American Racial Decline and Modernism

I’m bumping up my response to ATBOTL from the comments who raises some good points:

“American radical abolitionists like William Lloyd Garrison and Charles Sumner were openly anti-white in the current sense long before modernists had any influence anywhere or even existed. Most significantly, they a huge following among average, non-elite middle class whites in the North going back to the 1820’s. There was a mass movement of anti-white politics in the American North, based around liberal Puritan, Quaker and Methodist preachers that began to shift our culture in an anti-white direction even when many of the Founders were still alive.”

We’ve discussed this to death for years now.

It is true that liberalism existed in the 19th century. It is true that the Second Great Awakening spawned various religious and moral reform movements which were supported by middle class, White evangelical Protestants in Britain and the United States. It is true that “antiracism” existed in some form within liberalism before there was an explicit term for it as the belief that all racial differences were environmental in origin and the result of “prejudice.” It is true that this culminated in the War Between the States and Reconstruction. The Fourteenth Amendment established black citizenship.

Liberalism and Romanticism combined to produce abolitionism. Abolitionist literature focused on the poor, pitiful suffering slave and the cruelty and wickedness of the White master. It is deeply sentimental. Slavery was also indicted as being economically backward because of the influence of laissez-faire economics. 19th century Americans argued over slavery and the rights of the negro due to liberalism. Immigration restriction was also something new as it developed in opposition to Chinese immigration to the West in the 1860s and 1870s. As damaging as all of this was though, the America that emerged in the 20th century was still not our America. It was moving away from Sumner and toward Jim Crow, Woodrow Wilson’s resegregation of the federal government, eugenics and the Immigration Act of 1924.

From Wikipedia on Charles Sumner:

“Sumner repeatedly tried to remove the word “white” from naturalization laws. He introduced bills to that effect in 1868 and 1869, but neither came to a vote. On July 2, 1870, Sumner moved to amend a pending bill in a way that would strike the word “white” wherever in all Congressional acts pertaining to naturalization of immigrants. On July 4, 1870, he said: “Senators undertake to disturb us … by reminding us of the possibility of large numbers swarming from China; but the answer to all this is very obvious and very simple. If the Chinese come here, they will come for citizenship or merely for labor. If they come for citizenship, then in this desire do they give a pledge of loyalty to our institutions; and where is the peril in such vows? They are peaceful and industrious; how can their citizenship be the occasion of solicitude?” He accused legislators promoting anti-Chinese legislation of betraying the principles of the Declaration of Independence: “Worse than any heathen or pagan abroad are those in our midst who are false to our institutions.” Sumner’s bill failed, and from 1870 to 1943, and in some cases as late as 1952, Chinese and other Asians were ineligible for naturalized U.S. citizenship.[64] Sumner remained a champion of civil rights for blacks. He co-authored the Civil Rights Act of 1875 with John Mercer Langston[65] and introduced the bill in the Senate on May 13, 1870. The bill was passed a year after his death by Congress in February 1875 and signed into law by President Ulysses S. Grant on March 1, 1875. It was the last civil rights legislation for 82 years until the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1957. The Supreme Court ruled it unconstitutional in 1883 when it decided a group of cases known as the Civil Rights Cases.[66]”

Charles Sumner reflected the liberalism of the Black Republicans. He was pushing for the political form of liberalism though (giving blacks equal civil rights), not the aesthetic form.

“Many modernist cultural figures, some of whom you discussed, were white supremacists, anti-Semites and right wing politically. You should carefully analyze the racial and political beliefs of historical figures before condemning them. Walter Gropius, for example, was not anti-white, but he was anti-Semitic. He even joined the NSDAP, although the NSDAP leaders didn’t like his modern architecture in theory, in practice they built most buildings according to his techniques, like everyone else in the world did since 1930. You can blame him for changing architecture, but understand that before modern construction techniques, most people in the West lived in homes that would not be legal to live in today. Those beautiful old buildings that right wing people like so much only served a wealthy urban elite. Average white people lived in tiny shacks or windowless tenement rooms with no bathrooms in the 19th Century. How’s that for populism? Only modern techniques of building lowered the cost of housing so that everyone could afford a clean, safe, pleasant home to live in. If we built structures today with the same construction methods as 19th Century neoclassical or beaux arts buildings, they would cost as much as aircraft carriers.”

Modernism is a sensibility like Romanticism. It is an aesthetic. It is not an ideology like liberalism or fascism. As a sensibility, it is compatible with liberalism, conservatism, fascism, socialism, anarchism, communism, etc. Ezra Pound and T.S. Eliot were America’s most famous Modernists. Neither Pound or Eliot were progressive liberals, but both were Modernists. Ezra Pound supported Mussolini and fascism and was captured in Italy at the end of World War II and was charged with treason.

“This narrative about modernism is reductionist. Anti-white politics in America rose with the Second Great Awakening, crested in the years after the Civil War and then were displaced by a pro-white backlash among elites, inspired largely by Darwinism and Nietzschean philosophy overtaking the influence of liberal Protestantism. That backlash brought the Chinese Exclusion Act, the end of Reconstruction and the racialist era.”

Here is how I would frame the argument:

1.) Modern liberalism is responsible for America’s racial and cultural decline.

2.) Modern liberalism is a peculiar species of liberalism that originated in the early 20th century. It is primarily an aesthetic form of liberalism. The signature quality of modern liberalism which differentiates it from its ancestors is cultural liberalism or social liberalism. In contrast, classical liberalism was focused on the protection and extension of rights in politics and laissez-faire in economics.

3.) Modern liberalism is based on expressive individualism and cultural egalitarianism. Classical liberalism is based on utilitarian individualism. Modern liberalism wants to liberate the individual from the oppression of his or her cultural tradition in order to be able to express his or her (insert pronoun of choice) true self. Of course, it makes a glaring exception for non-Whites who are encouraged to retain their identities and cultures, which are there to stimulate modern liberals who are decadent cosmopolitans.

