Paradigmatic Shift: From Pandemic to Pervasive Ecology through Coordinated Ethnonationalism.
Preliminary Note: This article was written before it was evident that the powers that be would use Covid-19 as an excuse to consolidate money unto themselves (as usual), wipe out the White middle class and upwardly mobile, but the argument is still correct from the side of White Nationalism, as to how we’d look for powers in our interests to respond.
Paradigmatic Shift: A paradigmatic shift of epoch world view is emergent with the implicative force of the pandemic.
From Modernity, International Liberalism and Pandemic to Pervasive Ecology Managed through the Coordination of Ethnonationalism’s Paradigmatic Conservatism.
Paradigmatic Conservatism is an idea put forward by Gregory Bateson, endorsing strong national borders which, in turn, allow for broader individual liberty within the nation. He maintained that the prevailing epoch has stupidly reversed that equation – with borders having been allowed to run wild while individual liberties are pegged.
….
A paradigmatic shift in world view is instigated with the global pandemic, from the prevailing liberal internationalist paradigm, to one of paradigmatic conservatism – strong borders which can ideally and practically facilitate a wide breadth of individual liberty within, securing the integrity of the authentic, emergent qualities of our genome.
The global pandemic evinces a long overdue ecological corrective to the modern epoch’s impervious liberalism. Its universalizing reach wielded obliviously over interpersonal and international boundaries, where not naively adopted in the rational blindness of its pseudo objectivity, detached from relative group interests, then disingenuously weaponized by the powers-that-be, buttressing that halo of innocence with suspended disbelief in arbitrary experimentalism for the promise of limitless progress and growth, even if in the hereafter.
Modernity has been a driving extension of the most determinedly evangelical forces of globalization, with that linear belief that change and arbitrary experiment lead necessarily the way of progress, ostensibly warranting the hubris of vulgarly pragmatic narcissism to run impervious rough-shod over indigenous peoples – their destruction by its means, after all, written-off as a mere functional hazard of progress and being where the critique of Modernity gained moral traction/warrant with anthropologists.
There is an irony in this post modern correction, the reflexive effect of the pandemic revealing both our systemic inter-relatedness and thus interdependence on sovereignty, as the inhabitants of earth are shown most clearly how mutually interdependent and thus responsible that we are for the discrete border control and population management that nationalism facilitates.
This shared circumstance that we are all now confronted with along with the national responses of border control and social distancing, confirm the profound importance and the very real possibility of maintaining national borders and social bounds. Functional possibility of border and boundary control that the liberal powers-that-be would undoubtedly like to continue to deny.
And of the culmination of this Modern epoch post World War II, the idealized prohibition of group classification by means of Lockeatine Civil Rights no longer taken under the epoch’s fulmination as a simple mechanism at individual discretion against impediments to individual liberty, forward thinking and progress, but given a potently weaponized form of “Civil Rights” against forecast abuse of social classification by suspect groups, viz., as “racism”, a stunning and stigmatizing concept to wield by even the most crass against those deemed likely to abuse the concept of human taxonomic classification, easily ruining them, Bateson remarked in one of his very last speeches, nevertheless…
“I don’t have to tell you about the tyranny of patterns, that is the rubric under which we meet. What you may not know, is that you have to accept them.”
The rubric of the “tyranny” cited by so called progressives to be sheerly liberated from, of course, is the formal classification of patterns – including human ecologies – while Lockeatine rights, anti-racism and so on, are what is taken for granted as the perfectly innocuous liberation, the remedy to this “tyranny.”
The inevitability of systemic correction inherent in patterns, whether by stasis or homeostasis, is their tyranny.
This long overdue correction to modernity’s Cartesian universalism nevertheless presents the opportunity to move from post hoc reaction against the inevitable stasis – and by reaction against the stasis, we mean the non-deliberate physical and biological responses to corrections coming from outside of the system, sometimes confronting it in the form of disease, such as this virus – to one of social systemic homeostasis, deliberate correctivity: the autonomy of self correction, self corrective systems.
Nationalism, particularly ethnonationalism, structures a systemic world view optimally for homeostasis, i.e., in praxis – the socially self corrective paradigm as it facilitates accountability, coherence, agency and warrant in the management and coordination of human and pervasive ecology.
Whether disciplined by the overseers of homeostasis, or by brute stasis, a paradigmatic shift from Modernity and liberalism is implicated.
This international affliction that we are experiencing and the national responses of border control and social distancing confirm the importance, possibility and reality of maintaining national borders and interpersonal bounds.
As such, it prompts consciousness of a paradigmatic shift from the prevailing internationalist liberal paradigm, to one of paradigmatic conservatism – ethnonationalism.
……
However, the perennial libertarian concern over abuse of state power is vying to reassert itself as the most important rubric.
State measures to control the virus, ranging from shutting down small businesses, to fining people for walks in the park, to tracking-apps monitoring people’s whereabouts through their I-phones, to limiting freedom of travel for ordinary people, are looked upon as liable to lead to further centralization of wealth and power to the anti-ethnonationalist elite, along with a greater capacity and ostensible warrant to clamp down with a police state in their interests – not ours.
Particularly if this concern is upheld as paramount by influential voices who do not experience themselves as having a strong vested interest in ethnonationalism, a temptation especially for those talented enough to nerd their way around (think Styxhexenhammer666) and get their share (for now) despite the growing casualty to our species, personal priorities such as theirs can tap into a broader audience of right wing reactionaries, flatter their “intellectualism”, tickle conspiratorial horror scenarios and maneuver the broad base of our people right back into the laissez faire liberal-sphere – a co-option which would suit the powers that be just fine – the liberal powers that be, who’ve gotten us into this broad wreckage of our human and pervasive ecology, who obviously care even less about us and our concerns for the preservation of our kind and habitat, and would be just fine with seeing us blended away where we do not die-off outright.
