The American Anti-Revolution

Louis Lalande’s recent article The French Anti-Revolution for Counter Currents discusses Marine LePen, the traditionalist-nationalist forces with the Front National and the possibility of achieving an “Anti-Revolution” or “Final Revolution” which would bring about a “restoration of European order and harmony.” In his short discussion Lalande ventures away from France and explains why he believes America can never be the answer to what ails the West:

[N]O American can reverse the damage, as most Americans, whether they like it or not, are against monarchy, hierarchy, and harmonious order. It is in the very roots of the nation. It is in their national spirit, for the most part. They are the sons and daughters of the decline, although some more so than others. America is a nation founded on republican, anti-traditionalist values. America and the French Revolution go hand-in-hand. How America has conducted itself in the world since their “liberation” from monarchy is a testament to this inability to do anything seismic. Of course, there is work to be done in America, work that has to be done by good people, but it is a very complex situation. America is a very young nation, so it could go either way. It could even be that America was merely a mistake, and it will simply dissolve.

Southern Nationalists have long pointed out that “America is a nation founded on republican, anti-traditionalist values.” Many Southern Nationalists have repeatedly made the point that “America and the French Revolution go hand-in-hand.” We have long explained that Americanism is a specific, destructive form of egalitarian universalism which is closely related to the universal liberalism that came out of the French Revolution. And while there have been reactionary or counter-revolutionary periods or forces in American history, the general trend from 1776 to today has been a Leftward slide toward against tradition, order and organic identity.

Historically speaking, the clearest counter-force in the USA to American universalism has been Southern Nationalism. Indeed, as I wrote in Our Southern Nation the Southern historical narrative can be seen as anti-American (if one identifies America with egalitarian liberalism) and numerous academics and pundits have described it as such. Our beginning is not with a republican revolutionary movement against the crown, established church and European motherland. Rather, it starts more than a century earlier and reached its golden age during a time of monarchy, established church, racial hierarchy, affluency and order. And, only a few decades after independence Southern intellectuals and newspapers were openly rejecting Thomas Jefferson’s self-evidently false claim that all men were created equal with unalienable rights. By the early 1830s many Southerners had the feeling that 1789, if not 1776, was a tragic mistake. And by the early 1860s they openly proclaimed the Confederate experiment as “a great conservative revolution” – what Louis Hartz described “The Reactionary Enlightenment.”

While the Confederate “conservative revolution” tragically failed, we are still inspired by the heroic effort of our ancestors. We as a people and a movement point away from democracy, equality and universalism. Our identity is based upon an ethnicity, culture and historical experience rather than a bundle of abstract principles which supposedly apply equally to the Zulu, Englishman and Arab. The Southern Nationalist does not cry out for “Liberty, equality, fraternity!” – instead he yearns for order, tradition and identity.

Note: Listen to the first half of the recent Daily Shoah podcast for an excellent run-down on the French election and the challenge Le Pen faces.

About Michael Cushman 155 Articles
South Carolinian. Southern nationalist. Anglican.

8 Comments

  1. Isaiah Berlin has some great essays on the Counter-Enlightenment. Berlin was selling pluralism but still a great writer.

  2. Does Southern Nationalism reject a brotherly feeling with the other regions though? I’m in favor of devolution and regionalism, but the idea that white Americans should tolerate, say, the independent nation of California inviting, say, the Chinese to set up military bases on the former territory of the US, is ludicrous to me. I think this idea that white people should separate into regional factions politically at odds with each other only ends up with the entire continent being conquered and colonized by the *united* races like Latinos and Chinese. I’m happy to have Southrons determine their own laws and identities. I’m not fine with them thinking they do not share any vital interests with whites in the North. That belief is just as much the product of modern Republicanism as is the idea of the rational state. Just my 2c.

  3. Americanism: It isn’t because you can eat s*** and become a furrie bug chaser that you should.

    “How America has conducted itself in the world since their “liberation” from monarchy is a testament to this inability to do anything seismic”

    Really? For starter, the United Kingdom was (((subverted))) before the USA as well.

Comments are closed.