4.) Modern liberalism in the United States was born in the 1910s and can be traced back to the Young Intellectuals. The parents of modern liberalism are progressive liberalism and Modernism. I’ve been tracing the lineage of Modernism from the Young Intellectuals back to Baudelaire.

5.) Liberalism as an ideology has been around since the Enlightenment. Sensibility has changed across different ages though: Baroque (17th century), Neoclassical (18th century), Romantic (19th century), Modernist (20th century). The 20th century did not have the same sensibility as the Enlightenment or Romantic eras. We have not paid enough attention to this.

6.) The Victorian liberal differs in a number of striking ways from the Modern liberal. The former was racist. The latter is antiracist. The former was nationalist. The latter is globalist. The former was religious. The latter is secular. The former was confident. The latter has lost confidence. The former believed in order. The latter has rejected order. The former believed in cultural repression to encourage strong morals and elaborate manners. The latter believes in cultural liberation or that morality is a matter of opinion EXCEPT for the -isms and -phobias which either did not exist or were not associated with morality in the Victorian age. The Modern liberal is cosmopolitan. The Victorian liberal was an Englishman or an American and thought in terms of different nationalities as races and was happy to rank them. The Victorian liberal swelled with pride as he saw the pink map of British imperialism spreading across Africa and Asia. The Modern liberal believes this was the worst thing that ever happened in human history.

“Arch anti-modernist Evangelical Fundamentalist leader DL Moody was a massive supporter of racial integration and deeply hostile to racialism. His movement’s influence on our culture was massive and played a critical role in breaking white solidarity among culturally conservative Americans. Evangelical Fundamentalism’s Christian Zionism made American culture uniquely penetrable by Jews, by fomenting pro-Jewish attitudes not only among elites, but among the rural masses, who served a check on Jewish power in other societies.”

I’m not referring to “Modernism” in religion. I’m not referring to “modernization” or technological change. I’m referring specifically to the Modern movement in the arts in the late 19th and early 20th century.

“Prohibition was the key issue that moved young WASP Americans towards modernist cultural values. You would have done the same thing had you been subjected to a ban on drinking beer in college by elderly feminist crazies. Post collapse white nationalists like William Pierce and Revilo P. Oliver abhorred Prohibitionists and held that movement largely responsible for the collapse of WASP pride that happened in the first half of the 20th Century.”

Prohibition was a triumph of the Progressive movement which in those days was weirdly associated with social conservatism. The mainstream of the movement was “left-conservative” as opposed to “left-liberal.” Modernism arrived in America before World War I though. More than anything else, it was the World Wars which led to the triumph of Modernism in Europe and America.

“Many Remnant egalitarian classical liberal intellectuals, liberal Protestant preachers and anti-racialist, anti-Darwinist, Fundamentalist Protestants inside of the establishment and some socialist radicals, using ideas that predate modernism, were undermining white solidarity in America during the entire period from 1880 to 1910. It’s not a simple matter of European modernism bursting into America and making everything go bad.”

Wouldn’t you say White solidarity increased though during this period as the Civil War generation died off and America retreated from Reconstruction? Henry Cabot Lodge’s Force Bill of 1890 was the last gasp of it before the Plessy decision. Isn’t this reflected in the reception of The Birth of a Nation and the Second Klan in the 1920s? The new divide that was opening up in this period was between the elites and the masses.

“There was a racialist motivation for modern art and architecture. Aesthetic modernism in architecture and the visual arts was deeply tied to feelings among Northern Europeans in the racialist era that classical Greece and Rome could not be the sole influence for their culture, as these were not the cultures of their ancestors. Since pre-Christian(ie pre-Romanized) Germanic people had no high civilization, they felt that new forms must be created that expressed the “racial soul” of Germanic peoples. German Expressionism sought to reflect this racial soul symbolically and emotionally in art rather than abide by the Greco-Roman ideal of mimesis of the natural world as guiding principal. The artists and architects who pioneered this movement were largely White nationalists, White supremacists, Nordicists and anti-Semitic racialists whose beliefs and intentions could not have been further from the liberal anti-white zeitgeist of egalitarianism that had long been part British and French intellectual culture dating back into the 1700’s.”

If so, I haven’t come across this.

I will keep reading. I haven’t studied German Expressionism yet.

Everything that I have read has led me to believe that the primary inspiration for Modernism was the rejection by artists of the 19th century bourgeois and their philistine tastes. It was about the rejection of the masses and the rise of mass society in the late 19th century. The avant-garde was inspired by class hatred which is why they valued transgression against bourgeois tastes and morals.

“Aesthetic primitivism was attractive to these men precisely because their ancestors had been primitive tribal people who fought against and ultimately destroyed the Roman Empire.”

I get the impression that they were experimenting with Asian and African art forms in painting and music. They wanted to bust norms and boundaries.

“Modernism cannot be conflated with generalized anti-white attitudes, self hatred or egalitarianism. It could be argued that liberalism corrupted modernism more than modernism corrupted liberalism. Randolph Bourne was the son of a liberal Protestant minister and characterized himself as a liberal.”

As I said above, Modernism was compatible with liberalism and fascism. Ezra Pound and the Futurists in Mussolini’s Italy show that. It is the fusion of progressive liberalism and with Modernism in the United States that was problematic. American hegemony after World War II made it the norm across the West.

“His writings are reminiscent of the sentiments expressed by pre-modernist liberal American WASPs of the radical abolitions movement, albeit stripped of Anglo-Saxon superiority thought. Note that Anglo-Saxon superiority was often explicitly linked to Anglo-Saxon liberalism among it’s advocates going back hundreds of years. Anglos were claimed to be superior because they were liberal. In this thinking, they had little value as a people or culture apart from having liberal tendencies. That kind of argument was used against conservatives in the Anglo-Saxon world, who were accused of being secret agents of the Catholic Church or of being in conspiracy with Continental powers.”

