The Future of the European Peoples, Part 2

The following is part 2 of the translation of my speech delivered in the German language ( Die Zukunft der Völker Europa) at the NPD Summer Academy in Saarbrucken, Germany (August 23-26, 2012).  The meeting and the lectures were also attended by several representatives of the Front National from the nearby Alsace, France. The original speech in the German language can be downloaded here. 

*                       *                       *

A Forthcoming War in Europe

A likely war in Europe is not going to have clear cut demarcation lines between “good White Europeans” vs. “evil dark-colored non-Europeans,” as many nationalists in Europe and the USA often anticipate. The pending war will demonstrate nasty features of combined class struggles, racial struggles and messy interethnic struggles within, between and amidst Europeans themselves. And yet, the aforementioned distorted and politically biased historical narratives must not be an excuse for Europe’s age-old small time nationalisms. Petty nationalism, whether of the German, Croatian, American, English, or French extraction, has inflicted immense damage to all European peoples. Only in retrospect can wee see the disastrous legacy of the nation-state which has bequeathed upon us, in the span of the last two hundred years, murderous religious wars, ongoing territorial disputes, and false historical memories. Last, but not least, we must all raise an embarrassing question: What does it mean today to exclaim “I am proud of being a German, a Fleming, a French, or an American,” considering that more than 10 percent of Germany’s citizens, 15 percent of  France’s  citizens and 30 percent of the U.S. population are of non-European descent?

Our main concern here should not be whether, or how much, or to what extent non-European immigrants residing inGermany, or in the EU can, or must be integrated. The fallacy and the danger of the multicultural system have already been well covered. Our prime goal is the reintegration of countless Germans back to their explicit Germanness; of countless Europeans back to their explicit European national awareness.  Millions of Germans, or Croats, or Americans, or French, who vegetate as passing consumers, or as “Whites by default,” unaware of their own history and their own destiny, are far more of a problem than the further influx of millions more immigrants from theThird World.

 “To be a German is not only he who speaks German, or he who comes from Germany, or he who possesses German citizenship. The state and the language are natural foundations of a nation, although a nation acquires its historical characteristics only from the art how it determines the life of the people of the same blood in its spirit. To live with the awareness of one’ nation means living within the awareness of its values. “(A. Moeller van den Bruck [1876 – 1925])

We often confuse the causes of non-European immigration with its effects. We hunt after a wrong scapegoat. Let us try to clarify it. Non-European immigrants are often depicted with the across the board noun “Muslims,” or “Islamists”—as if there are only Muslim immigrants coming to Europe. The notion of the religion should not be equated with the notion of the people. In the Balkans, for instance there are well over 10 million Muslims of European stock, yet many of them are very White people with Nordic features. Should we kick these peoples out of Europe? On the other hand, even if the present four million German Turks were to convert to Christianity that would not make the slightest difference to me. Our sense of nationhood and my sense of being part of an historic people depends not only on my, or on our religious affiliations, but are also grounded in our peculiar sense of the tragic, our unique sense of history— and of course, in our distinct biology. In America there are 50 million mestizo Latinos who are very Catholic and who believe in Jesus Christ. But these peoples are not part of our people or our culture and neither do I expect from them any empathy for my kind, or my kinsmen and my destiny.

There is also a conceptual error some of our colleagues make. Anti-Islamism, similar to the ideology of anti-fascism, is today a relatively risk-free and legally acceptable intellectual adventure. Of course, this adventure is frequently fueled by elites in the government and in the media, as well as by neo-conservatives, especially in the United States. Incidentally, anti-Islamism can also serve as a handy cover for disguising one’s own hatred of the multicultural system. Since it can be legally and professionally harmful to lambast non-White immigrants, let alone criticize out in the open European and American Jewry (e.g., for the support of multiculturalism), many Europeans and American nationalists hide their criticism of the multicultural system behind their criticism of Islam.  Some prominent European nationalist figures recently went a step further: they began using strong anti-Islamic rhetoric, mixed with mandatory atonement trips to Israel—in a naive belief that they could henceforth better barter off a free ride for their criticism of multiculturalism.

Capitalism: the main enemy of the peoples of Europe

The blame for non-European immigration and the decomposition of the European peoples must not be solely borne by the immigrants. It is in the interest of the local capitalists to get a million-strong reserve army of cheap labor to Europe and to the U.S.; in turn, they can lower the wages of their domestic workers. Furthermore, non-European immigrants have little social consciousness, a weak sense of the trade union adherence and practically no sense for the European destiny. Therefore, they can be better manipulated by the local capitalists. One should consider therefore the globalists, the plutocrats and the financial “superclass” as the main enemy of the European peoples. A German stockbroker, or a Croatian or a Russian ex-communist speculator turned now into a capitalist shark, does not care where his nation is—as long as he can rake in big money.

