From Patriotic Alternative.
The word kosher could not be more aptly applied than to the latest attempt at a right-wing political vehicle — National Conservatism.
National Conservatism, an organisation headed by Israeli Yoram Hazony, recently held a conference in the UK featuring some Conservative big-hitters such as Suella Braverman, Michael Gove and Douglas Murray. The organisation presents itself as the nationalist wing of Conservatism, offering to tackle head-on the issues of mass immigration, cost of living and the “woke” cultural revolution. It talks about national borders, history and heritage — about teaching young Brits to be proud of their country and culture.
As the saying goes: if it sounds too good to be true, it probably is.
National Conservatism is an attempt to head-off a genuine race-conscious White nationalist movement in the West. The powers-that-be know that as their plan for White replacement in Europe and America gathers pace, a nationalist push-back will inevitably arise in response. National Conservatism is a contrived pseudo-nationalist/populist front organisation designed to corral those opposed to mass immigration and LGBT+ degeneracy into a political cul-de-sac. Its primary directive is to embed Zionist neo-Conservatism into a right-wing dissident populist movement which is purposefully set up to fail.
Its core weapon is rhetorical — its spokesmen pitch their attacks to appeal to the disgruntled Daily Telegraph and Daily Mail readers of middle England who just want an end to the madness destroying their beloved Britain. Of the key rhetorical tactics there are three that stand out.
Ignoring the real enemy
The first is the maintenance of what could be called the kosher dialectic. This involves the establishing of nebulous strawman political enemies that can be rhetorically attacked while the real enemy is left untouched. In the case of National Conservatism these enemies are “the Left”, “the woke mob” or “Marxists”. This becomes clear from the group’s speeches and writings — Toby Young talks of his “dispatches from the woke wars” while The Daily Telegraphinvites us to “Meet the Conservatives the Left fears the most”. In the article under that headline, David Frost writes of the National Conservative conference: “If you spend any time on social media…you will have seen that it sent the Left into a frenzy of a quite ludicrous nature. This gathering of conservative intellectuals and politicians left our opponents wailing and gnashing their teeth, with more steam coming out of their ears than the Flying Scotsman at full pelt.”
That after a decade of Conservative government in Britain which has seen a tsunami of immigration, degeneracy and anti-Whiteness we should blame “the Left” is so ludicrous that it leaves one wondering how any serious person could write such a thing. Yet, this unseriousness is part of the trick of National Conservatism. It wants to shoo conservatives into a dumbed-down and ineffectual war-of-words with a non-existent enemy. It wants them in the dark flailing impotently at ghosts while their country is destroyed.
The term “woke” serves this purpose perfectly. “Woke” is a word without a referent, a signifier without a signified. Press someone who uses the word to define it and they tend to struggle. It is this meaningless that makes it so useful — it is a perfect straw-man that conservatives can fulminate against while leaving the real enemy unaffected. It also provides a convenient way for people to critique the current order without touching the third-rail of race. In reality, “woke” means anti-White. A Black actress playing an English queen isn’t “woke”, it’s White replacement.
Avoiding mention of race
This brings us to the second rhetorical tactic of National Conservatism: the elision of race. Of all the talk of British history, British values and British heritage there remains a critical lack of definition.
Within this discourse the identity of British people is left deliberately vague. One imagines that on the list of verboten words that Yoram Hazony hands out to his National Conservatism spokesmen, the term “White” is at the top (in bold).
You will rarely hear one of these spokesmen utter the word “White” in the context of British people. In fact they might even equivocate over the colour of snow given how assiduously the term is avoided. This avoidance of racial issues exposes National Conservatism as the hollow vessel that it is.
This deliberate omission of race in reference to Britain and British people was evident in the speeches given by both Hazony and Murray. The former was effusive in his praise for Britain and its history, even drawing parallels with Greek civilisation. Hazony decries the liberal notion that society can be formed from individuals with no connection to the land. He insists that nations need borders and traditions, that its people need to feel a sense of duty and responsibility to protect and pass on their heritage. British people, he opines, have lost the thread of what Britain is — the nation needs to be returned to the centre of our cultural existence.
All well and good. But what Hazony does not attempt to do is to specify exactly who a British person is. At no stage does he allude to the indigenous British — the Anglo-Saxon and Celtic peoples who are the founding stock of the nation. One can only assume that as a Britain he has in mind anyone with a British passport.