Anglo-American ethnicity was unchallenged in the 19th century. Black Republicans like Charles Sumner and Thaddeus Stevens were liberals who thought that civil rights should be extended to blacks, but they didn’t go beyond that to demonizing and rejecting their own ethnic groups. Americans took great pride in their ethnic heritage until well into the 20th century. It is worth noting that T.S. Eliot became a British subject and Ezra Pound spent World War II supporting Mussolini in Italy. It illustrates how Modernists are so commonly estranged from their own people.

About Hunter Wallace 9628 Articles
Founder and Editor-in-Chief of Occidental Dissent

42 Comments

  1. It is worth noting that Garrison was nearly lynched by a Boston mob in 1835 for his anti-slavery views. The abolitionists remained a fringe group even in New England until the 1850s. It was the Kansas-Nebraska act and the ensuing violence that pushed them into the mainstream for a short period.

    • Lighthorse’s point needs to be investigated, Brad.

      As was noted, “Arch anti-modernist Evangelical Fundamentalist leader DL Moody was a massive supporter of racial integration and deeply hostile to racialism.”

      There is a reason, and it is THEOLOGICAL. Moody was a full-fledged ARMINIAN, as was Finney.
      ALL of the sects in America were largely Calvinist prior to the Wesley’s arrival, and the so-called ‘Great Awakening.’ Even Wesley’s partner, Geo. Whitefield, was a ‘high-Church’ Calvinist. The Dutch Reformed Church had anathematized Arminius (a latter-day Pelagius, but ‘of a kindler/gentler’ apostasy), in the prior century, and the Westminster Confession of both Anglicans and Presybterians in the UK, was the Calvinist model for church thought until the generation of Englishmen, roughly before Wesley.

      I mention this, because the heresy of Pelagianism/Arminianism (Man can save himself, if he merely ‘lift himself up by his own bootstraps’) is at the heart of Wesley’s frankly heretical theology. He denied apostolic succession (‘ordaining’ [sic] clergy by himself), denied Pauline concepts of Predestination and Election, (‘all who may, can be saved’), and because of that (You cannot change your fate, it is predestined by Almighty God, and no amount of social policy change can alter that fact) IS AT THE HEART OF ABOLITIONISM and Negro ontology! And EVERY SINGLE ELEMENT of the [sic] “Woke Culture” starts with that IDOLATRY of the N-word!

      “The liberals have decreed it is meritorious to kill non-illuminated whites and it is a vicious, horrendous crime to kill the murdering scum in the ranks of the Antifa/BLMers. Of course the Antifa must fly the Black Lives Matter flag when they murder because they too are white, hence they must denounce whiteness all the more, and they will lose their shields if they don’t hide behind Black Lives Matter. Kyle Rittenhouse may be acquitted for his meritorious killing of the two Antifaers because they were white, but he shouldn’t even have to go on trial — he should be given a medal of honor and a parade. When the demon-crats applaud and laud the murderers and looters of the Antifa and the BLM, and when the Republicans say a prayer at their convention for the horrendous black criminal, Jacob Blake, both parties have shown us where their hearts are…”- https://cambriawillnotyield.com/2020/09/05/the-war-that-has-been-thrust-upon-us/

      If you believe that ANYONE can ‘save himself,’ then you will see an N-word ‘slave’ (his ontological state of being) and think, ‘He is like me- he should be ‘free.” And your aberrant theology will work itself out in pride and damnation (instead of fear and trembling [Phil. 2:12]) to destroy your race, your nation, and your Church. Why? Because ‘all they that hate God, LOVE DEATH.” [ Prov. 8:36]

      Is it any wonder that Finney (the heretic) who took up the banner of the lies of Wesley (as Jos. Smith did with the Mormons) and was a spearhead in this Abolitionist, Self-Salvational,” N-word is just as good as me” ‘Second [sic] ‘Great Awakening”? I think not, for Finney was clearly the model for today’s ‘woke blaspheming IDIOT, in that he/they “…had many misgivings about the fundamental doctrines taught in Presbyterianism,’ and would therefore have agreed with Finney, who “…took the breathtaking step of barring from communion all slave owners and traders,” in his blasphemous attempt to CHANGE TIMES AND SEASONS?!? [ Dan 7:25]* – https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Grandison_Finney

      *”He will speak against the Most High and oppress his holy people and try to change the set times and the laws. ”

      And, now as we see N-words cry ‘F*** White People’ we KNOW their hearts- which are as black as their skin. – https://metro.co.uk/2020/09/07/blm-protesters-shout-fk-the-white-people-at-restaurant-diners-and-down-their-drink-13236321/

      This is the LEGACY of Arminianism/Pelagianism, the fallacy that ‘All hominids are created equal’- it is not surprising that, for all the good of Jefferson, he wanted to ‘pick and choose’ in Holy Writ, to DENY GOD OWNERSHIP of all existence! Like himself, for instance! If God truly does ‘own’ us all, HE IS THE DIVINE MASSA, and we are ALL his SLAVES- and he can do with the Darkies just as He likes, and NO ONE DARE SAY TO HIM, ‘What doest thou?’ [ Dan. 4:35] And if WE WHITES ARE THE “SONS OF GOD” that Christendom SAYS we are: [Gal. 3:26, I John 3:1-2, Eph. 1:4, etc.] WE HAVE EVERY RIGHT TO OWN SLAVES – because it is BIBLICAL! (Look at the first half of this site- ignore the rest- https://www.rivalnations.org/slavery-is-biblical/

      Every problem we WHITES face as a nation dying today, is DIRECTLY as a result of ABANDONING the Biblical Constructs of Election, Predestination, and Divine Providence, ORDERING OUR STEPS for our good.

      Brad- You keep looking to the 1910-1920’s for REASONS, yet you have not ONCE talked about
      J. Gresham Machen, his Fundamentalist/Modernist battle at Princeton, and what that MEANT to America on the CUSP OF ANARCHY, a hundred years ago!