Hence, the correction could be diverted through over reaction as the exercise of state power rouses concern of police and surveillance state, whether paranoically imagined or very real, as incipient ethnonationalists certainly have cause to be concerned about that through their experience of censorship and persecution.
However, most of those worried about these possibilities tend to be the same people who do not have the freedom of being grounded in good will; not being ethnonationalists, the people they feel duty bound to see as something like brethren-ends-in-themselves are not, in fact, their people, or do not conceive of themselves as such; and thus, they rather stubbornly cling to their right wing, anti-social security blankets – the socially unaccountable natural fallacy of ceaseless power struggle, or outside of praxis on the other side, outside of nature to an unaccountable sky god or the “magic hand” of the market that would ordain the charlatans who would use state power to oppress them indeed.
Nevertheless, the significance of achieving national autonomy for our people through state sovereignty on our behalf, is so clearly important that how state authority is to be achieved reigns supreme and how to rein-in state authority over potential abuse a detail – an important detail but one which should be far more manageable as we all know, if we are “bowling among ours only.” In fact, issues of potential state abuse, corruption and accountability (particularly keeping accounts requested to a minimum) should be far more manageable trough ethnonationalism and all the more reason for us to take charge.
Putnam’s studies, published in Bowling Alone, indicate that the heterogeneous, proposition nation is at the other extreme with regard to trust facilitation. Thus, we have less to fear from the homogeneously populated state – i.e., ethnonationalism.
And ethnonationalism is most open in the broadest sense as well, as the people are one in the union, from elites, to rank and file, to marginals, accountability is most likely to best serve the interest of all, thus kept to a minimum, let alone going rogue to police and surveillance state.
With that is another silver lining to fear of the police state: try putting yourself in their shoes – what are you going to do with all this data? Where would you begin? Are you afraid that you might be required to get a vaccine in order to travel or move to a nation? Is that a new practice? Haven’t Small Pox and Polio vaccines been required for a century now? But I digress.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Ut elit tellus, luctus nec ullamcorper mattis, pulvinar dapibus leo.
Yes, China has a pernicious social credit system in operation, but that is a function of a narrow elite rigidly in power for their sake, not an ethnonational superstructure. China would have to be broken into several nations to have ethnonstates; as opposed to something more like an empire over-reaching divergent interests, attempting to suppress and control them.
Let us put trust where most people intuitively find trustworthiness, and where the science tells us that people find social and political participation worthwhile regarding state/union organization – if it is ours, in and about the interests of our homogeneous people, it is at very least a trustworthy start.
Further, consider what convulsive, over reaction can bring indeed – the quest for pure warrant, the exception beyond account, ethnosupremacism and genocidal imperialism as opposed to ethnonationalism.
Paul Tillich:
“The existentialist protest against dehumanization and objectification, together with its courage-to-be as oneself, has turned into the most elaborate and oppressive form of collectivism that has appeared in history.”
Although arguments have been put forward that he was speaking of the Soviets, it is actually pretty apparent that Tillich was speaking of the Nazi regime.
Even so, this platform isn’t about preventing self actualization and achievement, but rather looks to make the individual quests more possible by putting them on socially supportable, emergent grounds, facilitating an optimal circularity of needs in quest in order to stabilize them within the union, harmonizing them with homeostasis of the union as well.
This is why social constructionism has been recommended, in order to sensitize us to our human connection and indebtedness in Praxis, which is a fact and a responsibility, a necessary focus particularly for we, the more individualistic peoples of European evolution.
In fact, we are not making things up, out of thin air as weaponized forms of purported social constructionism would bandy.
This international affliction that we are experiencing and the national responses of border control and social distancing confirm the importance and reality of social grouping, and the possibility of maintaining national borders and interpersonal bounds.
As such, it prompts consciousness of a paradigmatic shift from the prevailing internationalist liberal paradigm, to one of paradigmatic conservatism – ethnonationalism.
In fact, in some respects we are experiencing the dark side of self actualization, a modernist story in dire need of social hermeneutic correction (as I have discussed many times), a story told of our individual potential and social boundary transgressing liberty maximized and weaponized against our group interests through the context of America’s civic nationalism; its civil rights weaponized as anti racism against any social classification that would serve European homeostasis facilitated by ethonationalism; thus it is an anti nationalist weapon, decidedly un-ecological but given to us as the rubric under which we function since World War II. Since then, Nazi imperialism and supremacism, its natural fallacy, have been disingenuously labeled nationalism by those antagonistic to our people being due any account, as we would by means of a sufficiently powerful group, the ethnonation, and able thereby to require accounts in return.
To be clear from the start, we are marking a distinction of ethnonationalism from ethnosupremacism, the epistemological blunder, the natural fallacy of Nazism, which was supremacist and imperialist, as Hitler believed state borders were a fiction that were merely enforced by brute force and should be violated by the powerful people, imposing their will to power in accordance with his natural fallacy – this is not nationalism, nor socialism for that matter. His natural fallacy followed a logic of meaning and action beyond (or below, as it were) the accountability and correctivity of the praxis of the social world, to runaway – to destruction. Our aim is the systemic autonomy that the social construction of ethnonationalism facilitates, and preservation of human and other natural species which borders assure, not a race struggle with the aim of annihilating those who do not want be subject, subsumed and eliminated in a battle for supremacy.
Ethnonationalism is the opposite, defending species against supremacism and imperialism.
