Against the Homo equalis and Modern Conservatism
-
Upload
fuerza-nacional-identitaria -
Category
Documents
-
view
224 -
download
0
Transcript of Against the Homo equalis and Modern Conservatism
7/27/2019 Against the Homo equalis and Modern Conservatism
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/against-the-homo-equalis-and-modern-conservatism 1/7
AGAINST THE HOMO EQUALIS ANDMODERN CONSERVATISM:
A dialogue with Alex Kurtagić
Questions: Sebastián Vera.
Considering the debate aboutimmigration not as the defeatof a certain political faction (inour case, both Left and Rightliberals), but the defeat of apolitical philosophy orworldview, do you considereasier or harder to stop the
phenomenon in countrieswhere immigration comingfrom more coloured countriesin South America, and Africa,has grown into considerablelevels just a few years ago?Egalitarians, be it modern
liberals or the Left, would like
everyone to think that the
colonisation of White
homelands by settlers of colour
is irreversible, and that this
(according them) now
permanent situation is a sign of‘progress’, resulting from the
technological overcoming of
geographical barriers, the
deprecation of ‘antiquated’
notions of identity, the
destruction of traditional
hierarchies, and the increasing
move towards a fluid world. Yet
this is vision is purely
ideological: there is nothing
intrinsically progressive in
egalitarianism or globalisation,the latter of which is an
expression of the former; they are merely the expression of an ethics that
subjectively declares equality to be an absolute moral good. And herein lies the
principal difficulty in the effort to instigate a change of government policy: in our
age, the dominant morality in our society is an egalitarian morality, and it is this,
rather than any of the contrived pseudo-economic arguments we often hear
repeated in the mainstream media and liberal and Left-leaning thinktanks, that
serves as the ultimate basis for justification — either for continuing the policy or for
7/27/2019 Against the Homo equalis and Modern Conservatism
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/against-the-homo-equalis-and-modern-conservatism 2/7
not reversing it. Most ordinary citizens in the West agree that there are too many
‘immigrants’ (settlers of colour) and would rather their governments stopped
them coming and sent most of them back. They dare not say or call for this
publicly, however, because they fear that desiring this makes them ‘bad people’
and would cause others to think them so too. This is why no amount of economic
data, crime statistics, or racial science has any effect on policy. To see it change
we will need to be able to articulate the case for change in moral terms, and Ibelieve this cannot be achieved without attacking egalitarianism in moral terms,
because it is its enshrinement of equality as a moral good that lies at the base of
the modern liberal project.
Once the moral standing of egalitarianism is destabilised, and once an ethics of
inequality (the moral goodness of difference, or the moral goodness of quality) is
successfully articulated, then it will become a lot easier to justify a change in
immigration policy throughout the West.
Of course, reversing the effects of decades of colonisation is more difficult where
it has been more intensive and where the indigenous have intermarried with the
settlers, but, from the perspective of physically relocating, those who immigrated
can just as easily emigrate: after all, did they not emigrate from their countries of
origin in the first place? It is not the migration that is difficult, even if large numbers
are involved —it’s everything else.
In your opinion, if Liberalism has been the cornerstone to both Left and Rightpolitics since eighteenth century, to which historical period of Western civilizationshould identitarian movements look for examples in order to createarcheofuturistic propositions to face this difficult period of time to Europeanculture, tradition and race? We suffer from a confusion in terminology. Our
political language derives from the French Revolution, the terms Left and Right
reflecting the seating arrangements at the National Assembly. At that time, the
Left came to mean supporters of the revolution (liberals), and the Right supporters
of the ancient regime (conservatives). However, with the Leftward drift in politics,caused by the absorption by liberalism of certain Marxian positions, over time the
above terms have come to mean different things. Nowadays the Left means
Marxism (a critique of liberalism), the centre means modern liberalism, and the
Right means classically leaning liberalism. A so-called ‘conservative’ today is a
classically leaning liberal; he is not conserving tradition, but rather he wants to
maintain the status quo, slow down a bit, or take a few step backs (which usually
means the previous election or the last time they were in power). We will,
therefore, not find any answers in modern conservatism.
Also, simply looking backwards and attempting somehow to turn back the clock
will only cause us to become irrelevant, because our world is very different today
and we need something that will provide solutions that are relevant and respond
to our present conditions.
What to do? Alexander Dugin has, I believe, made an important contribution in
this area in his book, The Fourth Political Theory. He says that there were three
ideologies in modernity: liberalism, the first and oldest; Marxism, the second,
which was a critique of liberalism; and fascism / National Socialism, the third,
which was a critique of both. Fascism / National Socialism was defeated in 1945
and Marxism was defeated in 1989. This left liberalism, which is now triumphant,
having proven the most stable. There is a distinction that Dugin does not make in
this exposition of events, however, which is that between classical liberalism and
7/27/2019 Against the Homo equalis and Modern Conservatism
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/against-the-homo-equalis-and-modern-conservatism 3/7
modern liberalism, but we need not focus on that now. Dugin does not provide a
fourth political theory; he only suggests areas of intellectual exploration where we
may find the components for such a theory, the development of which he says is
a difficult, ambitious, and heroic project that will require a collective effort.
