It sounds perverse to our modern ears, but for centuries, Europe’s diversity was truly a source of strength. The competition between the kingdoms that might have otherwise united pushed our people to never before seen heights of achievements in all realms and all regions. Rivalry between European powers helped drive our people to the open seas to chart and discover the entire globe, and when they reached hostile lands, the experiences gained from internecine conflicts in Europa gave our people the edge to triumph over the Aztecs, Chinese, and a number of other polities with delusions of grandeur. However, as the rest of the world began to catch up with Europe – helped in no small part by universalizing political and economic ideologies – it became imperative for the continent to come together in order to safeguard for their progeny the gains that White men had fought and died for.
However, each time that Europe seemed to be on the verge of uniting, forces from within or without conspired to prevent the amalgamation of European peoples into a single body. If such a combination could have been achieved, in one of a variety of forms, then Europe would have remained the undisputed master of the world. Regardless of the merits of each of their respective visions, every time that a Charlemagne, Ferdinand II, Napoleon, or Adolf Hitler attempted to forge a unified Europe, divisions between the people of the continent were exploited and widened in order to doom the dream of unity. Even the milquetoast European Union that we have today is encumbered by conflicts. Ultimately, it remains little more than a neoliberal wolf in sheep’s clothing designed to poison the well of true European unity by virtue of it being a counterfeit attempt at realizing the concept. A united Europe could still be achieved, but the road to such a goal is much longer and harder than that previously tread by those great men who lived in a time where European identity was taken for granted.
While saving our people and their homelands is our goal, I wish to discuss a step we must take earlier on our journey. Unity does not begin at the level of nation-states, it must be engendered closer to home first. Anyone who has followed the development of White advocacy in the United States with even a cursory glance must conclude that our movement has a serious issue when it comes to unity. I am here not to propose a twenty-five point program or evangelize for my particular blend of White Nationalism. Instead, what I am offering is a mindset that I have adopted and I encourage all of my kinsmen to consider.
Americans have been beset on all sides by individualist propaganda, indoctrinated with the talking points of how brave it is to go against the crowd and the dangers that majority rule poses to minority rights. You all should be familiar with the much-maligned concept of a “herd mentality”, of going along with the crowd due to peer pressure. The decisions of the masses, we are told, are irrational, and that only by standing up and being individualistic “critical thinkers”, can we separate ourselves from the great mass of unwashed “sheeple”.
Due to the way that our beliefs radically challenge the prevailing orthodoxy of our current anti-White system, our movement has primarily attracted a bedrock of men who are not afraid to go against the grain because they know that the truth is independent of what the masses and their handlers believe. A consequence of this highly individual cohort, however, is that this individualism does not stop at criticizing jewish lies and elite malfeasance. Everybody seems to have their own idea about how best to save the White race, and so much effort and energy is spent on debating the finer points of historical conflicts, the level of state involvement in the economy of the future ethnostate, or the industrial revolution. A good foundation is important to building our future, but it is a waste of valuable time and brainpower to try and persuade every White Nationalist of the validity of a specific set of policy proposals. For every racially-aware White that you just convinced of your vision, five more just woke up to our demographic destruction and each of them have their own ideas on what total Aryan victory looks like.
Although it is certainly a start, I am not convinced that it is enough to simply adopt a few core principles and try and hold people to them. A “big tent” strategy of letting everyone in risks subversion and watering down of our message by hostile or incompetent people. We saw this happen with support for Donald Trump and working with the “alt-lite”. When you gaze into the Republican Party, the Republican Party also gazes into you. Instead, I believe that we can draw a lesson from history, namely from the strategies of two of the greatest threats that Europe ever faced: Atilla the Hun and Genghis Khan.
Atilla and the Huns that he led were so fearsome a foe for the Roman Empire that many believed that they were the horsemen of the apocalypse predicted in the Book of Revelations. Wielding a rusty sword that he claimed belonged to the Roman god Mars, Atilla was an inspiring leader for his people and a terrible foe for their enemies. His reputation was such that the Huns found that the mere threat of an attack was enough for a village or town to grant them all of the plunder that the horde wanted in order to stave off an all-out attack.