We are all witnessing a reemergence of the silent holy alliance today—an alliance between the ex-Commissar and the Merchant, i.e. the marriage between the left-winger and big business. The European Left is in favor of mass immigration, given that the exotic picture of the non-European immigrant represents for it now the ersatz symbol of its long gone proletariat. For the capitalist, it is beneficial to bring people from the Third World into Europe, because they can best serve the interests of anonymous capital. The capitalist strives towards the removal of his people, because his people are too expensive for his business transactions. A leftist “antifa” wants to erase his people because it will always remind him of the rising “fascist beast.”

But the Church also bears a heavy responsibility for the decomposing situation of the European nations, especially with its ecumenical parlance of “help thy neighbor.” Americans, Europeans and White Christians are nowadays more concerned about the welfare of non-European peoples than the welfare of their own. A rich Qatari, or an oil sheik from Saudi Arabiacould not care less are about the young unemployed and destitute masses in Moldova, or the working poor in France of Spain. He does not feel much inclined to help his own kind in Palestine in the first place, let alone give a thought to the suffering of the millions of the unemployed in Europe. The influential American Cardinal, Timothy Dolan, also known “as the American Pope” openly preaches in the American media the necessity of the open borders and openly advocates the protection of illegal immigrants in theUSA. Therefore it is wrong to blame only stateless plutocrats, ethnic lobbies, or starry eyed leftists in their decomposition endeavors of the European peoples. Regarding the destructive equality doctrine by Christian savants, I’ will not discuss it here. I’ll refer you to my papers and books.

Conclusion: The End of the System

The mission of the nation-state in Europe has ended in serial disasters. The idea of a European Reich must be revived. It is not important how the idea of the Reich should manifest itself in the future and what statutory or legal forms it may assume. It can carry the name of the European confederation, or for that matter it can retain the name of the European Union. What counts though is not the form but the content of the new imperial (Reich) idea. The imperial idea excludes rabid nationalism and offers all European peoples a chance to hold on to their uniqueness, yet also meet their common duties. The Germanic Reich idea has nothing in common with the English “Empire,” or the French “Empire”. It should never be confused with those English or the French words respectively.  (See Alain de Benoist’s “The Idea of Empire.”)

Centralism had always played a significant role in the development of the French imperial idea—which later gave birth to modern xenophobic nation-states and even worse, midwifed recently the strange centralistic structure, known as the EU. This was never the case with the idea of the Reich, in which supra-national and federal undercurrents had for centuries been the guiding principle of the ruling elites. The Reich means European ethnic plurality within a strong political unity. However, the imperial idea for the European peoples requires a new hierarchy of values, values which lie in sharp contrast to today’s liberal values. In today’s egalitarian, economistic system, where the rule of money is the only religion and where the sameness of all individuals and cultures runs full course, the idea of the empire is an oxymoron.

Yet the imperial Reich idea is also a logical response to a political threat. One thousand years ago, the idea of the empire was the only answer to the threat of the Huns, the Mongols and Turks. Back then in the 17th century had it not been for the European Prince Eugene of Savoy, had it not been for the idea of the empire, Dr. Sunic would be delivering a different sermon today and maybe his name would be Alia or Mohamed.

What’s the point in living in a so-called independent Croatia, or Lithuania or in Germany if all Western states, without any exceptions, have no more sovereignty left, all being instead ruled by the American proconsuls, Euro-commissioners and anonymous banksters?

The good news, however, is that the system has been dead for quite some time. The experiments with abstract dogmas of multiculturalism, the belief in the economic progress amidst ethnically rootless people have failed. Events in both Europe and the U.S. show us daily that the liberal experiment is history. There is sufficient empirical evidence to prove that. It is a typical feature of the dying system to resort to pathetic words about “its infallibility,” “its eternity,” and to pontificate about “its truthfulness”—precisely at the moment when the system is falling apart. Such complacent wishful thinking we have experienced countless times in Western history. The bogus self-conception of today’s ruling class in the EU about the “end of history” reminds me of the mindset of the political class in former Communist East Germany and the former communistYugoslavia—just before their collapse. In the summer of 1989, there were still big marches in the GDR with all local communist bigwigs raving about the “indestructibility of communism.” A few months later, the Berlin Wall fell down—and the communist system was dead.  Today’s ruling class in the West, or in the EU, is very weak, and it well aware of it, but cannot admit it openly. It does not know where it is headed. What should be of interest for all of us is the coming state of emergency and who will be the person to declare it. Once the state of emergency begins, our present political discourse will assume a different meaning. Then the plow may again turn into the sword. Thanks for you attention.

Dr. Tom Sunic (www.tomsunic.com) is a writer and the Board member of the American Third Position Party)