As opposed to this runaway quest of modernity, clinging to subhuman nature in struggle for supremacy and imperialism, the turn to ethnonationalism wields the power of common interests to cooperate, thus security over anxiety, death, emptiness, meaninglessness, guilt, condemnation, subsuming these existential dreads into the meaningful context of our social capital, its history and future.
The ethnonation gives verifiable structure to the history and systemic breadth that hermeneutics critically affords – the historical narrative of our people, our broad systemic perspective in coherent meaning, contextualizing and transcending mere facticity, beyond duress of betrayal and the natural fallacy of momentary or episodic struggle.
Nationalism, true nationalism, that is to say ethnonationalism, requires a paradigmatic adjustment in the narrative we go by – not to deny the place of self, but to place its relevance within the meaning of a large, but delimited group – the nation (species) and the race (genus) along with its regions being about the largest practical unit of analysis to stave off the abyss of indifference that confronts the limits of our natural parameters.
There is an irony here as the epoch of Modernity is brought to a conclusion, its universal quests, its obliviousness to differences that make a difference, it’s impervious internationalism brings home the interdependent need among the nations for border control to facilitate human and pervasive ecology.
That is, national border control provides the apparatus for population management – the correctability of Praxis, which is approximately synonymous with social systemic homeostasis, the deliberate management of human ecology only practical through the alleged artifice of nationalism and its coordination among ethnonationalsm, without which there will be stasis, brutal stasis such as the virus.
We should have been able to do this before the disaster hit, but liberals…they are just too cool for the rest of us, aren’t they?
Now, you don’t have to look at things that way, you can go back to the blindered perspective of self actualization and the magic hand which you think owes very little to your ethnonation, but I don’t recommend it and I’d have people take a look at people like you when the nation’s people are down on their luck.
Ethnonational management facilitates the establishment of control variables and the biodiversity, the flexibility for an ecology that will best assure our survival and advance.
We are speaking of very real human biodiversity, more horizontal in nature, not the red cape, singularly lateralized Steve Sailer sham of comparative I.Q. that he has the nerve to call “human bio diversity” – the lateralism that you rightfully fear, having power to wield all that modern apparatus and same old narcissistic Abrahamic world view indifferent to the difference of your human ecology as might thrive in a diversity of ethnonationalism.
This international crisis demonstrates how interdependent we are on borders and interpersonal bounds, to protect the ecology of our genome, i.e., on not being forced to be so inextricably enmeshed with one another and not be subject to the coercive social engineering, the artificial halo of sainthood of no account, self righteous, imposed pan mixia to the destruction of ancient genome in this universal, most evangelical religion of modernity – which some would call secularized Abrahamism, a tag of which I could agree.
This world view takes us to a new paradigm from the Judeo/Christian, its enlightenment reaction of Descartes and Locke, to a world view centered existentially through praxis, and not misdirected from that centering by the red cape abuses of the concept by the YKW; rather we hold fast to this paradigm, the social connection of our embedded, emergent groups, race, nation, sub groups, family, and to responsibility, to ourselves in coordination with outgroups for our common interest, manageable by group – the nation being the optimal unit of power to maintain ourselves against out-group antagonism, indifference and brute corrections like the virus.
This international affliction that we are experiencing and the national responses of border control and social distancing confirm the importance and reality of social grouping, and the possibility of maintaining national borders and interpersonal bounds.
As such, it prompts consciousness of a paradigmatic shift from the prevailing internationalist liberal paradigm, to one of paradigmatic conservatism.
The Post Modern, hermeneutic turn, is a turn from the Caresian estrangement of Modernity to a centering in Praxis, our people, which is entirely consonant with ethnonationalism and its coordination with fellow ethnonationals.
The ethnonational state in particular, is an existential entity. That is, it facilitates the re-centering of our Western world view in Praxis – social group – taking us out of Cartesian estrangement, runaway and reaction to brute corrective stasis, to a centraliztion of ethnonationalist social groups, with their capacity to structure systemically corrective homeostasis by means of accountability; which also facilitates coherence, agency and warrant to coordinate with other human ecologies and pervasive ecology.
In this paradigmatic shift we are taking the post modern turn to praxis – the social outlook, the centralization of our world view through our people groups, most powerfully by nation, as opposed to the non-social, i.e. non human modernist reaction to sophistry and its abuses of the social realm, which shuns our capability for interactive, agentive correction and seeks relief from that responsibility by claims of narrow, if not pure warrant at either end of the Cartesian extreme, beyond nature, or below human nature, in natural fallacy – either way, beyond correction, beyond accountability, with impervious claims of objectivity free of interests and accountability, and liable to runaway, to disaster, such as befalls us and has befallen us.
In quarantine of our shut borders and social distancing, we may experience the time to dwell, to dwell in our emergence, among our emergent habitat and folk, to hold fast, maintain and evince our truth.
It is a time to slowly look at our situation in its broad concern, take what we need in essence and give thanks – thankian.
This anti Cartesianism, call it social constructionism as you should, is about focusing attention on our interrelatedness, re establishing the capacity to unionize our interests, not a matter of some esoteric and vast undertaking of psychological transformation, but a highly pragmatic act, an ordinary, straight away available act of unionization in our genetic interests, recognizing and reminding one another of our inter relation, indebtedness to one another and thus accountability – but with that comes the aforementioned reward of coherence, agency and warranted assertability.
There is an irony being revealed in this crisis, of the interdependent need for border control to facilitate human and pervasive ecology.
The irony of interdependence means that we are interdependent upon the discrete border control and population management that nationalism affords.
Hence the Paradigmatic shift from the globalizing liberal hegemony is set forth. Thanks be to the forces of pattern.