      As this author points out, Machen’s choice of Cornelius van Til to teach at Westminster Seminary was conscious and deliberate: “This was the tradition out of which Machen worked as an American Presbyterian and a member of Princeton Seminary’s faculty. Yet, his argument against Protestant liberalism questioned the close identification of the church with American culture, a tradition that extended back to the American revolution. Machen recognized that the church was fundamentally different from society, and that its faith and practice stood above (and at times against) the norms of America. The mainline churches, he argued, had compromised their witness because they had substituted the ideals of liberty, democracy and equality for the good news of the gospel.

      Machen’s recognition of the antagonism between church and culture made him sympathetic to confessional ethnic communions like the Dutch Calvinist tradition from which Van Til came. He admired, for instance, the confessional witness of the Christian Reformed Church, its practice of catechetical sermons, its system of Christian schools, its college and seminary. He also esteemed the CRC’s separateness from the wider culture, its ghetto mentality as it were, rooted in the conviction that the church must avoid all associations that might compromise its witness.”- https://opc.org/OS/MachenVanTil.html

      If you folks want to restore America, you need to restore ALL of her Identity; including her CHRISTIAN IDENTITY, [double entendre intended!] which was clearly White, Elective, Isolationist, and European.
      We cannot live with the Xenoi- and neither could the Ancient Israelites… because we are ONE AND THE SAME RACE.

  2. Re: “The Victorian liberal differs in a number of striking ways from the Modern liberal (…) The Victorian liberal swelled with pride as he saw the pink map of British imperialism spreading across Africa and Asia. The Modern liberal believes this was the worst thing that ever happened in human history”:

    The nineteenth- and early-twentieth century “Opium Queen” capitalist is essentially (in what really matters) EXACTLY THE SAME as the twenty-first-century Obama and Trump age capitalist, and the mostly British-based Opium Queen Age imperialism has only been re-centered, refined and intensified as mostly U.S.- (and Israel) based twenty-first-century capitalist global hegemony.

    Ideological verbiage about culture and change is merely smoke. Reality, which is obscured by the smoke, is unchanging massive-scale theft and enslavement and hegemonic global war, hot, cold and “hybrid.”

  3. I like this thread you have been pulling although I can give or take the vicious Jazz debate and Spencer’s hurt feelings. The only problem for those new to these topics is the broad definition of Liberalism or Progressive. Teddy Roosevelt, Andrew Jackson, and William Jennings Bryan were considered the Liberal thinkers of their day because of their reformer mindset seeking to improve the life of the working class.

    Left and Progressive becomes a different animal when you add in the anti white aspect. It is no longer about general social improvements but morphs into the current “diversity” talk we hear about. Most people are dumb as rocks but speak as if they know everything. Trump is the best president in American history and all Leftists from history are like Michael Moore

  4. Your reason for posting the picture of Randolph Bourne?

    He was a brilliant and courageous man, though he looked “funny.”

    He was outcast, shut out by the wall of Plutocracy that also stopped Eugene Debs, William Jennings Bryan, and any others who dare to rail persuasively against it. The show trial of tortured U.S. political prisoner Julian Assange is happening right now in London and no one here seems to care: https://www.moonofalabama.org/2020/09/us-war-on-journalism-assange-fights-extradition-in-british-court.html

      • Typical flowery, purple rhetoric of that era, not my style. Look at his positions on war, imperialism, democracy – when he was definitely not saying exactly nothing, but as much as might be dared to say under the sedition law. See further comment below.

    • Randolph Bourne was no outcast, he moved in elite circles his entire life. He may not have been popular at parties in college.

      An outcast in that era would be someone like a hobo or vagrant.

      • I think a better term was the one he used of himself: “a malcontent.” He was abandoned by his progressive friends in the elite circles, when he opposed the First World War that they supported, and wrote against militarism and imperialism. He was not racialist and was not as clear on class division as he should have been, and he was thoroughly confused by ethnic and cultural pluralism, but he opposed the popular war and that was much more brilliant than his bright colleagues and enough to be brave, in the face of the sedition laws: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Espionage_Act_of_1917

        • https://mn.gov/mnddc/parallels2/pdf/10s/11/11-the-handicapped-bourne.pdf#:~:text=The%20Handicapped%20By%20Randolph%20Bourne%20First%20published%20anonymously,he%20is%20unable%20to%20move%20around%20among%20his

          “It irritates me as if I had been spoken of contemptuously myself, to hear people called ‘common’ or ‘ordinary,’ or to see that deadly and delicate feeling for social gradations crop out, which so many of our upper-middle-class women seem to have. It makes me wince to hear a man spoken of as a failure, or to have it said of one that he ‘doesn’t amount to much.’ Instantly I want to know why he has not succeeded, and what have been the forces that have been working against him. He is the truly interesting person, and yet how little our eager-pressing, onrushing world cares about such aspects of life, and how hideously though unconsciously cruel and heartless it usually is. Often I had tried in arguments to show my friends how much of circumstance and chance go to the making of success; and when I reached the age of sober reading, a long series of the works of radical social philosophers, beginning with Henry George, provided me with the materials for a philosophy which explained why men were miserable and overworked, and why there was on the whole so little joy and gladness among us and which fixed the blame. Here was suggested a goal, and a definite glorious future, toward which all good men might work. My own working hours became filled with visions of how men could be brought to see all that this meant, and how I in particular might work some great and wonderful thing for human betterment….”

          • “It irritates me as if I had been spoken of contemptuously myself, to hear people called ‘common’ or ‘ordinary,’ or to see that deadly and delicate feeling for social gradations crop out, which so many of our upper-middle-class women seem to have. It makes me wince to hear a man spoken of as a failure, or to have it said of one that he ‘doesn’t amount to much.'”

