Jim Kalb has some thoughts this morning about White Nationalism:
The basic problem with the approach, of course, is that “whiteness” doesn’t have much to say about what life is about, so it can’t serve as the basis of social order. That’s why the extreme nationalists and racists of the last century relied so much on theatrics and on an ideology of infinite struggle for infinite dominion that made no sense and could only end in catastrophe.
This is untrue. The idea of whiteness is pregnant with profound social implications, which is why it is so fiercely criticized in the mainstream, and why racialists are so innoculated against liberalism. Unlike conservatives, White Nationalists clearly define “interest” in terms of the propagation of a lineage in a defined space through time, instead of individual materialism or appeal to universal abstract principles. This enables them to clearly reason out the activities (abortion, pornography, drug abuse, etc.) which are damaging to their ethny.
“Whiteness,” not conservatism, was the basis of the Southern social order (1660s-1960s) for three hundred years. Far from being unstable, military force was required on two separate occasions to overthrow it. The theatrics of Southern politicians stemmed from democracy, not racialism, and have continued down through the anti-racist era. Finally, the ultimate denounement of segregation in the United States wasn’t brought about by an effort to export the Southern social system; it was the American North which sought to aggressively universalize its ideals abroad.