Douglas Murray is more explicit in his race denial. It would seem strange that at a purportedly nationalist conference a speaker would disavow one of the most successful nationalist movements in history — German National Socialism — but that’s exactly what Murray does. According to Murray, the National Socialist German Workers’ Party, elected to power in the 1930s, proved how “nationalism can go wrong.” He does not elucidate further but one can assume he means this was a nationalism based on race and therefore deficient. It was a European nationalism which had the interests of European people and their culture at its centre. For Murray and his ilk this type of thing just won’t do. Like Hazony, Murray talks in glowing terms about love of country, family, culture and inheritance. These things are important but without a grounding in the biological they are simply meaningless.
The third rhetorical tactic of National Conservatism is to be a Trojan Horse for Zionism and the myths of the current Judeo-liberalist order. National Conservatism wishes to give the appearance of a dissident movement challenging the incumbent political order while surreptitiously affirming the very same presuppositions of that order. Rhetorically, this is achieved more through what goes unsaid than what is stated explicitly. However, it appears that historian David Starkey didn’t get the memo.
In his conference speech, Starkey argued that the Left’s Black Lives Matter movement is not about advocating for Black people but is instead a weapon aimed at bringing about the destruction of European culture. Starkey spoke of the Left’s “determination is to replace the Holocaust with slavery. In other words, this is why Jews are under such attack from the Left, there’s jealousy, fundamentally. There is jealously of the moral primacy of the Holocaust and a determination to replace it with slavery.”
Starkey claimed that the agenda of Black Lives Matter was “to do exactly what was done to German culture because of Nazism and the Holocaust” in an attempt to “[destroy] the entire legitimacy of the Western political and cultural tradition.
Starkey’s comments confirm the White Nationalist position on the primacy of the Holocaust mythology in the post-WWII liberal order. Following the Allied victory over Germany in 1945, the Holocaust myth has slowly displaced Christianity as the primary source of European morality. This has served various purposes for the Jewish elite which reached the apex of its power in the 1960s. One of these purposes was explained in detail by Norman Finkelstein in his book The Holocaust Industry. International Zionist organisations have used the Holocaust to expropriate billions of dollars in reparations from countries such as Switzerland.
Perhaps more important than money, though, is the role that the Holocaust plays in the de-Nazification of Germans and European people generally. The primary motive for indoctrinating White schoolchildren with Holocaust propaganda is to instill a sense of guilt — that it was their people who committed mankind’s greatest atrocity, the industrial murder of six million Jews in the gas chambers of Auschwitz. Any semblance of White unity, of White people working together as a race to better themselves (and others) is seen as a sin greater than any proscribed in scripture.
Starkey is obviously correct regarding the “moral primacy of the Holocaust” in post-war Western culture. It could well be that as interest in (and belief in) the Holocaust fades among younger generations, elites wish to replace it with the myth of slavery. This seems unlikely, however, as slavery guilt centres Black people as the primary victims while the Holocaust obviously centres Jews. That Jews would wish to undermine their own status as victims par excellence seems questionable at best.
So, this is the so-called nationalism that is going to save the West. Forgive us if we remain less than impressed.
Race is the basis of true nationalism
When speaking of nationalism in the European context let us make things crystal clear. The only serious political groups who represent genuine nationalism are Patriotic Alternative in the UK and The National Justice Party in the US. The nationalism of these groups is pro-White. We insist that European people have a right to remain a supermajority in our indigenous homelands and the homelands we founded. We assert the rights of White people to exist and for the rights of our children to inherit the culture that our forefathers fought and died for. We assert the rights of White people not to be ruled over by hostile elites who seek to undermine the European spirit through a mythological complex of White guilt.
While asserting the rights of White people we seek to respect the dignity of other races and work together, although separately, towards the betterment of all. Multiculturalism and multiracialism are rejected. Mass immigration in Europe should be stopped and peacefully and lawfully reversed with due respect to human dignity.
National Conservatism does not represent a nationalist political vehicle. It is simply the political status-quo wearing a Superman costume. Yet, instead of the famous “S” emblazoned on the front, there is a star of David. Those involved in this fake opposition like to use the abbreviated form “NatCon”. A con it most certainly is.
From Patriotic Alternative.