            Admirable though it is, such mindfulness of the dignity of the least among us is hardly encountered in Randolph Bourne alone; and the negative words about “upper-middle-class women” strike me, at least, as gratuitous and have the effect of souring the rest of what he says there. As to his hope of working some great and wonderful thing for human betterment–well, socialism isn’t it.

  5. “Liberalism and Romanticism combined to produce abolitionism. Abolitionist literature focused on the poor, pitiful suffering slave and the cruelty and wickedness of the White master.”

    The FIRST slave traders in America were JEWS, as well as “the FIRST plantation owners” in African Sao Tome and the FIRST transplanters of sugar and slaves across the Atlantic.

    Jews and the Civil War. page 53

  6. Modernism is really the institutionalization of perversion. It is a mistake to see it as primarily an “aesthetic” movement or to think of it as a sudden break with 19th Century romantic liberalism. It is the same mistake as seeing Feminism as being broken into “First Wave” and later waves. (E Belfort Bax, John and Prestonia Martin are good on that score) Ultimately, institutionalizing perversion is an iteration of prior Anti-Christian movements. The Jews get bolder and bolder in their efforts to impose their psychopathic “values” on the masses. Crass materialism with an obsessive compulsion for diabolical parody. It’s not something new. It’s as old as Man. So how has it become socially dominant, no longer hiding in the shade? The collapse of moral forces, per Copin Albancelli:

    “The people then will wish to resist. But it will be too late to prevent it, because all moral forces having ceased to exist, all material forces will have been shattered by that same cause. Sheep do not resist the sheep dog trained to drive them and possessing strong teeth.”

    Now we see Trump pushing his Rainbow-Zionist agenda with the support of the “Christian Right” – thus it has ever been in the United States, the power of the enemy (which has relatively little to do with perverted art and music, those things are popular because of Zionist power, not because they genuinely make a good impression – like the optics debate, matters of tastes with the masses are settled by manifest social dominance), come from its ability to co-opt traditional culture to carry out its own auto-demolition. Sending girls to university in vast numbers in the post-war period is a great example of this completely self-destructive streak of American Christianity.

    Modernism is not about efficiency or science or genuine human psychology. It is about creating confusion and disorientation in the masses. All the games being played with Real Estate so Jews can make money moving negroes around, it’s not about a shortage of housing. The cause of the Real Estate bubble is not really a matter of classical economics. Homes, construction and business, skills, education, families, marriage, children. (our society values them in reverse order of importance), these things are not being managed according economic exigencies. Not in this country. No, they are being manipulated by the culture distorters. It really is useless to discuss any of these things without recognizing the primacy of the judeo-masonic secret organization of modern Western society. That is the germ of everything, all these notions of organic historical evolution and oscillations are just silliness. Conspiracy theory, not anything else, is the ONLY valid explanation for our predicament.

  7. It’s been the Anglo-Ashkenazi Alliance that fueled this slippery slope of degeneracy from the beginning. There’s no escaping that fact. Their fingerprints are all over the evidence.

  8. There isn’t any question that lack of common sense on race is the root of many of the present circumstances. The southerners had the good sense not to let most colored vote, they didn’t know what they were doing and it’s obvious. Now that the ghetto morons are running many large cities, they’ve run them right into the ground, they’re on the verge of destroying them completely. Especially if they get rid of the police.

    I’m not saying you should be wealthy or a property owner to vote, but you should be able to demonstrate an understanding of how the American system is supposed to work.

    • I dont often watch Campus Reform as it is typical Charlie Kirk type Republican “Conservativism”, but they did a solid video beyond the awful Mark Dice “everyone is stupid” take. They asked younger people about 1776, the 4th of July and America in gemeral but instead of quick cuts let them talk. The blacks and Latinos of course grunted out how racist and awful America is with the irony of them lounging in palm tree covered beaches being over their heads, but they obviously have zero loyalty to America as an idea or a country. Hammers home just how done things are.

      The part that is the most striking is when two heavyset white girls are asked. They let the interviewer know THAT THEY ARE SOCIAL STUDIES TEACHERS but they couldnt even name the date of Independence despite it being filmed on or around July 4th. They go on to state that the history of the country does not really matter and they spend most of their class time teaching these 13 year old and under children about “anti racism” and how to protest. It is depressing but worth the watch

      https://youtu.be/YC4Qg4IUkvY

      • Also, not a single person got 1776 correct. Which they all found hilarious. The Hispanics thought it was the 1970s while the blacks did a little better guessing the 1880s

  9. I can’t respond to this all now.

    “If so, I haven’t come across this.”

    Read books about art and architecture as opposed to books about literary intellectuals if you want to understand the aspect of aesthetic modernism. The attraction to non-classical art and Germanic racialism were linked. Study William Morris, Gothic revival, late 19th Century Medievalism, Jugendstil and German Expressionism. African art was of interest to European(particularly German) intellectuals somewhat later in time than East Asian Oriental art was and there was also a Jewish intellectual Semitic/Oriential-phile movement in Germany in the late 1800’s that is highly relevant to all of this. Jews had their own racial reasons for overthrowing Greco-Roman aesthetics.

    Some things that need to be factored into this whole topic are socialism and communism, and how the advocacy for working class whites played into a generalized favoring of the low classes, the weak, the common etc. despite the fact that many socialists and even Jewish communists were white supremacists in the late 1800’s. That was transferred to blacks, immigrants and colonial subjects as well as to social misfits and people who lived outside of Victorian morality.

    The Russian-Japanese War and how Anglo-Saxon imperialism, Anglo-liberalism and Protestant ideology and WASP philosemitism played into support for the Japanese was a crucial watershed and was cited by L. Stoddard as the turning point where White racial solidarity was first explicitly broken by White elites.

    This entire era is confusing because right at the point when White Supremacy was at it’s zenith and the elites had views very similar to modern White nationalists, it all fell apart so quickly that it’s hard to understand how it was possible.

