Tribalism vs Universalism
Few individuals live up to the ideal of universal compassion, but at least the ideal itself used to be largely admirable. A clear sign of collapsing civilization is when tribalism is not only practiced (as it has always been by the vast majority), but actually promoted by reactionary movements as more admirable than universalism.
Certainly Judaism has always preached tribalism against non-Jews, leaving us no honest option but to consider Jews as barbarians. And certainly all humanist (Jewish and Gentile) philosophies have preached tribalism against non-humans, which is why humans in general too can only be considered as barbarians. But whereas Jews tried in the past to prevent non-Jews from reading the Talmud, fearing non-Jews would find the content abhorrent, today more and more Gentiles are reading the Talmud and thinking: “Clever! We need something like this for our own people!” Whereas past humanists admitted their moral callousness compared to universalists, the present trend is for universalists (or even anti-racist humanists) to be ridiculed as oversensitive ‘bleeding hearts’.
It is crucial that tribalism, including but not limited to racism, be put back in its place as the attitude of barbarians (ie. Jews and Gentiles) if revolution is to be positive.
Ignoble Altruism
“Through ignorance, passion and hatred, decisions are taken which, in their injustice and lack of logic, contain the seeds of fresh conflicts.” – Adolf Hitler
The argument in favour of tribalism proposes that the practical function of altruism (and hence the reason it naturally evolved) is to enable cooperation, which results in the cooperating in-group gaining survival advantages over the non-cooperating out-group. It follows that any altruism involving no out-group at all is unnatural, and betrays the very gainfulness of altruism. In order to upkeep this gainfulness, the tribalists tell us, some group must be chosen to fill the role of Goy.
The unhesitating Aryan reaction to such a thesis is that we refuse to be slaves to Nature, therefore merely knowing that tribalism is a product of natural selection does not give it moral validity in our eyes, but only stresses the need for National Socialism to replace natural selection as the primary evolutionary mechanism. We are not Jews, nor are we spiritually content to identify ourselves with humans; we will not tolerate ignoble fitness.
Tribalists living among universalists in a society will indeed end up in all the positions of control, as they will ensure that every position acquired by a member of their own tribe (whether defined by family, ethnicity, class or subculture) never leaves the hands of the tribe thereafter. Does this mean that therefore everyone else should also form tribes and see who is best at being tribal? No, it means that the universalists need to identify the tribalists and get rid of them.
Imagine how ridiculous it would be if Jesus instructed his disciples to become money-changers in order to compete with the Jewish money-changers at usury and hopefully outperform them. Of course he did not do so. He stormed the temple with a whip and drove the money-changers out.
The Big Lie
“The idea that it is possible to divide up the world for all time into states with different rights will always be recognized only by the one side.” – Adolf Hitler
A key lie concering tribalism told by all nationalists, who are just tribalists seeking respectability (note that National Socialists are not nationalists, but folkists), is: “We can be for our own people without being against other people.” In a world of finite resources, it should be obvious why this is absolutely impossible.
The nationalists would have us believe that geographical and political separation is the answer. Yet the nationalist stance on foreign policy after separation is to make decisions based on ”what is good for our own people.” So what happens when resources become insufficient? According to their stance, they will plunder what they need from whomever possesses it, because they have defined their own people as automatically more important than their Goy victims. To see nationalist foreign policy in action, we need look no further than Israeli treatment of Palestinians, or the words of Rabbi Yaacov Perrin: “One million Arabs are not worth one Jewish fingernail.”
“We’re doing what’s good for Israel! What’s the problem?”
It would be delusional and unfair to believe that only Jews are capable of such attitudes, as history is replete with non-Jews behaving in exactly the same way. The oppression of the Native Americans and the Africans by Anglo settlers was no less brutal than that of the Palestinians by Israeli settlers, while the worst massacres committed by Jews against the Ukrainians and the Armenians or the worst tortures masterminded by Jews in communist gulags cannot begin to compare in scale or cruelty with the daily routines of abbatoirs, dairy/egg/fur/silk factories and vivisection labs worldwide, all economically supported by ordinary humans.
Opposition to tribalism is not apathetic pacifism. We understand that conflict is inevitable in the near future; our concern is that the conflict involves morally meaningful sides rather than a bunch of tribes all fighting for the same thing and for the same reason, namely for their own tribe because it is their own tribe. We recommend that the universalists (also known as Aryans) of every ethnicity, religion and nation oppose the tribalists – all tribalists, Gentiles as well as Jews – within all our denominations. While universalists may be outnumbered by tribalists in each separate denomination, we can unite as a folk across denominations in a way that tribalists (by definition) cannot, and as such are not as powerless as we may seem.
Noble Compassion
“Final solution can be effected only by means of a warm-hearted resolve on the part of those who once faced each other as opponents, but whose mutual esteem, based on a recognition of each other’s bravery, could become a bridge leading to the future – a future which must never see any repetition of past sufferings.” – Adolf Hitler
We promote not universal altruism, but universal compassion.
Fundamentally, altruism views others as assets from which additional gain can be derived, be it increasing one’s own gain at their expense (the zero-sum game, played with Goys) or increasing collective gain even at individual expense (the non-zero sum game, played with collaborators). Thus underneath all altruism - including supposedly universal altruism - is nothing more than greed. Compassion, on the other hand, views everyone as slaves to the game itself, regardless of whether they are gaining or losing. Compassion does not, therefore, attempt to help anyone increase their gain (which ultimately further increases their thrall by the game), but instead attempts to provide an alternative to the game in its entirety.
When Jesus threw out the money-changers, he was not trying to give everyone else a better chance to become wealthy.
Related Information
