If being a nationalist means we have to accept Eastern European class theory, with all its Marxist presppositions about “workers” and “owners of capital”, etc. then I’m not a nationalist.
Also, if being a racial nationalist means we have to be socialists, where the wealth of the racial nation is truly common (common-wealth) and class divisions (if there are such things) are mitigated with everyone having roughly the same amount of wealth (excepting small fluctuations), then I’m not a racial nationalist.
While my political position has often been classed under the fascist label, that says more about the ambiguity of the term “fascism” than it does about me. (I can’t wait to read Gottfried’s book on the subject).
I’m more of a medievalist, a neo-feudalist, or a tribalist. An anti-ist-ist, who envisions a series of decentralized, confederated duchies, where people don’t define themselves in terms of a Marxist financial class, nor in terms of their political and / or religious affiliations (hence the lack of “ists”), nor by the color of their shirt collar; rather they define themselves tribally.
I’m a Terry!
…and watch out because one day, if you’re unlucky, Terrys might come shouting out of the woods to sack your house, steal your women, and sip wine from the skulls of your mechanized police force.