While the Sophists wield their casuistry to no end, assailing our people with charges of racism and supremacism, gaslighting us wherever we do not want our kind to die, our people have been maneuvered into thinking that there is only one response – Cartesian, a quest for infallible warrant within brute nature, below human systemic correctabiltiy, or beyond human systemic correctability in god, the king, the over-men, pure principles, the magic market hand, whatever – just so long as one can find some “pure account”, final relief from the responsibilities of human existence, from praxis, the ability to say bluntly by contrast, “that’s just the way it is.”
The affliction thus, is a prompt to retrieve us back from Cartesian estrangement from social accountability, and the weaponized charge to be above group interest as racist, as if we should not be responsible for the management of our kinds and their coordination with others, as if we should view people from some pure, a-historical perspective.
Praxis, the group homeostasis, by contrast, facilitates necessary optimization, mindful and deliberate correctability by means of ethnonationalism as it recognizes human nature, our concern for relationships, especially more kindred ones, recognizes our agency and its reflexive effects, our fallibility of perspective, and the expectation that oversights can be corrected through accounts requested; but that our reward will be in vast temporal and historical coherence, our social capital, along with the means to coordinate with alien groups as they are appraised and respected for their niche differences.
That again, is by contrast to modernity, which runs rough shod over borders and bounds, and where it does not kill other groups, kill us, destroys the common earthly habitat.
Rom Harre:
To socialization thereof (in the social world of social group(s)/praxis): At birth, as Rom Harre says, a “person position” enters into “the one a-priori context, molecules and persons in conversation” – practically speaking, persons in relation to one another. Even if you’d like to focus on the emergent qualities, and differencing capacity of molecules, you are still in the context of social interaction, in conversation about it – or else your point merely awaits an interlocutor.
We are born into the social category, its substance, which – yes, includes molecules and DNA, with their causative properties – gives us the structure (some, physical structure, I should say) to any individuality that we have (our auto/biography gives us the narrative structure); ethnonationalism provides contextual history, an approving audience, thus purpose and meaning beyond the delimitation of our life span; ensconcing the value of our life span.
And person positions act as correctives in the moral order that emerges out of the practical requirements of social interaction.
Now, what I would add is that if the patterns of the folk are consistent enough, the correctives will be veritably institutionalized by common understanding – no need for continual enforcement, invasive accounts requested; while some people will be in position at least for at time to better adjudicate how to facilitate the homeostasis of the moral order, the rule structure of the moral order will carry more weight than any single person or small group of people because it is an expression of the emergent qualities of the homogeneous folk – thus commonly understood and suitable. Our emergent qualities are so much a matter of co-evolution that our intuition does form something like an internal relation as to how to proceed upon a given episode…however:
There is an analogy to the introduction of invasive species to habitats where the species are naive – not having evolved defense against the invasive; but while this tends to be a phenomenon of accident in the animal world – e.g., invasive species being carried along in ships – it can be compounded by deliberate imposition in the social world.
Invasive Species/Naive Species Analogy
With particular attention to the Manichean (trickster) evolution of those evolved in temperate climates where competition is more against other groups (thus, evolving trickery) as opposed to those evolved in climates where nature, Augustinian challenges (natural challenges) are the greater concern, i.e., in protracted spans when food and shelter are the greatest challenge and threat to survival: we might consider what can happen when Manicheans are introduced to habitats of the northern, “naive” species
Naive species and the introduction of manichean species
Social groups evolved in circumstances where brutal and cyclical elements of nature deprive food and ready shelter for extended periods are less the challenge, are put in more direct competition with other groups [hypothesized of Middle Easterners] for easier resource and recourse in shelter; thus develop trickery (“Manichean devils”) to compete with the other groups for resource as opposed to those [hypothesized of Europeans, esp. north] evolved more in the circumstances where the challenge comes more from brute nature (“Augustinian devils”); who become stronger in STEM disciplines but somewhat naive species and socially gauche – dupes compared to Manicheans if they are introduced to their habitat (nation); and providing more reason for them to recognize these groups, despite any crypsis (phenotypic appearance like the in-group despite being of a genetic outgroup), more reason to recognize them as out groups – belonging to another nation.
While the powers that be with their liberal “pan-mixia” agenda are of course only reluctant protectors of the borders and ever the more pernicious abusers of control of individual liberties within the borders by means of modern technology and the excuse of pandemic, the key counter to them is, of course, achieving ethnohomogeneity and focus on how to do it.
This is to be done by means of the DNA Nations and unionization on its basis.
And once our unions are big enough, we can work on coordinating a union of unions, the union being synonymous with the ethno-nation, union of unions being the race, and we may cooperate with non-European nations who are similarly accountable.
The union would be of the (species) ethnonation, with a looser union of the (genus) say, European nations and diaspora, calibrating the social concern, taking care of in group concerns and coordinating with out groups to facilitate mutual interests. I have found it useful and predictable by contrast to our antagonists agenda to call this concern the ethnonational left, but it is fundamentally about unionizing the full group, or ethnonation as it were, not about internecine class warfare. The Nation is the class and the race, as it were, is the class of classes.
Whether a particular ethnonation wants to be more or less fee enterprise or socialist is not my particular concern; this is not a platform advocating the doing away with free enterprise and private property and within reason – though a sizable percentage of land and certain key industries should probably be state owned.
I would only add in regard to economics, that there is no pure capitalism or socialism, and that people should come to terms with a concern to optimize the balance for their social group – and that is why I can sound socialist – partly because I want to get people over the phobia to the term that the cold war and YKW anti-European misuse of the concern has engendered to anything that expresses a social concern.
