whites while strengthening the invaders.
Instead of trying to topple the state and re-institute our own “ethno-state” in order to combat these two problems, we ought to simply practice a series of grey-market, counter-economic, “microsecessions”. The majority of these microsecessions are, for the time-being, completely legal. While some are costly, others aren’t, but all require dedication and a willingness to live a disciplined life. For example, we need to “secede” from the banking industry by finding alternative vehicles for our wealth that cannot be easily “redistributed” to the pillagers. We could become experts in the tax laws; common loop-holes should be known and talked about in every Alt. Right forum. Further, we secede from government schooling, homeschooling our children. We secede from the degenerate culture by leaving the church and turning off the television.
If we do this while simultaneously building up our own cultural awareness, we could go a long way towards salvaging our wealth from the pillagers while re-circulating it among our own people. And it will all (or, at least, mostly all) be done legally and peacefully, without the need for billions of dollars and hundreds of thousands of lives.
The “geographic proximity” problem is a little more difficult to deal with, although, should this micro-seccession idea take hold, people will naturally begin migrating to white enclaves. Nevertheless, moving one’s entire family to a new area is difficult and time-consuming. Also, given current immigration insanity, this will only be a temporary, “rear-guard” solution.
Ok, maybe – but consider that the geographic proximity problem is *never* going to go away unless we slaughter all non-whites and have the Earth to ourselves. There will always be non-whites, lustfully eye-balling our property and our women. So really, how far away must they be in order to say we’ve “successfully fixed the geographic proximity problem”? Some Alt. Righters might answer this differently, but whatever distance is suggested will simply be arbitrary.
No, in the final analysis, the “geographic proximity” problem can only ever be solved by protective violence. And again, we can do this through decentralized microseccessions, forming our own protective class and defense structures.
Ideally, this would allow us to not only survive, but grow and perhaps even flourish, even while living among the Satanists. And the more we flourish, the more likely it will be, in the future, to find and and establish a safe-haven (or even, re-take Europe).
It all hinges on re-igniting a love for the God who created Europe to begin with and a willingness to do away with the idea that political magic machines and activist alchemy will save us.