    Wilson is a prefect example of the contradictions of this era. His flawed thinking(internationalism, philosemitism, utopianism) came from his liberal Protestant background. His racialism was a product of his Southernness and Darwinism. He was against even admitting a handful of genuinely intellectually qualified blacks to Princeton, as had been done a few time before him, but appointed the first Jewish Professor, a taboo that had never been broken.

    There is a critical locus of the crisis in the split between anti-imperialists and imperialists over the Spanish American War. The White Supremacist anti-imperialists were the same as us. We trace modern White Nationalism to them. The imperialists were like modern neocon boomers.

    I’m arguing for high degree of continuity from the Enlightenment era radical egalitarians, like the French intellectuals who supported the slaughter of French whites in Haiti and the current anti-white zeitgeist, rather than a fast collapse in the early 20th Century. At the same time, strict adherence to early classical liberalism would have prevented much of the anti-white policy program that started with FDR by allowing Whites free association and blocking Progressive style social engineering, which was pioneered largely by White Supremacists, but later used against Whites. Similarly, Randolph Bourne’s anti-imperialism mirrors that of L. Stoddard and his Germanophilia mirrors that of anti-liberal racialist WASPs like H. S. Chamberlin which in turn stood against the Germanophobia of WWI era WASP Jingoists, who attacked German culture for not being liberal and democratic. Contradictions abound.

    “It illustrates how Modernists are so commonly estranged from their own people.”

    They were alienated in a similar way to the way we are alienated from neocon boomer style conservatism.

    • “[Wilson] was against even admitting a handful of genuinely intellectually qualified blacks to Princeton, as had been done a few time before him, but appointed the first Jewish Professor, a taboo that had never been broken.”

      For the record, I’ll note that that Jew was Horace Kallen, whose brief stay at Princeton started in 1903 and whose 1915 “Democracy versus the Melting-Pot” argued for proto-multiculturalism, I suppose, as did Randolph Bourne’s subsequent (1916) “Trans-National America.”

      See https://dept.sophia.ac.jp/is/amecana/Journal/18-4.htm
      Erika Sunada, Graduate School of Sociology, Hitotubashi University, Tokyo, Japan
      “Revisiting Horace M. Kallen’s Cultural Pluralism: A Comparative Analysis”

      Footnote 26 (in part): “Although Kallen’s essay [“Democracy versus the Melting Pot”] published in 1915 failed to attract much attention, it stimulated Randolph Bourne (1886-1918), an essayist, to write “Trans-national America.” … Bourne stated Kallen’s influence on his idea of ‘transnationalism’ in a speech he gave before the Harvard Menorah Society in 1916. Bourne said ‘my own mind was set working on the whole idea of American national ideals by the remarkable articles of Dr. Kallen in The Nation last year.'”

      Footnote 31 (in part): “[David] Hollinger says ‘[t]he ideas of both Kallen and [Randolph] Bourne enjoy a revival within multiculturalism, but this new movement is much more popular than cultural pluralism had ever been.’ … In his book of study on multiculturalism and American nationality, Michael Lind calls Kallen and Bourne ‘[t]he two saints of American cultural pluralism.'”

      The original pieces:

      http://www.expo98.msu.edu/people/kallen.htm
      (Kallen, “Democracy versus the Melting-Pot”)

      http://www.swarthmore.edu/SocSci/rbannis1/AIH19th/Bourne.html
      (Bourne, “Trans-National America”)

    • “The Russian-Japanese War and how Anglo-Saxon imperialism, Anglo-liberalism and Protestant ideology and WASP philosemitism played into support for the Japanese was a crucial watershed and was cited by L. Stoddard as the turning point where White racial solidarity was first explicitly broken by White elites.”

      Just thought I’d add the following, from page 35 of the 1921 Scribner’s edition of Stoddard’s THE
      RISING TIDE OF COLOR AGAINST WHITE WORLD-SUPREMACY:

      “Officially, the keystone of Japan’s foreign policy since the beginning of the present [i.e., twentieth] century has been the alliance with England, first negotiated in 1902 and renewed with extensive modifications in 1911. The 1902 alliance was universally popular in Japan. It was directed specifically against Russia and represented the common apprehensions of both the contracting parties. By 1911, however, the situation had radically altered. Japan’s aspirations in the Far East, particularly as regards China, were arousing wide-spread uneasiness in many quarters, and the English communities in the Far East generally condemned the new alliance as a gross blunder of British diplomacy.”

      See http://www.gutenberg.org/files/37408/37408-h/37408-h.htm

      • Thank you, The Rising Tide… can be seen as the foundational text of White nationalism. Before L. Stoddard, it’s hard to find anyone who fully understand the whole picture since the Founders. The slavers and imperialists for example, did not want a society that was white, but a multiracial, cheap labor society ruled by White elites. Others were too liberal and too focused on individualism, despite being pro-White. What’s so frustrating is that had Stoddard’s understanding been widespread further back in American history or had elites listened to him more, the crisis could have been avoided. He was friends with Presidents and other top elites, but they didn’t embrace his ideas fully.

        • You’re welcome. As you probably know, Stoddard’s ideas are treated unfavorably in “The Great Gatsby,” published in 1925, just four years after “The Rising Tide.” That’s in Chapter 1, while the narrator is having dinner on the porch of his cousin and her rich husband …

          “Civilization’s going to pieces,” broke out Tom violently. “I’ve gotten to be a terrible pessimist about things. Have you read ‘The Rise of the Coloured Empires’ by this man Goddard?”

          “Why, no,” I answered, rather surprised by his tone.

          “Well, it’s a fine book, and everybody ought to read it. The idea is if we don’t look out the white race will be–will be utterly submerged. It’s all scientific stuff; it’s been proved.”

          “Tom’s getting very profound,” said Daisy with an expression of unthoughtful sadness. “He reads deep books with long words in them. What was that word we—-”

          “Well, these books are all scientific,” insisted Tom, glancing at her impatiently. “This fellow has worked out the whole thing. It’s up to us who are the dominant race to watch out or these other races will have control of things.”

