No More Justifying Ourselves

Our right to an existence and future is not up for debate. Justifying ourselves and using the language of our enemies is a huge mistake.

This article was also republished on Arktos Journal.

One thing Whites really need to understand is that there is no reasoning with our enemies. Whether they are hostile, ungrateful immigrants occupying our lands, or anti-white Jewish elites embedded into our political and media classes doesn’t matter. Their aim is the same; our displacement as a people, and the expropriation of our lands, resources and all the fruits of our culture to outsiders.

The word ‘racist’ has been used a battering ram against native Whites within our own lands for many years. Although the word no longer holds the power it once did, untold damage has been done by Whites’ fear of being called racist - a fear our enemies have taken every opportunity to exploit in order to weaken us, attempt to morally undermine us, and ultimately take everything we have.

In Britain we’ve been subjected to decades of op-eds, articles, documentaries, parliamentary discussions and TV debates about how racist White society is and why we should do more to accommodate third world immigrants and their needs. Typically such panels comprise of hostile immigrant or immigrant-descended non-whites berating some midwit cuckconservative figure who instead of showing bold defiance, cowers on the back foot while trying to prove that Britain, and indeed they themselves are ‘not racist’.

Typically these TV debates have left-leaning hosts, and the audiences are stuffed with leftists ensuring that the ‘conservative’ panellists are in an even weaker position.

Constantly framing all discussion this way is exactly what they want. It gives the appearance of ‘airing’ the arguments of the right and defeating them in public debate, whereas it’s nothing of the sort. It’s political circus - carefully controlled propaganda designed to gaslight and defeat us.

It’s About Power, not Morality

These ‘debates’ or conflicts have absolutely nothing to do with fairness or morality. They are simply about power, and the aim is to take power away from us. That’s all there is to it. It’s an enormous mistake to let the enemy try and draw us into questions of ‘morality’ and ‘fairness’ - not because they’re in the right - they’re not. It’s because these people are our enemies, their arguments are bad faith, and our beating them in fair debate still gets us nowhere. Whites, so accustomed to our high-trust societies, need to understand that others are simply not like us, and they don’t play by or value our rules.

Our innate sense of fairness and reason is inevitably weaponized against us. This becomes evident as their justifications for imposing themselves on us change from one minute to the next as their ‘arguments’ are demolished, typically steadily evolving from a ‘this is how it benefits you’ narrative, to ‘you have a moral duty to provide a safe haven’, then to ‘your people are guilty/responsible for xyz, therefore you owe us’, and finally to a ‘revenge’ narrative. The vast majority on the dissident right are familiar with all of these arguments and increasingly - in large part thanks to the free speech enabled on X - have the opportunity to respond to them* appropriately, ideally as outlined below.

*Them = third world immigrants + their Jewish enablers:

Them: You have a shrinking workforce. Your economy needs immigrant labour
Us: Mass third world immigration is a proven net drain on Western economies
Them: You have an ageing, shrinking population. You need immigration to boost it
Us: Immigration harms our own birth rates. Also, we don’t want to be replaced with outsiders
Them: They are fleeing war and persecution
Us: Aside from the fact most are not, we have no moral duty whatever to take them in
Them: You started these wars
Us: No we did not. Jewish elites did. Mass third world immigration harms our societies. The right of our people to exist and a future for our children is not up for debate.
Them: You colonised other countries / had an empire - this is just payback for that
Us: So it’s about ‘revenge’ now, not our benefit. Thanks for clarifying. You have to go back.

Anti-whites will always find reasons Whites should allow themselves to be invaded, subverted and conquered. Reason, fairness, even logic have nothing to do with it. The colonisation / empire argument is quite easily countered by pointing out that every major civilisation in history had some sort of empire. And what of nations such as Sweden with no history of colonialism, but now with a significant non-White, non Swedish population? Again, none of this matters. Non-white immigrants and their Jewish champions don’t care about any of this, let alone what’s good for us. In the case of the latter in particular, the aim is to harm us. They hate us and they want us gone. Never forget this.

Never Apologise and Never Back Down

Imagine if you will some shrill anti-white immigrant (the types brilliantly described as ‘skintellectuals’ by

Morgoth

) berating a true unapologetic nationalist in a public space, instead of the usual weak, apologetic, nominal conservative. They use all the usual arguments - this country is racist, you are racist, you owe us for colonialism and so on. The correct response to all of this would be based on the following incontrovertible truths:

• This is our land

• We owe you nothing

• You do not belong here

• We the native people never wanted or invited you

• You simply resent Whites and want to take everything we have

• Our right to our lands and our children’s future is not up for debate

• You / your ancestors came here of your own accord. Now you sit here speaking the language of my people, using technology invented by my people, to attack and undermine us?

