The White Man has sinned, greatly;
Whitey will pay for it, dearly — has already started paying;
the solution to his suffering can only come through a moral reformation.
This almost everyone agrees upon —
though many will explicitly deride such unholy words
and instead use a completely different vocabulary to say the exact same thing.
The more interesting disagreement though is not about what words to use to say it,
but about what is the nature of this Sin,
and what reformation will bring moral regeneration
rather than further degeneration.
Indeed, this disagreement is not innocent at all, but the crux of the issue:
the White Man's Sin is the opposite of what the all-too-influential
Evil Preachers say it is (the worst amongst them being White Men),
and is actually exactly what they propose more of as a solution.
Indeed, that's how this Sin works: having embraced an ideology of Evil,
Whitey ever commits more sins as alleged solutions to his problems,
only to accumulate more of this spiritual debt that is already crushing him,
and will do far worse to his descendants.
But how do you tell good from evil?
Socialists will typically claim that White Man's Great Sins
were Imperialism, Colonization, Slavery, Racism
and are still Individualism, Capitalism, Consumership.
His Sins were only partly redeemed by granting Independence to his former colonies
and welcoming in his midst large masses of their former inhabitants.
He must atone by apologizing for his past criminal hubris,
forever paying blutgeld to these people,
by dissolving his race into theirs through miscegenation,
but also embracing the world collective, abandoning the race for profits,
and scaling down any consumption.
Unhappily, will mourn socialists, "we" are domineered by a reigning ideology,
the ideology of the free-market, whichever its current name;
all social ailments can be traced to these economic freedoms that still exist,
and the evil people who defend these freedoms.
Deep down, socialists have a deep fear and hate of Man and his corruption,
and somehow want to create a New Man, by hook or crook.
They always call for "More Democracy", which is a code word
for more power to them supermen who claim to embody "Democracy".
As a libertarian, I will praise Individualism, Capitalism and Consumership as virtues, not vices;
I will denounce the mass-murder and ruin unleashed by Collectivism and Socialism;
I will point out that Consumership is nothing but individuals
empowered to choose how to spend their own money,
and that the alternatives are the evil and stupidity of protectionism and central planning.
But that's not what I will discuss today.
I'll instead speak as a reactionary.
And as a reactionary, I will not only make excuses
for Imperialism, Colonization, Slavery and "Racism",
but I will instead put the blame on
Democracy, De-colonization, Socialism and "Anti-racism".
White Man may have been racist, and that's a vice indeed;
but he has always been and still is much less of a racist than any other Man;
meanwhile, under the name "Anti-racism" hides but the worst of all racisms,
racism directed against the White Man precisely for his virtues.
White Man may have practiced slavery, which is evil,
but he never started it, and on the contrary he is the one
who forcefully abolished it all around the world,
when previously it was almost universally practiced.
White Man's colonization may have been brutal, as is the nature of any government;
yet it was much less tyrannical and less corrupt
than both what preceded it and what followed it;
it also introduced most of the world to modern medicine, industry, agriculture,
not to speak of literacy, freedom of thought, freedom of religion, freedom of press,
and an explosion of music, literature and others arts...
a period of unprecedented material prosperity and intellectual blossoming and moral progress,
with an according multiplication of the population.
Certainly, the conquest itself was violent, and
included many war crimes, and even a few genocides,
but not more so than preceding or subsequent conquests by "colored" conquerors
— these sins are in no way specific to Whitey.
As for Imperialism, the problem was more a lack of it than too much of it:
denying the conquered formal citizenship of the Empire albeit second-class,
failing to coopt the local elites into first-class citizenship like Rome once did,
and worst of all, maintaining and spreading the deadly disease of an ideology
that is obviously antithetic to Empire: Democracy.
As an ideology, "Democracy" is the belief that the world should be divided
in "nations" each to be ruled in an egalitarian way,
while excluding non-nationals from power — in other words, National Socialism.
"Democracy" is the belief in the all-importance that peoples of the world
should rather be ruled by a mass-murderous corrupt tyrant born a few hundred miles away,
than by an honest officer born a few thousand miles away — Nationalism.
"Democracy" is the belief that Political Power,
the power to unaccountably kill and destroy,
should be granted based on a popularity contest — Demagoguery.
"Democracy" is the belief that through the Mystery of Democratic Election,
ballots are transubstantiated into the almighty Will Of The People — Political Mysticism.