          “We’ve got to beat them down,” whispered Daisy, winking ferociously toward the fervent sun.

          “You ought to live in California–” began Miss Baker but Tom interrupted her by shifting heavily in his chair.

          “This idea is that we’re Nordics. I am, and you are and you are and—-” After an infinitesimal hesitation he included Daisy with a slight nod and she winked at me again. “–and we’ve produced all the things that go to make civilization–oh, science and art and all that. Do you see?”

          There was something pathetic in his concentration as if his complacency, more acute than of old, was not enough to him any more.

          … I was confused and a little disgusted as I drove away. It seemed to me that the thing for Daisy to do was to rush out of the house, child in arms–but apparently there were no such intentions in her head. As for Tom, the fact that he “had some woman in New York” was really less surprising than that he had been depressed by a book. Something was making him nibble at the edge of stale ideas as if his sturdy physical egotism no longer nourished his peremptory heart.

          That phrase–“stale ideas”–has always struck me as cowardly, as if F. Scott Fitzgerald was aware that that’s how he, Fitzgerald, must characterize Stoddard’s work if he, Fitzgerald, wants to remain welcome in the right company. Be that as it may, another book, also published in 1925, presented ideas like those of Stoddard very-much-more favorably, and thus the clash that was World War II was prepared. (I’m speaking, of course, of “Mein Kampf.”)

  10. “Many Remnant egalitarian classical liberal intellectuals, liberal Protestant preachers and anti-racialist, anti-Darwinist, Fundamentalist Protestants inside of the establishment and some socialist radicals, using ideas that predate modernism, were undermining white solidarity in America during the entire period from 1880 to 1910. It’s not a simple matter of European modernism bursting into America and making everything go bad.”

    Wouldn’t you say White solidarity increased though during this period as the Civil War generation died off and America retreated from Reconstruction?

    ———————————————————-

    Just to address this one point, the remnant egalitarian classical liberal intellectuals, liberal Protestant preachers and anti-racialist, anti-Darwinist, Fundamentalists were a minority faction in the establishment during the racialist era, but they still had some power and were scheming along side you know who to unleash the current anti-white zeitgeist on America. Such people were often wealthy, socially prominent and involved in efforts to help blacks who were pouring into Northern cities at the time. They founded the NAACP, for example, with help from our fellow whites.

  11. The North Carolina in which I grew up in, in the 1960-s1970s, was completely Anglo-American ethnicity in it’s totality.

    It was so utterly this way that practically not a soul gave a thought about it being any other way, except for the League of Women Voters, and a few radicals who taught at the colleges.

    The members of that organization were actively hunting for something else, though, looking back, I think they had no a clue what that thing was – only that it was something ‘other’.

    Ironically, those of The League of Women Voters of that time, who are still with us, are petrified by the world as it has turned out today.

    ‘Other’ turned out to be not quite as they thought it would be.

    As of 2020, North Carolina is still Anglo-American Ethnicity, though ashamed of itself, awkward, and looking to somehow become something else.

    Therein is the great peril – to not know who you are, or to know it, and to be so uncomfortable with yourself you would actually cross-dress to escape it.

    One thing is for sure – if you are this way, you certainly will not defend yourself…

    • Off topic, Ivan, but I want to thank you for the warm remarks you made here, at Occidental Dissent, some time ago, about my mother. Because blog-commenting can be a tricky way to communicate, I didn’t reply immediately, but it has been on my mind all this time to reply. I told my mother that “one of my friends on the internet” said such nice things about her and that he told me she and I should visit his home, in North Carolina, if we’re ever down that way. Of course, she thought that wonderful. You and your loved ones are always in my heart, Ivan.

      • @John…

        Yes, I love your mother. I did right from the first time I saw her psychick shadow in your words.

        She, or, perhaps better said, the kind of she she represents, is why this country was once great, but, is no more.

        You have one of my e-mail addresses, should you need to give me advance notice of your visit.

        The invitation is both open at any time and open-ended for both of y’all, only it would be best if y’all gave us at least a few days warning, so that we could have the house clean.

        Thank you for your kind words and for allowing us to be in your heart.

        It means something!

        • You’re welcome, Ivan–and I say the same in reply. For reasons I needn’t get into, it’s unlikely I’ll ever be able to get down your way, but the invitation itself makes me feel connected to your locality, for which a fondness has grown in me. When I hear, for instance, “North Carolina” in a weather report or see “sweet tea” written on a box on a supermarket shelf, I think of your family and you, even though we’ve never met. One never knows, I guess, how an attachment will develop.

  12. America’s end is coming thru blacks and jews. No other race like blacks is constantly promoted, covered up for, lied about and shoved down our throats like blacks. Jews are a big reason for that being the founders and money behind black organizations, communist civil rights, the tv stations always pretending blacks are victims when the opposite is true. Hollywood with its evil jewish push of all things anti White and pro black and pro jew.

    In the latest American debacle, to now win an Academy Award for best picture it has to be filled with non Whites or gays. That is truly incredible as standards literally are destroyed again. But the jews and gays who run Hollywood don’t care because they hide in the shadows and still get paid. Basically non Jewish Whites will be the ones discriminated against. Jews will always sneak in jews disproportionately.

    I do think America is done. It’s too big, too divided, too bitter. It has a literally treasonous media whom should be locked up and forced out of business for treason and yet these devils prosper. I could not blame any White person over say 45, to seriously consider moving to a far Whiter nation without so much jewish influence. The ironic thing is the darker this nation gets the worse it will for these goyim hating jews.

    350 million people of vast diversity is no longer a cohesive nation. Stations like cbs, nbc, abc and various print news are literally looking to destroy White America. But you kill the golden goose then you kill it all.

    Outside of a much needed breakup, America is done. Destroyed by blacks, jewish influence and obscene amounts of non White immigration so a handful of rich White guys can get richer. Utterly nauseating.

