My response to “The Trouble with Culture War”

This piece is going to be a response to Adam Wallace and his latest post about Argent Templar’s video.

The first thing I think it bears pointing out, is that my views have changed somewhat since I first started writing about the topic a few months ago. The first point I wish to make, is that I do not think there are any steps to be taken that can save most of the white population of the United States and Canada. While Europe is headed for major trouble (really, it’s already there with the invasion from Africa, and Muslim kids laying siege to French police stations), there are still large swathes that will survive. Europe is really the homeland and spiritual center in many senses, and Europe, even today, has an actual identity. There will be bloodshed and suffering, but eventually, perhaps in a couple centuries, Europe will regain a spiritual and moral core, and keep it’s genetics essentially intact. This is something that will happen with or without the cultural help of people such as ourselves. I won’t deny we can perhaps create a slightly better result here, but in the end, with or without us, Europe will live on in some form or another.

None of these conditions hold true in America, especially outside the Southern United States. The fact of the matter is Non Hispanic White Americans are essentially doomed and cannot be saved as a whole. There will be a few pockets, here, there, where they live on as a majority, but they will end up as a tiny minority in a few centuries (at least at this rate). America has no identity besides enlightenment values and capitalism. It has no real roots in the land. Above all, the people in America still live damned well, even by first world standards. If we were to follow Argent’s advice, even if our cultural labor finally paid off in a century or so, it would be too late to save most of white America. Now I agree that artistic labor does work as a metapolitical tool, but when you are starting from almost zero (Or in the case of Canada, totally zero) in terms of heritage and ancient values, it takes too long to get results, and the situation is dire as is. America is almost 40% non white, with NHW’s (Non Hispanic Whites) slated to become a minority before mid century. On top of that, our cities are now burning and suffering a massive crime wave in the aftermath of the Baltimore and Ferguson race riots. Put bluntly, we don’t have a century to achieve our goals.

This addresses my main distancing from the idea of culture war, that in the case of America, it is almost useless as a political tool. However, Adam brought up another angle, and that is that using art for such direct political ends can be considered immoral. Perhaps this is my modern nihilism and cynicism speaking, but if the left has done it for decades, I see no reason why it should not be done on our side. It perhaps can be argued that art deserves to only be a genuine expression of the soul, and that to bend it to political ends makes the world bleak and nasty. I actually wouldn’t disagree, but the world is already awful, and we live in unprecedented times in human history. Perhaps Adam will have a metaphysical take on the morality of using art as a political tool, but for now, that will finish off this post.

Outcast Kaitsar

2 thoughts on “My response to “The Trouble with Culture War”

  1. Your pessimistic views aren’t exactly unfounded, but if I were you, I’d avoid wallowing in them overmuch. In any case, most of what you’re saying isn’t exactly inaccurate save your last paragraph.

    I didn’t say or imply “that using art for such direct political ends can be considered immoral.” I said that any artwork created solely as a reaction against the day-to-politics is without a strong, stable foundation, and is therefore tying itself to a sinking ship. I suggested that art, or any creative endeavor undertaken by members of the alternative Right for political purposes, should base itself upon something stable, irrefutable, inarguable and beyond the possibility of counterattack.

    If political art coming from the alternative Right only exists as a reaction, then what happens once the present epoch ends? Do we then discard it and develop new styles? And what of those new styles? What would they be based upon? If they are based upon a sound foundation, then why don’t we cut-out the middle-step and go straight for a form of artistic expression which is so, instead of a temporary knee-jerk spasm of energy?

    It just isn’t rational to prefer temporary, unstable attacks over a stable, strong, consistent style which survives deconstruction or the other tools. Weakness or strength. It’s a choice we have to make.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s