"Democracy" is the belief that as long as they do follow the democratic rites
and act through "legislation", the State and its bureaucracy embody "us",
and are therefore axiomatically good and
entitled to arbitrary power on all and everything that concerns "us" — Totalitarianism.
"Democracy" is the belief that sovereignty is collectively being able
to sway power every so many years between two wings of a massive monopoly Establishment
that will spend half of what they make,
whereas being each able to individually choose how to spend all of what one makes at all times
is dependency to "private" therefore "evil" interests — Collectivism.
"Democracy" is the belief that merely being born grants you rights upon everyone else,
so that the careless r-strategists who reproduce faster and create nothing
shall feed upon the careful K-strategists who prefer to create everything
and are careful not to over-reproduce — Ochlocracy.
"Democracy" is the belief that a majority can impose its culture and rulers upon the minority,
with the consequence that ethnic war and ethnic cleansing are
the only way to avoid being imposed some other group's way of life and corrupt leaders
"Democracy" is the belief that private individuals may only do meaningless discriminations,
and only government officials may make meaningful discriminations,
and set an artificial standard and calling following it "no discrimination" — Bureaucracy.
"Democracy" is all these beliefs and many more dysfunctional beliefs.
But at heart, Democracy is not a rational idea or a clear theory that can be argued,
though some have tried, and the result is the many variants of Socialism.
At heart, Democracy is a visceral emotion: the identification of the slave to the master,
provided that the master is mediocre enough not to appear better than the masses.
This ideology of Democracy inspired a World War to make the world "safe" for it,
resulting in tens of millions of dead people.
After it won this war, this ideology of "Democracy" justified democides
by the national socialists of Russia and Germany,
who precipitated another World War,
as well as by those of China, Cambodia, etc.
It has fueled and keeps fueling to this day many religious conflicts and ethnic cleansings.
It has led Whitey to leave his former colonies in the hands of mass-murderers
that he has then repeatedly funded and bailed out
as their tyranny drove their countries back into poverty.
It has justified a reverse colonization, that instead of bringing Civilization
to formerly barbaric parts of the world,
brings barbarianism to formerly civilized parts of the world.
It is the foundation for massive plunder of producers by governments all around the world,
which results in financing eternal wars,
the systematic grooming of a large underclass of idle parasites and criminals,
a huge brake to progress and unprecedented destruction of wealth.
It is the system that forever ensures that power will be in the hands of
sociopathic narcissists competitively selected for being the very best liars,
and of a class of completely unmovable bureaucrats
who worship arbitrary power with no risk for themselves
and compete for the greatest impact while protecting each other
in the context of utter unaccountability.
In summary, the White Man's Sin is having shrugged off the White Man's Burden,
having dropped the torch of Civilization,
having forsaken his wards into the claws of brutal monsters,
while having greeted another kind of psychopaths as his own rulers.
What more, the White Man's Great Sin is the root cause to all this evil:
to have abandoned the very belief in Civilization,
and embraced the belief in Democracy, this ideology of De-Civilization,
often formalized into variants of Socialism.
In other words, White Man's First Sin was to violate the First Commandment,
without which all other commandments fall short:
Thy Shall Not Worship a False God.
who are but the mindless authoritarian defenders of socialists long past,
reactionaries do not believe that there was any point in time at which White Man
used to perfectly worship the One True God.
They certainly do not defer to corrupt religious "authorities"
to tell them what God Commanded and how to interpret it
(and once again, they do not care for the words used to say that as much as
for the quintessential concepts denoted).
But reactionaries believe
that together with the evils of the militaristic Ancien Régime,
some essential wisdom about the nature of Society has been slowly
but surely destroyed along Man's descent into Democracy.
This descent led to a Great Fall, the most spectacular symptom of which was WWI
and its orgy of mass-murder, that also lead to the Russian Revolution
and paved the way to German National Socialism.
But before that, Whitey had made pretty good attempts at championing Civilization,
taking it so much further than it had ever been;
he was never perfect, but at least he was trying, and kept improving.
Not only that, he was proud of succeeding better than others,
and of sharing his success (indeed sometimes using unjustified overeager force,
though force was often justified, too).
He was not ashamed to exist at all, as he is now.
He recognized that not all religions, ideologies or economic systems are equal,
and was proud to argue at length which is best and how to make it even better.