• You have to go back.

Departing from these key premises is always a mistake. They are truth and they underpin everything. The reason our enemies try so hard to gaslight and swerve us away from these facts is precisely because they undermine every one of their claims against us.

This would not be remotely controversial for any other race than Whites. Simply switch the races, and imagine a White European migrating to a third world country, being given a comfortable material life, a position of influence or a public platform and then using that platform, along with the very language and technology of the host nation, to attack it and its people for not giving them enough. It’s impossible to imagine, not least because that platform wouldn’t have been given in the first place.

Avoid the Language of the Enemy

Whilst the key point here is about truth and frame, it’s worth briefly touching upon language itself, because our enemies have so dominated mainstream discourse that many on the right don’t realise they’re actually using the language of the left. Take the word racist. The etymology of this word is a matter of debate, with some evidence that it was brought into wider use by Jewish Bolshevik leader Leon Trotsky (Bronstein).

How it came about doesn’t really matter; the truth is it has always been a word of the left, of hostile non-white immigrants and anti-white Jewry, deployed as a weapon against us. The word’s apparent meaning has transformed over the years*, making it very hard indeed to pin down, even when consulting various dictionaries. The original meaning which endured the longest is something like ‘intolerance or discrimination against someone based on their race’, or to use one of the numerous Merriam-Webster definitions, racial discrimination or prejudice. This is more or less the meaning of the word as most of us understood it, for most of its history, before meaning was changed and new phrases were coined.**

And right here is exactly where we need to stop and say ‘hold on. What was ever wrong with that?’ The idea of a world without discrimination or intolerance is absolute nonsense. Simply having food preferences is discrimination. Is it wrong to be intolerant of excessively loud music? Taking this further, is it unreasonable to be intolerant of non-stop violent crime including rape, robbery and murder, along with corruption, within previously high-trust societies? Is it wrong to discriminate against ungrateful, resentful, grasping outsiders trying to dispossess you within your own lands, never mind overtly violent, low-IQ savages raping, killing and robbing your women and children?

Only White people have been taught that ‘discrimination’, i.e. pattern recognition, is a grievous sin. Again, all you have to do to smash every argument of the anti-whites is reverse the roles. Does any other race feel guilt about showing ‘intolerance’ towards hostile invaders and parasites? This leads us onto the next part, a brief examination of how we found ourselves in this position.

* Some dictionaries like Merriam-Webster actually changed their definition of ‘racist’ ‘in order to reflect systemic oppression’ (by Whites).

** Note that common use of the word ‘racism’ by the anti-white mainstream was substituted over the last decade by ‘White supremacy’. This almost certainly Jewish coinage seems a direct reaction to the above - i.e. as ‘moral’ arguments against discrimination were too easily dismantled, they saw accusations of ‘supremacy’, with its associations of subjugation, as a more effective weapon against us.

Our Altruism and High Trust has been Weaponized Against Us

A friend recently sent me this detailed thesis on Europeans and the Hajnal line written a decade ago. It’s an interesting read in itself, presenting a hypothesis that individualism, small families, reduced clannishness and increased co-operation with outgroups became a selected-for trait in Western Europeans as a result of feudalism and Christianity. Whether or not the thesis is true, few would deny that Western Europeans are relatively unique in possessing these traits - traits which helped us build the most advanced civilisation ever known, but which have also worked against us.

Unlike many other peoples, Whites don’t have a tendency towards dishonesty and weaponization of victimhood. Accordingly, despite their overwhelming role in undermining our societies in nearly every way, Whites cannot simply blame the Jews for all of our problems. We have to assume personal responsibility and accept that all other tribes have taken advantage of these unique qualities of ours, and will continue to do so until we put a stop to it.

In Summary

Our altruism and empathy, having been great strengths in building our societies, in which everyone wants to live, are proving a weakness in an age of globalism, leftist hegemony and deep subversion. As a race we cannot afford to be on the back foot any longer. Not only do we need to collectivise as White Europeans; we must step over any forms of self-justification. There is no reasoning with enemies. In addition we must harden our hearts because our survival depends on it. We owe them nothing. Our arguments are irrefutable. Our right to exist, the security and prosperity of our people, and the future of our children, are not up for debate.