    • Re: “350 million people of vast diversity is no longer a cohesive nation (…) .America is done. Destroyed”

      The U.S. is destroying not being destroyed. It is not almost finished, but just getting started! Expect it to endure a thousand years like the ancient Egyptian dynasties. The sun never sets on its one thousand overseas military bases and black sites. War is its health and it does not need, or want, any racial, ethnic, religious or cultural cohesion, and ESPECIALLY NOT CLASS COHESION to develop among the commons. The U.S. is just what it always was and doing what it always did but now even more so:

      https://caitlinjohnstone.com/2020/09/01/you-can-have-peace-or-the-us-empire-you-cant-have-both/

      Ideologies are smoke. Government is power and power is wealth, and the Almighty Dollar is worshipped by the world.

    • @Jeff…

      “America’s end is coming thru blacks and jews. ”

      Although I usually agree with you, Dear Jeff, in this area I tend to agree with Grand Dragon Louis Beam, who, back about 25 years ago, said that the failures of America are all about White Weakness.

      This is a White country, Jeff, and, before you go to thinking it is not, just imagine what would happen to it if all the White People disappeared tomorrow, or even, anytime in the next several years.

      Just imagine that.

  13. @Jeff..

    “I do think America is done. It’s too big, too divided, too bitter. It has a literally treasonous media whom should be locked up and forced out of business for treason and yet these devils prosper. ”

    It is ‘done’, however, Dear Jeff, if by that you mean that it will continue on as you have known it.

    On the other hand, those things which are not organization are not necessarily ‘done’, just currently labouring under an eclipse.

    In the decades leading up to this moment we have been through the worst, because things were being taken down, that ought never have been taken down, while most did not care to notice.

    That period is over now, and what remains is the beginning of a new beginning.

    That’ s the good news – it can only get better from here, because the new status quo is failing, and, fortunately, seen as a failure.

    • Thanks for the above comments. By done I mean we have reached a very different era. This disgusting black worship that is forced on us is now everywhere. Thanks to excessive capitalism, we now have uber rich leftists literally controlling what can be said. Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, etc. literally control what White people say. Blacks, browns and self hating Whites get to say what they wish all day long. How many pro White people have been tossed from social media? Countless. How many pro Blacks have been tossed? Few….unless that black is ragging on jews. Then it’s Oyyy veeyy, hit the block button on the schvartze!

      Never thought I would see countless statues taken down by White retards doing their best to be pets to black people. These same Whites say nothing of the 60 year black on White crime streak or how blacks radically increase your taxes and wreck schools.

      This is why we get never ending movies and other bs on ” integration” from a 1965 viewpoint. Gee, how about an update of the bombed out ÷@% holes it created? Jew producers and goy pets? We are waiting for such films and documentaries.

      How can anyone have hope for a country that literally lets the third world pour in here and expect it to hold up? Goofy Republitards speaking of blacks in the year 3058 voting Republican or those Hispanics have “natural conservative values”. Oh si senor. Then the election comes and Whites as usual are the ones who do the heavy lifting for Republitards.

      Life is short. For some of us here it will be shockingly short. Why would one not consider a move to some place that is far more pro White? Or even a place money can go further.

      I do think some of Americas decline is money related. In too many cities and burbs it has become astronomically expensive just to live. Compare it to not too terribly long ago and the prices are shocking. Then throw in the cost of college so average kids can do average things at a not so average cost.

      I watch those real estate shows on tv. You literally see houses being sold for 10, 20 or 40 million dollars. I mean who is buying this? Certainly not your carpenters, police officers, emt, pharmacists, etc. In many cases foreign buyers are buying in which they are driving up housing costs terribly.

      I love America and yes, it’s still better than most. But we let too many devils in the door. Diversity is not a strength but rather a ball breaking weakness. It is inherently anti White.

      You want America back? Stop sucking up to blacks and the jews that run too much of this country have to be called out in the open. We need to go back to 250 k immigrants per year with many being White instead of an 85% or so non White immigration system. It’s amazing this was allowed. Also, Dear God, how do we still allow welfare people to plop out so many kids without sterilization? Talk about killing your country.

      Sooo, who can blame folks for looking at an Eastern Europe or Russia to live? Or similar places to live? We all die and at least in this life we are gone forever. Anyone 40 and over with no sense of urgency of time is living in a fantasy world. Do you want to waste it talking about Tyrone in 10 years committing another crime or jewish media being insidious with nothing done about it?

      • @Jeff…

        Thank you, too for your comments, as well, Sir.

        Yes, life is short, which is why my wife and I put a serious effort into the Hungarian language every day.

        Though we know the future not, one thing we do know – we are already uncomfortable enough here, like strangers in our own land, and, that so, we will not stay if it gets worse, which, in all likelihood, it very well could.

        Better to feel at home in a strange land, than like strangers in our own homeland.

        Life is short, particular for those of us who are getting up there.

        We realize that history moves at a pace that oft, at a glacial pace, is at odds with our lifespan.

        In this I am reminded of all the Russians that had to flee here, or to France, a century ago, they who never again saw their homeland, or, if they did, they died soon thereafter – courtesy of the NKVD.

        Whether we support Trump or not, it is hard to see that he has done anything to change the basic underlying direction of the country.

        Even if he would venture such a thing, I am not even sure that he is sufficiently to comprehend the full ramifications of where we are.

        Oh, well … history will help him out.

        In the meantime, we study Hungarian.

        • Good going , Ivan. Budapest looks outstanding as I am sure much of the rest of the country is. One just has to look at the countless you tube travel videos on various countries. It really gives you a feel for a place before you go there or just to keep up when not there. Watching you tube on roku tv’s is truly an enjoyment since many apps. are built into it and you get the comfortable tv screen view.

          Let’s just say it’s always good to have a plan B…..and C! It seems like you know the deal. Be well.

1 Trackback / Pingback

  1. The Rise of Modernism – Occidental Dissent

Comments are closed.