He hadn't yet fallen into relativism and cowered to political correctness,
and passively accepted an ideology that claims it isn't one
yet is uniformly spread by a diffuse Establishment.
He was mistakenly hoping to use Democracy as a means
to ward off the evils of past Tyranny and achieve Liberty;
but at least he hadn't yet raised it
into an Idol at whose feet everyone on Earth must kowtow.
His bureaucracies hadn't metastatized yet, and were still somewhat capable
of defending a rule of law that wasn't all self-serving tribalism and corruption —
though Protectionism and other forms of systemic graft were all too present.
Reactionaries understand that Civilization is not a point that you reach,
but a process that you keep pushing forward as best you can — or fail to —
starting from as advanced a point as you can find.
Thus, if you're civilized, your predecessors will look barbaric in comparison;
and those you consider your predecessors aren't necessarily your direct ancestors,
but whoever was carrying the torch of Civilization, anywhere throughout the world.
Now since by definition you started from where the most civilized people left off,
these predecessors were themselves ahead of other people around them at their time.
Conversely your own successors will look back at you with slight discuss,
for you'll look barbaric in comparison to them.
If all the above paragraph is not the case,
you are not actually partaking in Civilization —
you're a barbarian, or worse, an agent of De-Civilization.
In particular, if you only consider as predecessors in Civilization your ancestors, or an arbitrary group of people that includes them, you're doing it wrong. (Similarly, if the only people susceptible
to imitate your peculiarities are your descendants,
you're definitely not civilized.)
Conversely if you fail to include any of them, either you're doing it wrong,
or they were all barbarians indeed.
And there's no shame to be had in this latter alternative,
any more than pride to be found in the luck of being born
within a more advanced civilization —
pride is to be found only in the stars to which we fly,
not in the mud from which we take off, and we all take off from mud.
What have you done to advance Civilization?
Civilization is thus relative in space and in time,
and depends on what you know or can learn from other people around you.
Of course, Civilization is not monodimensional;
thus its progress is seldom uniform:
industry, science, and literacy could bring about the end of the ancien regime,
great material well-being, moral progress
as man was elevated above crass survival,
and ended many old superstitions and bigoted prejudices;
yet in other ways, there has been ideological and political regress
that inspired orgies of mega-murders,
whereby nations formerly at the outposts of Civilization reverted to barbarianism.
Mesopotamia conquered by the Arabs or the Mongols,
the USA descending into "Civil War",
Europe destroying itself during its Great War and its ripple conflicts,
so many countries falling into communism, Yugoslavia exploding,
Rhodesia becoming Zimbabwe, etc., are spectacular symptoms of De-Civilization.
Civilization is often but a thin veneer,
and though the average layer of it can be quite thick and getting thicker,
that mightn't matter much if there's a weak spot where it's getting thinner,
and that's where it cracks and all the rest shatters or peels off.
The virtues of Civilization have to be cultivated in
the proper priority order:
Survival comes before Victory, that comes before Truth, that comes before Generosity;
trying it in a different order just doesn't work.
Reactionaries understand that Civilization
is not a Golden Age in the past as fantasized by conservatives;
it is not a cinematic of progress mystically brought about through forceful purposeful struggle
as propagandized by progressives;
it is a fragile dynamic process of social construction, of capital accumulation, of undesigned evolution,
that requires conscious cultivation and protection
from the hordes of barbarians, conservatives and progressives who bring about De-Civilization.
Certainly, the White Man at his apex was right to be suspicious
of civilizations that had proven their moral weakness or their intellectual retardation,
and to overall look down on his conquered.
But he was wrong to wholly reject anything they could bring:
he was wrong to fail to recognize as equals
those of the conquered who had embraced civilization
and could prove they were indeed capable of furthering it;
he was wrong to fail to use their insight to criticize and improve his own ideologies;
he was thus wrong to fail to embrace the elites of his colonies —
to the point that these elites eventually preferred to band against him.
This race protectionism was indeed an instrumental part
of the downfall of his Empires;
his eventual attempts at fixing it came too late,
after he had succumbed to Democracy in two self-destructing World Wars
and thus proven his own weakness.
But this failure was nothing compared to what he did to his wards' minds:
in a war between his own old religions, and a new, worse one, into which he was falling,
he failed to propose any articulate ideal to the conquered,
so they may dispel their wrong beliefs and embrace something positive.