Calling this left ethnonationalism also does a good job of putting off the assholes who are indeed anti social, inhumane, and closed minded about the obvious opportunity that’s been available to move into this moribund term to define it for ourselves, for out interests – putting off people who are frankly dupes to the YKW red caping of these terms and unwilling to let go of their reactionary security blanket and think outside of the box to do with the term what is done with it in the depth grammar of the left anyway, that is set the calibration of the world view – a union of our people(s – ethnonational unions plural).
Whereupon heremeneutics can serve its function to integrate these heuristics, working hypotheses, specificatory structures with its capacity to move inquiry from broad systemic and historical breadth, imagination, as need be, which can then be corrected against the empirical end as need be; where those fascinated by right wing concerns (usually STEM types) can do what they like to do and be of indispensable constructive good; instead of stigmatizing our people with anti social and inherently destabilizing reactions to red cape misrepresentations “The left”, they can actually participate in homeostasis of our systems by offering feedback with the facts, science, “truth”, objectivity, principles, etc., which will not come unhinged as they are ensconced in the correctivity of praxis as the calibration.
Hermeneutic inquiry can start from the empirical end as well; indeed it starts from sensibility somewhere along the line to begin and then recognizes patterns that it must take for granted; but it should recognize the sense of its utility being feedback approximately gauged against and corrective of the calibration of praxis – one must be able to take certain important things for granted in order to proceed in practicality: “Even a false or inadequate working hypothesis is better than no working hypothesis” ….“one cannot continually investigate everything but must work from a given state of partial knowledge.” – Whitehead.
And the Praxis of our people is certainly better than a false or inadequate working hypothesis. It is a solid social (left) calibration awaiting (right) feedback.
Person positions act as ready corrections on the system when it veers from homesostasis.
And so we are presented with opportunity with this long overdue correction to move from internationalist globalism to nationalism, and specifically ethnonationalism and the accountability to human species and pervasive ecology on the optimal power level of social systemic homeostasis that ethnonational borders most practically sustain.
Correction by “person positions” is not quite contingent upon the clumsy mechanism of voting, let alone extended to a full franchise of national members, let alone to foreigners.
What I gathered that the recently departed Rom Harre was doing with this idea of “person positions” was rather providing a corrective to the Lockeatine empty slate equalitarian notion, as if it were to say the perspective, understanding, etc, of all persons, wherever they were in life, were in an equally capable position, stage of development, condition, state of knowledge, having a perspective that should weigh equally. A “position” rather, indicates that people are in different stages of development, are afforded a better or worse perspective, have more or less knowledge, sufficient experience and judgment or not.
Hence, certain positions will be better placed to make policy decisions, or rather uphold them for the most part – yet the occupant of the position is not paramount, nor the risk of short term perspective being corrupted for re-election every four years, in short term interests, because the ethnonation is set, calibrated on its pattern – historical, in broad systemic breadth and interaction and future trajectory beyond the life span, while the life span is nevertheless ennobled for its concrete and honorable place.
These correctives may work more like fluid feedback than the clumsy mechanism of the vote, which divides issues as if, on balance, you’re going to be comfortable if a vote for putting your foot in boiling water narrowly loses to the vote for putting your other foot in freezing water. Ethnonationals will generally know what is requisite.
The affliction thus, is a prompt to retrieve us back from Cartesian estrangement, its clumsy dichotomies and disconnects from social accountability, and the weaponized charge to be above group interest as racist, as if we should not be responsible for the management of our kinds and their coordination with others, as if we should view people from some pure, a-historical perspective.
The Praxis, social systemic homeostasis is maintained in ongoing correctivity by an understanding of the borders and bounds of the nation, and while all are responsible to abide those rules, those entrusted because of their greater competence and knowledge will be providing more of what can be deemed corrective feedback in a fluid manner as to actions to be taken to maintain the borders and bounds rather than the clumsy mechanism of voting on an issue – if people have one foot in ice water and the other in boiling water, on balance, they are happy, yes? While I am not ready to propose dispensing with voting, voting is clumsy, and some matters, such as borders, bounds, kind and quantity of the ethnogroup, and probably an option for institutionalized monogamy with some incentives for those who would opt for it, should not be up for the vote.
The systemic correctability of the agentive and social interactive world that is called praxis, that is the difference between centralizing it, calibrating it as world view as opposed to the Cartesian duality and the runaway that it is susceptible to at its two extremes – one in natural fallacy and the other of ideals – these proposed narrowing and attempted absolutizing quests characterizing right wing reaction are inherently unstable, informing and sustaining liberal hubris unchecked as well, until runaway is confronted with stasis; whereas paradigmatic conservatism, what I call left ethnonationlaism, ensconces our people with borders of the nations and bounds of our people unionized, to sustain accountability, constraining in a good way of bracing, balancing corrective of systemic coherence as opposed to elite betrayal, rank and file and marginal defection that brings on runaway and disaster.
There may be subsidiarity which fulfill human scale concerns better than the state, but systemic power is held in place by national borders which are big enough to hold up, particularly in coalition, in ethnonational coordination, against liberal globalist interests.
This unionization of national borders calibrated, the fundamental task will be readily understood – paradigmatic conservatism – person positions providing feedback with a minimum of accounts requested necessary.
Nevertheless, there would certainly be no room for the discretion of those who would violate the union because they do not care, let alone because they are antagonistic. Accountability to our people is part and parcel of a position, especially an elite position in the structure.
