|
|
|
Old but Not in the Way: The Geriatric White Army Particularly as they have less to lose, we should rather take the important opportunity to see our aging White demographic not as a liability but as one of our greatest assets - especially regarding the defense of Whites and their borders. One of the chief arguments presented by advocates of non-White immigration into White Nations is that the aging demographic of Whites can no longer contribute to the tax base and in fact, they rely upon it - therefore younger workers from abroad are required in order to contribute to it and other economic factors. By now, we know this isn’t true and the point is too obvious to belabor for anyone with but eyes to see: we do not need non-White immigrants to work and they do not wind-up helping the White Nations’ economies.
Regarding border enforcement Older White people have less to lose: as they have fulfilled whatever essential life goals they might already, such as having children, satisfying career ambitions and personal indulgences such as travel. They are likely retired from work, therefore their livelihood is not as threatened. And their remaining time is shorter; particularly if they are diagnosed with a fatal but non-debilitating affliction they might be called upon to take greater risks. Not necessarily to run suicide missions, mind you, but to take bolder risks on behalf of Whites. This ought to be a general cultural expectation for Whites at any advanced age; but we might also think about regimented terms of conscription. In terms of what they might do generally speaking, we might begin to think about anything from taking on greater risks of bold and clear rhetoric to participating in advanced guerrilla operations. They might engage anything from suicide missions where our people are being killed or fatally threatened, to manning military equipment, to the very genial mentoring of younger conscripts with the wisdom, knowledge and experience they’ve gained through life; or perhaps even just light duty support tasks. Merit points and reward may be assessed by degree of risk and accomplishment. At any rate, greater risks ought to be required of the older. It has been a fundamental military blunder to have our young White people do most of the fighting and dying in hot wars. Younger recruits, while required to assume risks as well, should be taking some measure to try to develop practical and philosophical skills, to have a family and provide for them – thus, not going all-out in the way we might hope from the older. Nevertheless, in shared service with the elderly, they may partake of the wisdom, experience and poise (and baby-sitting, child-schooling?) that the older lend to the task of border enforcement. All White citizens would be required to pragmatically take on border enforcement as need and circumstance reasonably required of them – nevertheless, there ought to be age windows when White people are required special focus on border enforcement.
There probably should be two terms: a younger and the older term As previously discussed, it would likely be best to have two pools of conscripts, one older, say ages 67 and 68 and another younger, say ages 19 and 20. We might have to change that to three years or one year; we may have to be flexible about the particular window of years among the younger and older recruits but nevertheless, something of that order, years of focus on border enforcement, might be called upon. The younger term might determine degree of participation and influence in the governance of a particular state in the Euro-DNA Nation; voting rights etc. The older term would probably be more honor-based and particularly where life has been sacrificed to effective end, should entail enhanced increase of resource to one’s grandchildren; if the conscript survives to complete the term, they might still enjoy increased retirement benefits in addition to an increased aid to their grandchildren. That’s another thing, conscription ought not to be indefinite. If they survive after two or three years of required service, they ought to be able to return to an easy and comfortable retirement, paying attention to whatever they like. This is a notion that could be implemented for any White Nation, but might be held as requisite for at least some states of the Euro-DNA Nation in particular, as it is based on our survival: hence geriatric conscription terms, provisionally speaking, for two years. One might object that if we’ve got old Whites running around taking risks what is to stop non-Whites from doing the same? The answer is that we would not be engaging in risky enforcement behavior if non-Whites will comply with our requirements, which in many cases will mean returning to their own lands. They should receive advance notice of requirements and help with compliance prior to strong measures being taken. Moreover, if they engage in similar risky behavior against our people and lands by the ranks of their elderly, that only underscores that their population is a general threat to our existence and must be expelled. It would seem that emphatic behavior ought to be directed at problematic settlers/ dwellers in our lands, not at mere transients and likely in some cases, not even at benign non-White settlers: procedures of accountability for such cases might be outlined. We may be flexible on any of these points as this proposal is strictly a hypothesis for negotiation. This proposal is fully open to suggestions.