Instead he planted into their minds the seed of a Great Evil —
the belief in Democracy, and its acute form, Socialism.
The Bloody Order of Empire thus gave way to the Even Bloodier Chaos of Democracy.
Democracy will only get worse, until its evil is fully unraveled everywhere
into Socialism, that after it has fully ravaged a country
leaves place to barbarianism and religious superstition.
If you want to see where Socialism is taking Europe,
look at Venezuela, Cuba, Zimbabwe.
Until they have completely ruined the respective countries they are farming,
various Democratic Establishments will remain solidly in place,
thanks to their propaganda machines, which these days are decentralized and efficient;
they are not trying to sell anything,
since people have already bought Democracy — an easy sell.
The point of propaganda now is to prevent any change of mind,
to make it impossible for the cattle to even think that there is any alternative,
to make any opposition as unthinkable by casting dissidents as madmen,
the proper political word for which currently is "extremists".
Therefore, there is no ideology
and it's not called "Democracy" and certainly not "Socialism";
all the beliefs formerly associated to a thus-named ideology
are just being "normal"; they are acknowledging the "obvious".
But perhaps worse than the material ruin and the intellectual oppression,
is the effect that this Democratic Socialism has on the soul of its victims:
it denies any individual accomplishment outside of the State,
which only distinguishes but few politically-designated heroes;
instead it maintains its victims in dependence, and deprives them from any meaning to their lives —
ultimately, it only offers meaning to the tormentors who live as professional parasites
and relish in they success at preying upon others;
as to the masses of its victims, it offers but blind obedience, self-sacrifice,
crass materialism, and petty insignificant selfish choices.
The escape will not happen through Politics.
There is no way out but up.
The race is on between Technological Progress and Political Power and its Democratic Juggernaut.
Technology is the only hope for Humanity to escape the death trap of Democracy,
whether by vastly lowering time-preference by greatly extending longevity,
by creating a new Imperial race of AIs,
by dramatically displacing military equilibrium to make for much smaller countries,
by artifically raising the intelligence of humans so they can understand the Evil of Democracy,
by enabling individuals to escape national surveillance,
by somehow spreading a message of actual moral reformation,
or by some other great change.
Of course, the Democratic overlords are wary of this jeopardy to their Power,
and do their darned best to stay on top of Technology and to control its uses.
This Grand Struggle is happening before your eyes.
You get to pick what you think is Good and what you think is Evil,
and to act accordingly.
But be careful what you pick — depending on your choice,
you may spend your life working toward redemption, or toward damnation.
Ideas have consequences.
PS: Let it be clear that collective responsibility doesn't exist, and that Civilization consists precisely in better recognizing individual liberty and individual responsibility — which when properly matched together constitute private property. Talking about White Man the way I did way is an aggregate that has no moral value — but I do it precisely to show the racial collectivists that their anti-white racism, "anti-racism" as they may dub it, is unfounded on their own racial collectivist grounds. Racism, Slavery, Colonization, Imperialism are evil — but they are not the worst evil, and do not justify a double-standard; and they can still be better than the opposite stance; a yet better one requires to reject this dichotomy and look at the essence of what matters: individual actions. People are not to be blamed because the ancestors of some people with a similar color of skin did something wrong — a random black US slave descendant has infinitely more of the DNA of a slave-owner than any white descendant of a XXth european immigrants to the US. Miscegenation is neither good nor evil (hey, I'm a métis myself, as such rejected by racists on both sides) — most importantly, it's none of your damn business, only that of the individual parents who may decide to have or not have (and raise) such kids. Also importantly, State-supported "eugenics", whether towards alleged race purity, or desired race dilution, is actually dysgenic as well as criminal. Similarly, I'm a migrant and a proponent of freedom of movement for all honest people. But government-enforced migration policies, whether for or against migration (im- or e-), is also evil and counterproductive, and ultimately dysgenic. It's sad that the contents of this post-scriptum isn't obvious and that I have to write it at all — and one more symptom of De-Civilization. As for the name "reactionary"? Well, my mother often says that when she's confronted with imbecility, she can but react ("Quand je suis face à la bêtise, je ne peux que réagir"). But it took me a long time to see things with her eyes, and I have to thank Mencius Moldbug for a lot of it.