Not long ago, I did an interview for a Finnish nationalist website which contained the following exchange:
Interviewer: What is your opinion on America, and what role should it play in the world?
Devlin: The goal of white American nationalists should be a white ethnostate on North American soil where we enjoy self-determination, unapologetically give preference to our own people, and pursue our long-term best interests. I believe this is how white Americans can best benefit the rest of the world as well.
The interview was fairly well-received, but one person commented roughly as follows: “I understand why Devlin adds his last sentence, but really it should be of no concern whether white Americans benefit the rest of the world.”
I understand why the commenter said what he did: An ethnostate exists primarily for the benefit of its own people, safeguarding their existence from rivals and possible enemies.
Yet if we consider history, it is easy to see that nations have often been of enormous benefit to other nations. A striking example can be found in the ancient West, namely, the benefit Greece brought to Rome. The Roman poet Horace expressed it as follows: “Conquered Greece took captive her savage conqueror and brought her arts into rustic Latium.” The Romans, with their unrivaled mastery of the military arts, conquered Greece and added it to their own dominions, but the cultural inheritance Greece bequeathed to Rome in return was so vast that the final debt was rather on Rome’s side, and the credit lay more with Greece.
Yes, Greece should be run for the benefit of Greeks rather than of anyone else, whether in antiquity or today. But this does not mean that other nations cannot benefit from Greece. Nations absolutely do benefit from other nations as well as their own people. And so my point that white Americans can be of benefit to the world by preserving their nation and seeing to their own long-term interests is not necessarily a bit of mushy altruism.
But how can nations can best benefit one another? There are different possibilities. One way France might benefit America, for example, is if Americans invaded France, killed off the native population, and divided their property among ourselves. This would provide us with some small, short-term benefit, but it would also destroy France, along with any possibility that America or any other nation might ever derive any benefit from her. We could describe invasion and genocide as an “exploitative” way of benefitting from another nation.
Nations might also try to benefit other nations altruistically. Many white people agonize over the poverty and suffering in Africa. It is only natural to wish we could relieve it. But doing so turns out to be an extremely difficult task, for which good wishes and a willingness to send money and aid are laughably inadequate. Western aid money usually gets siphoned off by exploitative local elites and fails to benefit ordinary Africans. When this is pointed out to whites, they are aghast: “Should we just stand idly by and let the Africans suffer?” And the answer appears to be that doing that would often have been better for the average African than the failed aid policies the West has pursued since African independence. Trying to benefit other nations altruistically may be less bad than doing so exploitatively through invasion and genocide, but it often fails to achieve its end.
If neither exploitation nor altruism provide much benefit, whether to other nations or to our own, how can nations best benefit each other?
It seems to me that for this question as well as for others, nationalists and race realists have the best answers. Greece benefited Rome neither by exploiting her nor by consciously trying to benefit her; she did so simply by being Greece and achieving all the things Greek civilization achieved. Rome learned from Greece without Greece having ever done or accomplished anything for the conscious purpose of benefitting the Romans.
France, too, has benefitted the world largely by being France: developing the French language and literature, developing its own arts and manufactures, trading with a view to its own benefit, etc. Her occasional military and imperialistic adventures, whether in Algeria or under Bonaparte in Europe, have probably done the world far less good and certainly did much harm. Nor has she been able to do much for Africa through altruism.
And the white nation of America, now left stateless within the crumbling framework of a decadent empire, will also best benefit the world by being itself, protecting what is its own, ensuring its own survival, never seeking to harm anyone else — but always putting the interests of its own people first. And so, I repeat:
The goal of white American nationalists should be a white ethnostate on North American soil where we enjoy self-determination, unapologetically give preference to our own people, and pursue our long-term best interests. I believe this is how white Americans can best benefit the rest of the world as well.
The post How Can Nations Best Benefit One Another? appeared first on American Renaissance.
American Renaissance