As I have discussed many times, the Lockeatine notion of individual civil rights was devised as a mechanism to empower individual sense and liberty over group classificatory discrimination to begin with; and while that mechanism might not have been entirely disastrous in a relatively homogeneous population, as it has been weaponized by outgroups who’ve manged to find their ways into elite positions over our nations, they have bribed would-be insider elites to liberalize our borders and bounds (with the hubris that they are objectively above accountability to our would-be union) and pandered to marginals and rank and file, particularly to puerile females, exacerbating their base proclivity to incite genetic competition and compound the ongoing rupture of classificatory bounds of patterns, incentivizing the puerile to exercise license (licentiousness, if you will) with greater prerogative than ever as very powerful gate-keepers, pandered to from every angle as discriminatory borders that would protect the developmental process the would provide for the greater human ecology of k-selection judgment is ruptured, and by the hypergamous predilection of their increased one up position within the disorder they allow primarily the most liberal males through the top, maintaining a charmed loop that continually reconstructs the liberal disorder, while the gains these females yield are ever more episodic and momentary, as relationships and long term patterns are further destroyed. Many will pay the price, many will be single mothers reliant on the state to force servitude to their bastard children.
Such is the predicament of Modernity’s universal maturity.
Rather than trying to undo the psychology of individualism or the fear of collectivism, we may adhere to the mere practicality, to just focus on reasoned borders and bounds, accountability thereof ..unionization.
When talking in terms of DNA Nations, the lack of popularity of concern for curating genetic kinds would be a dubious rebut as well. It is obviously a natural and popular concern to curate our genetic kinds.
Again, this is about preserving kinds, quite distinct from Nazistic eugenic program of elimination.
And regarding liberalism, it is a false alternative to right wing tyranny – really coming from the same pseudo objectivist place along with its hubris – of Modernity’s scientism, particularly in its weaponized form, we might ask if our peoples should be subject to its wild experimentation? The cruel, bullying, no account disregard that pseudo objectivism props up?
Should we not look critically at those anti-ethnonationalists, who would pander to the puerile lack of experience, and encourage judgments not only from their limited experience, but on the basis of episode rather than pattern, as the episode reins in the fallout and disorder of modernity, pandering to their basest nature to incite genetic competition without the judgment of experience nor the empathy of paternal perspective, with a view that maybe they are not of our people and should not be considered a part of our nation?
Should those who would hazard and flout the profundity of our time in memorial patterns be allowed to visit the consequences of their perfidy upon us? Or should they find a place beyond our borders that welcomes their experiment? Let them not subject us to catastrophic effects, consequences of experiment uncontrolled by paradigmatic conservatism, impose involuntary contract upon us by their neo liberal hegemonic backing, enslave us with subservience to the arbitrarily mixed bastards of the crass R selection upshot, as the atavistic criteria of episode, its display held sway in the fall out and disorder of modernity, its purport of universal maturity, rupturing patterns, let them not visit upon us the deadly effects of their hubris in arbitrary experiment.
We are violating nobody’s freedom – they are free to leave. They will not violate the ethnonationalist’s freedom. If they try to impose liberalization of our group bounds upon us, to introduce unassimilable species, then they are the supremacists and the would be slave masters who would exploit our peoples commons, therefore ostracism is warranted.
Bateson liked to quote William Blake in saying “wise men see lines and therefore they draw them” and I might observe that the lines of formal categorizations, when it comes to human ecologies, are classifcatory heuristics of largely biological, systemic patterns and as biological patterns, governed by matters of optimization invariably subject to correction, whether homeostatic, i.e., from within the system, or as a matter of brute stasis, correction from without the system, where modernity’s growth and maximization have taken to systemic runaway – then subject to stasis correction of the virus, for example.
How do we marshal ethnonationalism despite the fact that the elites are neo liberal and will be sure to be promoting international pan mixia, with all its ecological destruction, the moment the pandemic subsides? They will undoubtedly tell stories of our common humanity shown by the pandemic and how we overcame racism…
Through the sort of unionization and coordination thereof afforded by the DNA| Nations concept, we may organize irrespective of their nefarious trajectory and parallel to their powers. If some in elite and powerful positions want to join us, fine, be on the winning side, but if not, we don’t need them and will not be haplessly subject to their oblivious whims and decrees. Nor do we need any vast psychological transformation, as this is a highly practical means.
Pervasive Ecology, Paradigmatic Conservatism and The DNA Nations.
There will be few rules which everybody understands – border and species population management – emergent qualities of co-evolution take care of much of the rest, almost intuitively: thus, no need for a dictatorship, king of exception, or conversely, no need to expound upon the clumsy and corruptible mechanism of voting, let alone full franchise among those unequipped for good judgment.
This platform is concerned foremost, as as ever with borders and boundaries.
There are obvious means of national control: Unionization of our ethonnationals, Citizenship, Passports, Marriage Licenses, Birth Certificates, Border control and Benefits of Citizenship/ conversely, non-inclusion of those who should not be members to begin with and punishment most markedly by loss of citizenship and expulsion for those violating that human ecology once under our control. Practicality and consequences through ordinary interaction being the essence of morality, then come patterns taken for granted. There is no transcending moral concerns – there will always be prohibitions, obligations and legitimacies.
We are of patterns which are part of deeply co-evolved ecological systems – hence, while the modernist, with their license to liberalize, might proceed obliviously unaware and if they are among the lucky to not be wrecked in the early rounds of systemic deterioration, and gain in hubris, bolstered in the epoch to self righteous liberation from social responsibility to proclaim virtue enough by themselves to mock those suffering in resistance as the enemies of their presumed noble progress…
and in regard to those wrecked and falling through the cracks of the system’s less and less infrequent intermittent failings, those precariously marginalized by the failure to comprehend the system, getting swept away in the tide of its systemic runaway, while the puerile giddiness of purported universal maturity is met with the sobering discipline of stasis correction another day, before deliberate, mature, preemptive correction could be enacted, having been shunned aside blithely under the rubric of progress and liberation from group interrelatedness and responsibility…Bateson came to his last meeting an angry man. He warned the puerile. It isn’t funny.