When Genghis Khan emerged from the wide frontiers of the East centuries later and swept across Europe to bring sections of Eastern Europe and Russia under his control, he was expanding on his holdings that had already been conquered by marauding Mongol horsemen in China and Central Asia. For centuries, the people on Europe’s Eastern frontier were made painfully aware of the threat posed by these Asiatic invaders. Even when Russia threw off their yoke, the lingering effects of the Mongol occupation put Russia on a dramatically different track than the rest of Europe and left a lingering colony of Tartars that waged war against Europeans from their headquarters in area around the Crimean Peninsula.
Both of these men and their followers were supposedly more backwards than the empires that they attacked and toppled. The Romans and the Chinese thought that they had nothing to fear from their respective bands of nomadic horsemen, but their complacency was based on a fundamental misunderstanding of power. Power was not, as these decadent empires believed, rooted solely in material wealth and culture. Unity held a power all its own, and these divided empires failed to rally in the face of this threat and proved surprisingly fragile to the advance of a determined and coordinated foe.
The unity of the Huns and the Mongols was not the result of a centralized authority that enforced a one-size-fits-all set of tactics and beliefs. Instead, what happened was that the clans that these horsemen were divided into had their own leaders and practices. As one clan began to amass power, other Huns or Mongols did not look to undermine their success or form coalitions against it. Rather, the other clans rallied to the banner of the most capable group and the most charismatic leader and this created a cascading effect that brought more and more clans into the fold until the combined mass of men on horseback became a horde, a mass of warriors that ravaged whatever foes were unlucky enough to find themselves in their path.
The Huns and the Mongols were a disparate people, hard to totally defeat because of their decentralized way of life, but also well aware of their shared culture and competency. When they formed around a strong core, they expanded rapidly and subsumed their individual clan ambitions in the pursuit of the greater victory that would only be achieved by a united horde. This is the idea that I believe our movement can learn from.
We have many groups, many approaches to the question of saving the White race. Such a variety of opinions is proof of how much thought has been given to the issue of preserving our people, and is admirable for that reason. But when it is no longer ink being spilled but blood, then we cannot let our disunity be a tool for our enemies. The White man is my brother, even if he errs. The Arabs have a proverb, “I, against my brothers. I and my brothers against my cousins. I and my brothers and my cousins against the world.” Our differences are just those, ours, to debate, to decide. To the outside world, we should present a united front. I may have a different opinion on the perfect ethnostate than you, but we should both be in total agreement that it is a debate that neither asks for nor tolerates any input from our racial enemies.
Such a similar approach was also employed by German nationalists in the years leading up to the National Socialists taking power. (Since we are not pillaging raiders on horseback, this may be the example that resonates more, but “Horde Mentality” was too good of a title to pass up.)
All manner of organizations were formed in the rump German state out of groups of students, aristocrats, workers, and veterans of World War I and the Communist revolutions inflicted on Germany. Some of them were monarchists in nature, while others were republican, and they disagreed widely on matters of economics, foreign policy, the jewish question, and more. What united these groups was their love of Germany and their opposition to the Bolshevik threat that lingered in Germany. In street brawls between nationalists and Communists, there was little care given to whether the man next to you thought that the German flag should be red, black, and yellow or red, black, and white. Eventually, the National Socialist German Workers’ Party emerged as the clear leader of the broader nationalist movement with the charismatic leadership of Adolf Hitler and the strategy employed by the party winning converts. Smaller organizations folded into the larger mass, but they were largely unable to affect the doctrine of this premier party. The contest for legitimacy had been waged on the streets of Germany and in the hearts of her people, and National Socialism had won. In such a way, the nationalists reached a critical mass of numbers and organization necessary to take power in Germany while not diluting the winning playbook with the ideas of failed movements and also-rans. Success grants a legitimacy that cannot be eroded by armchair theoreticians.
I believe that this should be our strategy going forward. I say, let a thousand flowers bloom! Let us create all manner of pro-White organizations, dedicating to subsets or tactics, to building culture, to raising awareness, to kindling the flame of our people to the brightness of our ancestors. But when the time comes and our people are under attack, the debates and the personality contests must be shelved for another time and once a leading light for our people has emerged we must come together as a mighty horde. “We must all hang together,” as Benjamin Franklin put it, “or assuredly we shall all hang separately.”