A frequent complaint among traditionalist White political activists is the under-representation of female involvement in pro-White campaigning. Certainly, one factor favoring male interest in this political endeavor is the fear that a world run by White radical traditionalists would deny women economic autonomy, relegating them to the traditional roles of mother and housewife. And to a large degree women can be forgiven for being nervous, because, not only is this caricature perpetuated by the establishment culture, but one sees little in the literature associated with White Nationalism that does anything other than substantiate the caricature: invectives against butch feminist excess are twinned with lamentations at the plummeting White birthrate and a longing for the pre-feminist social order. When one considers that many women today view the older order as stupefying, mummifying, and (where marriages were loveless or abusive) a serotonin suppressor, it is not surprising that they regard the White Nationalist proposition as a backward step into a dark age of subaltern womanhood.
We can legitimately argue about how liberal feminism may have contributed to lowering the social standing of stay-at-home mothers; about how the economic structure of modern society may be discouraging family creation; and about how women who would rather stay at home raising their children are perhaps being forced into the labor market, and put under overwhelming time pressure, in order to make ends meet. Yet, it seems to me that if the preservation of European culture in Europe, North America, Australia, and New Zealand is to benefit from greater female involvement, both the discourse and campaign materials aiming to further this cause would need to demonstrate exactly how the lives of White women in general would improve in a post-liberal Western world. Doing so would not only make the face of this cause more attractive, would not only make it appealing to twice as many people, but it would also deprive the enemy of talent — the talent of the highly intelligent and very capable White women who, for lack of knowing better and a viable alternative, currently choose either to join, or at least not to challenge, the enemies of European civilization.
The argument needs to be made that it is not just that we “don’t mind” if women work, but that we actually respect and admire women who — and indeed want them to — exercise and cultivate their talents, wherever these may take them. It needs to be emphasized that we do not differ from the feminists in our attitudes towards female employment: we differ from them in our attitudes towards femaleunemployment. For feminists, marriage is oppression, and stay-at-home motherhood slavery; for us the former is a partnership between two complementary parties, and the latter — if done by choice — a meritorious enterprise for which there is no equiparable substitute.
The presence of visibly powerful women is probably more consistent with traditional European societies than the caricature perpetuated by modern feminist sociopathy: particularly in North Western European societies women have enjoyed higher social status than their counterparts in Asia. Indeed, in many Asian societies, particularly those under the heel of Islam, women live in silent servitude, virtually erased by the veil, legal and economic exclusion, marital abuse, and domestic confinement. It follows, then, that highlighting female visibility and power, however ironic this might seem given the critiques of feminism emanating from the Right, needs to be a core element in any campaign for the preservation of European culture. It follows also that any such campaign needs to highlight how White/European women will be better off in a society that is distinctly European in character.
This is not incompatible with male strength and dominance, or with femininity. My experience has shown that, in fact, even the most assertive, strong-willed women admire and respect assertive, masculine men; these women seem generally contemptuous of the neurotic, effeminate, whining, unmasculine (White) losers they so often see in modern American cinema and television. Interestingly, my experience has also shown that at least some such women, who seem to cluster on the higher IQ percentiles, are naturally feminine, indeed deeply romantic, but have felt compelled to adopt traditionally male survival strategies due to the growing scarcity of worthy mates. They are products of feminism only in a negative sense, for they are indicative of the depression of male status caused by feminist excess, not of the elevation of female status that followed the industrial revolution. (Admittedly, other processes besides feminism have contributed to the displacement of masculinity among White males.)
The degree to which the Europeanness of our societies is an important and valuable asset finds its most dramatic proof in the treatment women receive in many non-European cultures. Earlier I mentioned the civic erasure of women in not a few Islamic societies; yet this seems tame in comparison to some of the forms of suppression and abuse practiced in parts of Africa and South Asia. In the former we find various forms of genital mutilation, attached to notions of pre-marital chastity. In the latter we find acid attacks — not as rare acts of psychopathy, as in the relatively recent case of former model Katie Piper — but as common results of family disputes and female rejection.
Many of those immigrating to Europe come from regions of the world where women suffer from low social status, little or no real civic recognition, and a type or a level of abuse that until recent decades was rare or unknown in our part of the world. Combined with the long-term decline in Europe’s indigenous population, the net effect is a convergence between culture and demographic composition, and between our culture and the culture in the immigrant population’s countries of origin. In the United Kingdom, we are increasingly seeing this reflected in the statute books: female genital cutting was once unheard of in this country; but by 1985, after decades of Commonwealth immigration, the practice had become common enough to warrant legislation criminalizing its practice. In a multicultural context this type of negative legislation easily goes in tandem with a positive (and sometimes conflicting) counterpart. Already we have witnessed the principal leader of the Church of England and the Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales expressing their willingness to accommodate Sharia Law as a ‘supplementary’ or ‘alternative’ jurisdiction or form of dispute resolution.
Viewed in against this backdrop, developing an acute preoccupation with preserving the Europeanness of our societies, and the doubly negative impact of its loss on women, should make perfect sense among Western women today. It does not — at least yet — because presently the pervading belief in the mainstream of culture is that Europe’s complexion will remain predominantly White, despite Third World immigration; and that Europe’s character will remain predominantly European, even if immigration results in a dramatic change in complexion. One worries that by the time events disprove this belief, the transformation will have gone past the point of no return. And it is quite possible that, by the time traditional European culture is replaced by a mish-mash of African, South Asian, and Islamic components, no one, except a vestigial White minority, will be surprised or even care about it. This is because by that point the dominant ideology will legitimize the direction of cultural change as a reflection of the attitudes, worldview, and sensibilities of the dominant non-White majority. Demography is destiny, as they say.
Should nothing be done, within the lifetime of individuals born this century White Western women could well find themselves in a situation comparable to that of their less fortunate analogues in the Third World. In other words, the trend towards ever-greater equality, now apparently unstoppable, could undergo a reversal, ironically not despite the drive towards equality, but because of it, as it is the ideology of egalitarianism that is promoting the multiculturalization of our seats of government. (We have already seen Muslims reach ministerial positions in the United Kingdom.) We can easily conceive a scenario where the ideology of egalitarianism is co-opted by ethnic minorities in their struggle for power; and where the ideology is jettisoned — if not necessarily in theory, certainly in practice — by one of these minorities as soon as it becomes the majority and gains political hegemony. Reversals of this nature begin gradually, under the surface, initially unnoticed by most because they are eclipsed by the dominant ideological trend and the general noise of everyday life; but once the conditions are in place, and the necessary critical mass has been achieved, the transition can occur rather suddenly — this pattern of reversal is evident in the history of the fall of the Roman Empire in 5th century, and we saw it repeated during the collapse of Communism in Eastern Europe only two decades ago.
With non-White births amounting to anywhere between 40 to 90% in many parts of the country — which happen also to be the most populous — the demographic critical mass could be reached within a generation or two. I am 40, so this means I am likely to witness it at an age when I will not be strong. A cogent articulation of White Nationalism would from this perspective be the best guarantor of the social, economic, and civic freedoms enjoyed generally by women in the contemporary West. Thus, it is perhaps the absence of adequate information, rather than the absence of power advantages, that are preventing White women from taking their own side. It would be a mistake to neglect half of our constituency because of the cartoonish hostility and adversarial atmosphere engendered by sociopathic feminism; doing so would play into the enemy’s hands, for the rainbow coalition thrives on our divisions. Graphically and prominently emphasizing our conception of women as our allies and partners, as complementary to ourselves, rather than as competitors or opponents, as the feminists have done, would be of great service to any movement with ambitions of saving the West.