Obviously, these areas of exploration are those outside of liberalism, comprising
all those ideas for which liberalism had no use.
I think Dugin is right. However, Dugin writes from a Russian perspective, and Russia
is, as he is the first to point out, fundamentally different from the West. For
example, he prescribes we attack the concept of the individual, on the basis that
in liberalism the individual is the measure of all things; however, individualism is a
historical trait of Northern European peoples, certainly in the Anglophone world,
so, to me, and considering that the problems we’re experiencing today are not
so much due to individualism but to egalitarianism, we need to attack
egalitarianism. Therefore, we can expect in time the emergence of different
versions of any fourth political theory. It will be up to us to develop one that
reflects our traditions and collective soul.
I realise this is probably not a very satisfactory answer. But the fact is that while
there are many recognisable features associated with anti-liberal thought, there
is an urgent need to articulate — and to do so coherently and systematically — our
worldview and aspirations at the level of theory, particularly in ethics.
7/27/2019 Against the Homo equalis and Modern Conservatism
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/against-the-homo-equalis-and-modern-conservatism 4/7
As you said in one of your articles, the majority of far Right activists have adopteda liberal methodology and a liberal conception of man and the world,consciously or unconsciously, therefore playing a game invented by the enemy.During your years and travels related to counter-politics, do you see a change inthe strategies of these groups and movements, or they still use politicised scienceas a battle banner? You have to remember that my audience is primarily the
Anglo-American world, which is notoriously averse to theory. Hence, theexcessive emphasis on practical and empirical arguments, the complete
absence of theory and radical philosophy, and my criticisms. However, I believe
there is a tendency within this movement that recognises the problem, is more
oriented towards continental European philosophy, and more open to radical
ideas. The late Jonathan Bowden was unusual precisely for this reason. This
tendency is the most dynamic and I believe we will see more of it in future.
Can it be the lack of a solid theorical background considered as one of the maincauses, or maybe the only great cause, of far Right’s incapacity to emulatesuccessful practices? Yes. Where fundamental change is desired, you have to
start out from first principles. Everything flows out from those. Consider that every
placard, every slogan, every poster, every talking point, and even the trajectory
of a Molotov cocktail, ultimately rests on a body of theory. The radical who
throws a Molotov cocktail knows exactly which window in which building it needs
to go; millions of words have been said and written before that bottle was filled
with gasoline. The radical may not understand the theoretical texts, but he
understands their import, having intuited it in the mass of words around him, as
well as in the feelings and attitudes inspired by them, and, unless he is engaged
in random violence, he will know which window to target with his Molotov
cocktail and why it must be that window in that particular building and not
another.
In your words, the pursuit of equality policies is one of the features that has madeWestern societies different from non-Western counterparts. Should this be
understood as if the application of Liberalism, or any other Europeanphilosophical principle, outside the continent or outside countries with animportant or predominant European heritage, is the cause of all actual disgracessuffered by the Western world, racially and culturally speaking? Liberalism as a
political philosophy has, like Marxism, been an imperialist philosophy. Both can be
understood as a secular form of monotheism. Monotheism is totalitarian by
nature, so it follows that both liberalism and Marxism would also have a totalising
tendency. Yet the world is more in line with the pagan outlook, which is non-
dualistic, and embraces multiplicity, uniqueness, and difference. The exporting of
liberalism to parts of the world whose indigenous civilisations or cultures would
never have theorised it in the first place has, indeed, had very negative
repercussions, both for them and for ours. Unfortunately, because the West grew
very rich under the liberal regime, and because modern media has made this
riches very visible around the world, peoples outside the West desire the same for
themselves, and readily attempt to adopt or emulate the liberal regime, which
they can only half-digest, with mixed and sometimes catastrophic results. Stability
and sustainability demands autochthonous solutions, but the liberals — who are
inveterate proselytists or evangelists — will not stand for that, because in many
cases they find them disturbing or grotesque.
7/27/2019 Against the Homo equalis and Modern Conservatism
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/against-the-homo-equalis-and-modern-conservatism 5/7
We know that the logical end product ofequality is sameness and mediocrity,therefore a denial of all the things thatmake life good and worth living. How doyou think we can make people understand
that a system of beliefs that takes the joyout of life, a system of belief that is,ultimately, anti-life, cannot be consideredmoral? It will take a sustained, collective,
long-term effort at all levels, from the
theoretical to the practical. But it begins
with a man and a pen.
Do you think it’s possible to tie the pursuit of
the end of the egalitarian system, withnotions of social justice? Yes. Absolutely.
Egalitarianism is fundamentally unfair,
because equality cannot be achieved
without being unfair to someone, without
privileging the undeserving, without
penalising the undeserving, without an
oppressive state apparatus of surveillance
and regulation, and without dehumanising
the individual.