Bateson warned that the road to hell could be paved with bad intentions as well (see my post on the charmed loop of didactic incitement) with catastrophic violence being incited through ethnocentrism gone rogue to ethno supremacism, in singular concerned for one nation, takes the natural fallacy or a god beyond nature in their image in a zero sum game which must be won at the expenses of others; the other road to catastrophic violence, of narcissistic obliviousness to human interests, niche evolution and diversity.
But whether disciplined by the overseers of homeostasis, or by brute stasis, a paradigmatic shift from Modernity and liberalism is augured.
And of the pandemic, you can easily picture Bateson not relishing the presaging but saying anyway, “I told you so.”
This international affliction that we are experiencing and the national responses of border control and social distancing confirm the importance and the possibility of maintaining national borders and interpersonal bounds.
It shows the need for coordinated nationalism, as opposed to the integrating and mixing forces of globalism, with the impervious idea that change leads to “progress”, to some perfect foundation, caused like a force of nature beyond our agency (how optimistic? I think I’d prefer agency) while we must indeed be concerned that ethnonationalism is secured against these globalizing, universalizing forces such as the Abrahamic religions, its bastard children, Descrartes, Locke, Marx, the Neoliberals, Friedrich Hayek, Milton Friedman, Karl Popper, George Stigler and Ludwig von Mises, against deployment of neo liberal compradors to quash nascent ethnonationalism
Rejecting the invisible hand through social accountability marshaled by unionization of our people against corrupt elites will facilitate the securing of our nations, our borders and bounds. When the few rules are broadly understood and borders and bounds secure, there will be no need for accounts requested among our co-evolutionaries to go wild and rogue, Stasi style.
To whom it may concern, we can take the essence directly into our hands by unionization, the coherence, accountability, agency, and warrant it facilitates to coordinate human and pervasive ecology by means of the DNA Nations. This is a parallel measure which does not call for the renouncing of your current citizenship and certainly not a call for violence.
That which is above praxis or below praxis (social grouping) by way of Descartes, portends to be beyond correctability, beyond deliberate, social systemic homeostasis, and is therefore subject to stasis – natural corrections, disasters, or out group correction of the hubris of believing that one is above group interests.
And yes, this union includes the interests, the intrinsic being valued of boys and men. We produce these women. They don’t exist without us.
The ecological argument that unionization affords also provides strong warrant for those who’ve long lived and earned the right to live (to practice ethnonational bordering) along side the indigenous, as in the examples of European diaspora in the America’s, Australia and New Zealand. Border Control and population management is necessary to preserve habitat and its carrying capacity for both indigenous and Europeans in diaspora. This probably entails some help and coordination in population, resource and habitat management for other places as well, so that they are not compelled to attempt migration over borders.
….We have now reached a moment at which we can begin to know something of the process of this phony and crooked disease in the pathway we are following. At present, I don’t think there are very many of us. A few thousand maybe. But this is a very extraordinary epoch in which this knowledge is now becoming a part of the thinking of quite a lot of people. Thank god.
– Gregory Bateson, “Paradigmatic Conservatism.”
I propose The Charmed Loop of Didactic Incitement as a useful elaboration on Bateson’s Double Bind Theory.
The Double Bind was first proposed by Bateson in “Toward a Theory of Schizophrenia.”
On a broad level, the article is pivotal in taking psychology out of the head and into interaction.
Specifically, the double bind entails:
1. A preliminary paradoxic injunction such as
“I am a liar”
“Disobey me”
“Be spontaneous!”
These are inherently contradictory statements..
“Be a man!” could be another probably as it implies that you should be in power, when you are being commanded as a weakling.
2. A prohibition of metacommunication – talk about talk to clarify the confusion. Particularly on a relational level to sort out the confusion, particularly to help the “victim’ to sort out the confusion and their relational status with the “victimizer.”
3. A tertiary re-framing which prevents escape from the circumstance – for example, a child as dependent upon their parents cannot easily escape the field, and is therefore, confronted with an intolerable choice between protecting their capacity for sensible judgement or the relationship – as mammals, relationships are profoundly important. And they begin to manifest communological pathologies (in a futile attempt to protect the necessary resource of their faculties, as one cannot not communicate).
Notes:
Bateson incorporates much from Aristotle in his philosophy; and that is outstanding, as much of the problems that we are having in modernity would have been averted with adherence to Aristotlean philosophy: centralizing our social world view/politics, i.e., in praxis, recognizing our biological and mammalian nature requiring optimal need fulfillment (not maximal), a nature which cares for relationships, our relative concerns not objective detachment like an egg laying lizard; and on the other hand, our objective, systemic, ecological interrelation in these balances and niche evolutions. Our human capacity for agency and reflexive effects.. these wise considerations are traceable to Aristotle. This is not an affectation to British philosophy, it is British philosophy at its best, incorporating ideas that he finds empirically true.
Ok, it’s time for a statement. The pandemic brings into high relief the both the importance and the possibility of border and boundary control.This strikes a major blow to one of the major claims of liberalism and neo liberalism suggesting that human and pervasive ecology cannot possibly be managed by means of nationalism. Which I suspect all honest people believe. ..whether it can be done without a Stasi-like police state is the concern and theoretical obstacle. But this does not really strike me as a double bind…rather, there seems to be many ways out, some I’ve indicated. You’ve got to love the way accountability, correctability and social systemic maintenance go hand in hand.
