Preamble to a nationalist ontology
Posted by Guessedworker on Sunday, March 17, 2013 at 07:21 PM
When we speak of what oneself or any particular person or kin-group is in any real or permanent sense, we are speaking of what is of our, his or her, or their being. To speak of what is in us which is not of our being is to speak of that which is acquired from time and place. That is a distinction, ontologically speaking, between the content of the present and the absent, and between the conscious in any intentionally holistic sense and the mechanistic, and also between authentic Dasien and false Dasein - all just perspectives on the same truth (and not the only ones).
Now, taking this distinction as the essential field of ontology, preceding and underlying all philosophy and also all esoteric religious practise, we must conclude that it is, therefore, the essential field of a nationalist ontology as well. Indeed it is clearly so, since nationalist critique of the liberal ontology is very much that “what is acquired” from liberal modernity - from the kind of life we in the West live today - is a reduced and debased condition of the self. Precisely because of this, nationalists have used political power, when they have had it, to curtail freedom, democracy and egalitarianism, and thereby sweep away as much of liberalism as possible.
Some eggregiously poor and essentially faith-based thinking has gone into this, though, resulting in the imposition of a pre-determined model of a non-liberal life (for example, one guided by master morality, the “spirit of race”, or some assemblage of what is thought to be “German” or whatever). To be perfectly clear, nothing that is confected accords with what is real and true, and nothing that is not real and true can give the required permanence and satisfaction to the lived life which nationalists seek. The nationalist who seeks “national heroism” or “national glory” is a psychopath, or someone who just does not know psychopathy when he sees it.
Let us now demistify this essential field, for which purpose we can use as our model the classic, personal psychological journey out of absence, or false Dasein in Heidegerrian-speak, towards presence or authenticity - however you are comfortable looking at it. This model, though scaled to the personal, holds good for the scale of population. But, in the latter case, rather than an entirely personal experience of being, which may be extensive and accompanied by insights of an extra-ordinary nature, we are talking only of a general orientation towards the authentic. Nethertheless, that is enough to produce a widespread renewal.
It also has to be understood that the traditionally religious setting of the personal journey is not a bar to non-religious application. On the contrary, this is the only paradigm of the self. All movement towards or away from authenticity occurs within it. So it has an historical narrative, upon which is recorded our race’s existential declensions from the age of Rome on, and upon which it is the privilege and obligation of nationalists, even at this perilous hour, to write a new chapter. Perhaps.
Nature, being and mentation: these are the present elements. After stillness has settled the dust of all that is acquired from time and place, this is what remains and endures. Only that which does not belong to us is ever lost in that first moment of detachment, and only that which does belong to us is found in the subsequent period of return. No part of what belongs can be relinquished or transcended or lived without.
Even after the mind ceases the reflexive twitch of ascribing “I” to its own operation - already an extreme rarity in the life of our consciousness - still there is no leaving behind of that trinitarian synthesis. And then - even rarer - after the mind oversteps language to become the receptive principle again, after the beatifying flood, even after the ultimate epistemological act of a symbolic Creation, still there is no actual break-down in the world-division of subject and object, none of the being of stones and stars, no union with the cosmos or the All, no source and no ground either, nothing of gods within or without, nothing that was not always one’s own. There is only the present elements, and no experiential intensity and no revelatory substance changes that.
The religious will not accept such a naturalistic account, of course. Faith intercedes faithfully for diety. Intercession is the first part of its two-part modus operandum. The second part - the exercise of its presumption for deity - proceeds from that intercession. It does not precede it. Faith does not intercede for it. There is no constructive, epistemological process that leads, from necessity, to it. Deity is interpolated, not between data points as in mathematics, but before them ... before everything. It is done emotionally, without reserve, and it is done indiscriminantly. The god of fire, the god of the mountain, the god of love, the god of death, the god of the cosmos, angry gods, demanding gods, fatherly gods, to say nothing of goddesses ... faith treats them all with the exact same, overwhelming enthusiasm and subservience.
We can, then, freely ignore it, and the beliefs and moral strictures which attend it (and which reveal its evolutionary function). Our sole concern as nationalists is to understand our collective psychological estate in the modern world and effect a movement away from it and towards ... what, precisely? Well, I have already noted the fact that it cannot be stipulated in advance. We can know as an idea that what is real and true of, and permanent in, our race are the present elements: the European nature, being, and mind. There is nothing else, and no other foundation. But to know them as a fact is only possible if they are emergent forces in the lived European life, and that would already be a revolutionary condition from which change at the social and political level must cascade.
The intellectual challenge of creating a nationalist ontology is simple to sketch, if devilishly difficult to accomplish. It consists in setting the European nature, being, and mind in creative opposition to our present declension, using historical and political analysis as well as ontological thinking itself to model the liberation which this perfect trinity vouchsafes. The rest, if sufficient intellectual energy could be generated amid the decay of liberal belief, will follow the inevitable path of any turn towards the authentic. We know it because we saw it in Italy and in Germany in the 20th century, despite the many inauthenticities in those ideological systems. It was enough just for the mass of the population to orient itself away from the old system ... even just to harbour the hope of change. It would be so again.