Considering your childhood in Venezuela,do you think white minorities in SouthAmerican countries have a future as atotally different human group, or are theycondemned to mix with the brown mob? It
might be more possible for European descended people living in thesouthern countries of the continent, where they are more, but still a minority?It’s difficult to say. It may be that the whites disappear where they are fewer
and will survive in the southern cone. If we defeat egalitarianism, differences
will likely become more pronounced, and may lead to migrations and
secessions.
How has the idea of a cultural revolution been received? Are politicalmovements adopting this strategy? This is the overall tendency, yes.
The identitarian parties are still seeking to win elections, of course, which is really
the raison d’etre of the mainstream parties. In my opinion, we should not
abandon party politics, but we should remind ourselves that their aim is merely to
broaden the debate and disrupt the consensus; in other words, we should remain
active on this front, but with the understanding that, for now, this is not how we
are going to win: we will not vote ourselves out of liberalism until the intellectual
and moral bases of liberalism have been completely discredited, and it becomes
acutely embarrassing for a person admit that he once believed in equality.
Which do you think is the best way for whites to change a reality that threat theirexistence as a self-identified human group, in countries where they are a hatedminority, taking in consideration that they can’t count with the option of a massrevolution? Emigration or secession.
7/27/2019 Against the Homo equalis and Modern Conservatism
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/against-the-homo-equalis-and-modern-conservatism 6/7
Speaking in terms of what we, as European civilization (in contrast with WesternNeoliberal and Atlantist way of life), can be, ought to be, must be, what is yourproposition, in terms of how whites can take the power back in their owncountries, and of what will eventually come after that? The first thing is to
understand who we are. The second is to know what we want to become. Once
that is clear, the rest follows as described above: the formulation of a body of
theory that justifies us ontologically and teleologically, and that enables us toarticulate both, proudly, openly, and publicly, in moral terms. Then translate than
into strategies, which can be applied by organisers, and in turn by activists
(activism can take virtually any
imaginable form.) In every area of
activity or creativity, anywhere
and everywhere, subject
egalitarianism to radical criticism,
and oppose to it an ethics of
difference, that puts a premium
on quality rather than equality.
(Quality implies uniqueness as well
as superiority.) Fight egalitarianism
anywhere and everywhere, in
every possible form, on an issue-
by-issue, form-by-form basis,
always with a moral basis.
Destabilise egalitarian
assumptions and categories,
make egalitarians soul-search
and question themselves, force
concessions out of them, keep
them constantly under pressure.
I cannot stress enough the
importance of being able to dothis on a sound moral basis. Without that, it will not be possible to articulate our
position loudly and proudly, as it needs to be, and we will continue to have to
speak in code, in hushed tones, and in secret venues.
Of equal importance is also to enjoy the struggle. Anti-liberal commentators have
a propensity to speak in apocalyptic terms, and to delight in extreme expressions
of cynical pessimism. It’s all hopeless. Everything lost. We are
doomed. This creates a very negative atmosphere. It also
has no basis in reality, unless you’re planning on doing
nothing. No culture war can be sustained for long
if those involved are not enjoying themselves. It
is a heroic effort, of course, but putting the
enemy on the defensive, and finding ever new
ways to keep them under pressure and
extract concessions from them, has to be
fun.
Finally, due to a personal interest in extrememusic, what do you think it’s the importance
of artistic expressions as music in the culturalfight for Europe? Do you think Black Metal
7/27/2019 Against the Homo equalis and Modern Conservatism
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/against-the-homo-equalis-and-modern-conservatism 7/7
plays as important and/or especial role in this issue? If so, why? For me Black
Metal represented an articulation, in musical form, of elitism, non-dualism, and
intellectual paganism. Most people are not interested in political theory, but
many are interested in music. And I think Black Metal provided a cultural space
whereby individuals of a particular sensibility were able to express and realise
themselves. Individuals of this sensibility were not limited to Black Metal, of course;
those were not interested in the genre found other avenues, such as battle re-enactment. It goes without saying that Black Metal was never meant to be a
political campaigning tool, and those who have tried to use it in this manner
have caused irritation among individuals who are otherwise, by instinct or nature,
of a congenial sensibility. Yet, the power of music, and art in general, particularly
its popular forms, should not be underestimated, because it is capable of eliciting
the most violent of emotions, in a way that few other areas of human endeavour
can. And in this sense, those who share our outlook also found in Black Metal a
method of articulating their utter defiance to, and disgust at, the dominant
ideology of the wider society. I see Black Metal as a form of the 1990s (though it
existed since the 1980s) and early 2000s. Many of those who grew up or were
involved with it will continue to have a loyalty, or at least a soft spot for it, even
long after they have transcended it. At the same time, new forms will emerge,
and will continue, I hope, to plough the furrow ploughed by Black Metal in
popular culture, making further inroads into less underground circles.
Thank you very much for your time. We spectyou to continue your precious work in savingall what we consider valuable fighting for inlife. We will follow very closely your intellectualfight, the most important fight of our times.Thank you for the interview.
alexkurtagic.infoalexkurtagicofficial.blogspot.com
Cover art for Francis Parker Yockey’s Imperium,published by Wermod and Wermod PublishingGroup.
Fuerza Nacional-Identitaria. 2013www.FNI.cl