Correctability, centering moral order in the relative interests of our people. Morals and moral orders come not from god but from a practical negotiation between people in interaction and consequences.
And as we request accounts from our people to their social capital, they are drawn back from the runaway of ideals or natural fallacy into the correctability of our social system our union and the freedom and autonomy that it affords.
And that is, after all, what we are after, our autonomous systemic governance, human and pervasive ecology and its coordination as opposed to the runaway disaster of liberalism, neo liberalims, the internationalism of Marxism and Cultural Marxism.
It is important to note that correctability does not have to mean wholesale franchise to the whole group no matter how ignorant or ill disposed toward our group interests, not even the clumsy apparatus of voting, but it does imply feedback from the whole group; and with various especially worthy inputs to correct against systemic breach whether high, rank and file or those on the margins, even those struggling. It is important to note that with border control taken for granted, and the trust of a homogeneous people, accounts requested can be kept to a minimum, to answer those who fear a Stasi-like snoop and surveillance state.
The optimizing of our praxis, our social systemic homeostasis through the normative practice of correctability will distinguish us from right wing perfidy such as Nazism and other supremacist, right wing perfidy.
We are rather flexbile about the way individuals conduct themselves and the way particular states conduct themselves provided they manage their borders and bounds.
The DNA Nations can sort our our group concerns and it can also sort out our personal concerns. I’d like to be talking about that with you in days to come.
One part that I haven’t been able to get going despite my social constructionist perspective, is that knowledge construction is supposed to be more actively participatory, while people seem to be inclined to leave me in the lurch, wanting me to occupy the position of a self proclaimed authority transmitting information to a passive audience whilst I, in return, am subject to ad hominum, if any semblance of feedback – for reasons that I’ve belabored, not adoring Hitler, Jesus, YKW and scientism … lack of a 200 I.Q. and STEM proclivities doesn’t seem to ingratiate me with the boys either, but…that’s what I’m saying ..if you’re so damn smart, show me where to fix things, huh?
I’m not telling the English, the British to do anything. I am endorsing their ethnonationalism, focusing on the issue of borders and boundary management which will be a matter of some sort of unionization, whether you want to acknowledge that or not….the matter for ethnonationlists being a unionization of natives, of course. Paradigmatic Conservatism calls for strong ethnonational borders; the ways which people conduct themselves within are more flexible and up to them.
You are based in your unionized, accountable, coherent, correctable, stabilized social group systemic as opposed to the inherently unstable right wing reactionary positions that our enemies try to steer us into as white right wingers, rigidly seeking an answer in pure warrant absurdly beyond group accountability.
Absent this unionization, our females will be pandered to from all sides, even in their puerile ignorance, bringing out the worst aspects of the female, their propensity for inciting genetic competition and hypergamy, often rewarding men who are decidedly undeserving, unconscientious.
There should be no objections to the DNA Nations concept. There is no ethical objections to the quest to maintain our kinds.
While securing territory is crucial, it is not the insurmountable per-requisite if we coordinate through the unionization of dna nations, which is not contingent upon territory.. though habitat is of course crucial, and Europe especially, ethically ours.
We can do this for everybody, and if we care to preserves animal species and habitats, and we certainly should, we certainly need to do this for humans as well.
The structure of the ethnonational system and its homeostasis decides, not the particular person, let alone dictator or king. While there will be people more qualified to make decisions, the positions should be understood as mutable, while a few matters, such borders, quantities and kinds of the people, an option for institutionalized monogamy, should be fixed.
Horrible as the Pandemic is, it is showing both the importance and the possibility of border and boundary control, striking a major blow to one of the major claims of liberalism and neo liberalism that its impossible, that ethnonationalism cannot be done. It can be done.
Nor do not find at all convincing objections to the concept of unionization as somehow not consonant with nationalism, or merely post hoc and top down to the emergent qualities of ethnonationalism – it is a back and forth process flow from observation and working hypothesis – as our people will have to be held to account at any rate. Neither is it an imposition on English or an affectation to any ethnonationalism. On the contrary it is about ethnonationalist borders and bounds, including in the case of The English
The world crisis can contribute to a great counteraction of liberalism and people will be forced to reconsider the importance of borders and bounds and leaders will be held to account as well….in timely fashion, developing structures beforehand rather than reacting when disaster has impacted.
A paradigmatic shift is instigated from internationalist globalism to nationalism, and specifically, ethnonationalism – paradigmatic conservatism – which structures accountability to human ecologies, species, pervasive ecology and social systemic homeostasis, autonomous correctivity afforded at the power level that autonomous nations in coordinated interest most practically sustain.
Justin Trudeau personifies elitist tyranny and irresponsibility in regard to the most crucial matter of border control, the ecological health and individual sovereignty of our populations; having turned the pandemic’s natural prompting for border control and human ecological management to instead use it as an excuse to destroy the middle class, upward mobility and to continue with their recklessly experimental, in fact hazardous policies with regard to our children.
…
..
There is a race between the consumption of the finite resources needed to produce it and the green hydrogen society that might be developed:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4sn0ecqZgog
I’m adding this to the post:
Regarding “democratic participation”, first of all, it’s a matter of limiting the franchise to those competent, old enough, smart enough, educated enough, wise enough and limited – accountable to litmus tests as to in what they can change or not..
Secondly its not a matter of voting per se, as that is a clunky, quantitative process.
Nor is it a matter of debate, as that tends to go false binary either / or ..
The engagement of correctivity is of qualitative participation, not the quantitative, clunky binaries of the vote which adds up and winds up in exponential disaster in the hands of cunning actors aiming to win, rather than to do what’s right, delimited by accountability to the qualitative concerns of the ethnonation.