White Nations into Multiracial Places: A Spiral Radicalization Model
Why are Western nations, and only Western nations, committed to immigration and diversity? Why do they welcome ethnic rights for non-Whites within their borders while demonizing any expression of White identity? Why do they take for granted the fact that not a single nation outside the West advocates diversity?
This is really one question, the most important question of our times, and the most puzzling question to come up in history; for it is beyond comprehension why would an entire people commit itself to its own dissolution. Is not the supreme principle of Darwinian theory the struggle not only for individual survival but also survival of one's group, which entails an ethics of in-group cooperation and out-group derogation? How did it come about that such powerful instincts for in-group preference and loyalty have come to be seen as odiously racist amongst Whites, whereas in-group preference is taken for granted in the rest of the world and, more insanely, special group rights are legally sanctioned for minorities inside Western nations?
This transformation needs to be studied in the same way as the Origins of WWII, the Industrial Revolution, the Scientific Revolution, the Renaissance, and the fall of the Roman Empire. All these transformations and novelties, and many others in-between and within Western arts, literature, architecture, music, technology have been the subject of countless books and theoretical assessments, yet only a rare few have investigated in a systematic way the epochal transformation happening right now before our eyes: why the states of the West decided to prohibit White identity and become multi racial societies?
Kevin MacDonald's Argument
Kevin MacDonald is widely known in Alt Right circles for offering a fully documented scientific theory arguing that "the organized Jewish community" was the single most influential group in calling for an end to the Immigration Act of 1924, which generally limited immigration to countries with a culture similar to the majority WASP culture of the United States, and in promoting the 1965 Immigration Act, which committed the United States to accepting immigrants of all nationalities on a roughly equal basis.
But whether this theory can explain as effectively the favouring of unrestricted immigration in other Western countries, and whether there were other factors in the origins of this transformation, is still undetermined. MacDonald has explored other factors in numerous publications such as the role of Franz Boas in spreading the ideology of the equality of races, and of the Frankfurt School in stigmatizing Western traditional values as pathological expressions of White male "authoritarianism".
Peter Brimelow has spoken about "Hitler's revenge". Others have pointed to the influence of the black civil rights movement in mandating across American society the integration of races. Clare Ellis has written about the "Richard von Coudenhove-Kalergi's Pan-Europa," as an early twentieth century European integration model "based on the ideologies of Cosmopolitanism, Perpetual Peace, and World Federation," seeking "to unite Europe in perpetual peace by replacing ethno-national European identities with a common European cultural identity." I have written about the ways in which liberalism was taken over and transformed in a cultural Marxist direction after WWII, as evidenced in the complete identification of Western nationalism with "civic" values against any form of ethnic nationalism, and as evidenced in the amalgamation of Western individual rights with multicultural ethnic rights for immigrants.
But while it is generally known that these factors are interconnected, there is still no cohesive explanation for the almost simultaneous adoption of immigrant multiculturalism across the Western world. We need a general theory that ties in these factors together, and others deemed to be important, and that explains this transformation as a Western-wide phenomenon. Now, it so happens that MacDonald is currently putting forward a long term explanation for the West as a whole which emphasizes the "unique" tendency of European culture for an individualist way of life (accompanied with a "relatively low ethnocentrism" and a high level of "moral universalism") which promotes altruistic behaviour towards out-groups. This is a general theory predicated on the worldwide fact that Western nations at large "are committed to multiculturalism, and are being swamped by economic refugees from collectivist cultures, dispossessing their founding peoples".
MacDonald believes that the same traits of individualism and objective universalism that allowed the West to develop modern science and institutions open to merit, and which are the basis of Western dominance in the world, are the traits that have made Westerners believe that the otherwise far more collectivist peoples of the world can be made to behave like Westerners once they are educated with "Western values." MacDonald thinks this ignores the selection of collectivist dispositions among non-Europeans as a result of their habitation in ecological contexts that "supported large tribal groups based on extended kinship relations," strong ethnocentrism and lack of individualism. By contrast, he thinks that it was only among Northern European peoples that a "tendency toward individualism," toward monogamy and nuclear families, with less emphasis on kinship relations, and more on contractual relations, and therefore a relatively lower level of ethnocentrism, emerged. He traces these individualist traits back to hunter and gatherers thousands of years ago in Northern Europe.
Further elaboration by MacDonald of this theory is forthcoming. Suffice it to say now that he does not offer this theory as an ultimate explanation, and has indeed written that Americans, for all their individualism, were quite explicit in their ethnic attachments through their history until radically novel notions about the meaning of individualism and universalism began to spread in the 1960s. His intention has been to identify certain biological traits among Europeans predisposing them to be less collectivist and less ethnocentric, not to argue that Europeans were predetermined to become multiracial since prehistoric times. This is why he has focused on the ways in which highly organized and collectivist Jewish communities, despite having assimilated certain Western traits, were important players not only in the enactment of the 1965 Immigration Act, but also in the discrediting of "race" as a scientific concept and in the identification of any form of White group identity with "neo-Nazism."
Some members of the European New Right, including some who identify with the Alt Right, put the ultimate blame upon Christianity for this transformation, that is, the Christian idea that all humans have equal souls in the eyes of God and that meekness and love of the Other are a manifestation of what is best about the human species. Some have combined this explanation with the observation that the Romans were also responsible with their granting of citizenship during the third century AD to inhabitants in the Empire of any race, which started a new trans-racial concept of citizenship.
But the more influential and complete explanation among ENR members ties together many individualizing and universalizing trends in the history of Europe, starting with Christianity, but really accelerating, in their estimation, with the rise of such modern "liberal" trends as the Protestant obsession with moral guilt and separation of the individual believer from any form of spiritual hierarchy based on tradition; the rise of "economic man" as an abstract individual "dis-embedded" from communitarian attachments; the Enlightenment pretense that societies could be remade anew through the application of rationally derived concepts with universal intent standing above one's own culture; and the French Declaration of the Rights of Man and its supposition that all humans are born with "natural" rights regardless of historical and national context.
Most Transformative Happening Ever
However much I believe the West is a civilization with a uniquely individualistic ethos and Faustian rational will for universal comprehension, it seems to me that what is going on today is so out of the norm, so radical and so pathological that it requires as well a shorter term perspective. Much in Western history illuminates our current dogmas of racial equality and human rights. But it is also incredibly anachronistic to attribute to Europeans, even generations before WWII and the 1960s, believers in White-only immigration policies, our current hysteria against White identity and delusions about the blessings of diversity.
The Canadian establishment, business, government, media, and literary elites, the majority of ordinary Canadians, were completely at ease with the immigration restriction policies preceding the 1960s. The same is true for Americans and Australians; and there is no way Europeans in the 1960s would have accepted millions of migrants consuming billions in welfare combined with regular and recurring rapes of thousands of white women and girls, with all the schools and universities putting down the heritage of Europeans and with the authorities criminalizing those disagreeing with diversification and Islamization — this is unprecedented, it has never been known in the past, and it is becoming the most epoch making transformation in history.