An important matter of contention might be that of the first order in this house-cleaning would be elite responsibility, whether powerful non-Whites, influential and elite White traitors, or institutions which instigate non-White immigration – viz. those would come first in line of account. That would likely be true enough and with older Whites in particular being more beholden to the state it presents an ostensible problem at very least – one which might call for a parallel, cultural, viz. non-official dissemination of “the national idea and its defense” for a significant time: i.e. the program of the nation is to be introduced in gradual, non-official and voluntary stages indefinitely – maintained in that unofficial cultural status to some parallel extent even after critical mass of White Nationals and land-masses are secured (long way off, in all likelihood). However, this defense of the “nation” being circulated in the manner of a parallel, unrealized, hypothetical objective with unofficial cultural status and themes is one way such practical contradictions may be negotiated in the more actively hostile circumstances.
Comments:2
Posted by DanielS on Tue, 05 Feb 2013 14:48 | # There are some things that older people cannot do as a rule. There are some things that particular older individuals cannot do. There are some things older people can do as a rule. Some things that particular older individuals can do. We ought not preclude the consideration of possibilities in advance. The younger will be expected to contribute what they can and where they must. P.S. Just for one salient example on the matter of the economy necessary for defense, I don’t believe National Socialist Germany built its war industry on the basis of sheer individualist capitalism. 3
Posted by DanielS on Tue, 05 Feb 2013 15:23 | # One more thing - this notion of defense does not represent an ideal vision of fully realized White states of the future, but rather pragmatic contingencies developing along with White states at whatever level of reality they currently express - even as a mere idea and aspiration in the agreement of some at present. 4
Posted by James Bowery on Tue, 05 Feb 2013 18:32 | # The failure to understand that civilization is a state of war leads to mistaken resource allocations and roles. Jews certainly understand, for instance, that they are at war—they understand this at a genetic level that we do not, which is why we must consciously understand that civilization is a state of war despite their indoctrination to the contrary. This means that things as mundane as meetings of boards of directors are military actions, involving tactics, intelligence gathering and espionage.. Given this perspective it is far easier to understand the importance of what DanielS is saying. Moreover, the clear division of those who are expected to wage the kind of perpetual war represented by civilization, and those who are not also provides a humane treatment of our folk, as they are _not_ genetically adapted to a state of perpetual war as are the peoples of more “civil” cultures such as Jews, Hindus and Asians in general—and on a more tribal level—Africans and Hispanics. PS: One of the more destructive aspects of dealing with militant ignoramouses is that discourse cannot progress beyond their prejudices—they simply will not abandon them in the face of evidence to the contrary. A perfect example is in my understanding that certain forms of monarchy are a superior form of governance in civilization simply because monarchy recognizes the state of perpetual war. Discourse into the nuances of monarchy cannot proceed because the militant ignoramouses can’t get over their prejudices against my valuation of “individualism”. 5
Posted by daniels on Tue, 05 Feb 2013 20:05 | # Perhaps artificial insemination/ and surrogacy might be another possible reward for those who wish it upon completion of geriatric service. Understood that there is a risk with sperm after age 50, but perhaps its better late than never. 6
Posted by Graham_Lister on Tue, 05 Feb 2013 21:42 | # Just a methodological question with regard to civilisation and its discontents (to pardon the histro-cultural pun). Let’s say that Mr. Bowery is correct in all things. OK can perhaps Mr. Bowery outline when civilisation started, geographically and historically?, where and how (and by whom) was it initiated?, and what does a pre, post, or non (?) civilisational social-order (or is this term also out of bounds?) look like? I do think such matters are of some importance if you actually want people to seriously consider them as an alternative to present arrangements. Some grip on what we are actually talking about would be useful. Mr. Haller has his ‘vision’ and has given a very broad outline of its details. But it would seem at least on the surface very different from both Mr. Bowery’s concepts and from the ideas of danielS? Or am I once again mistaken? Any comparison of these rather different ideas needs some ‘flesh on the bones’ in order to evaluate them as to their likelihood, feasibility etc., rather than as merely obscure discussion between very abstract principles in which disagreements start to take on the quality of “how many angels can dance on the head of a pin?”, “sunshine from cucumbers?” and so on. We cannot afford to become the academicians of Lagado, can we? 7
Posted by James Bowery on Tue, 05 Feb 2013 21:47 | # To graphically illustrate what I mean about the failure of our instincts with regard to civilization, if we had appropriately evolved perception/reaction to things like mass media portrayals of “reality” or even “fiction”, it would be analogous to seeing media masters as the Islamic butchers in the following video and the viewers of the mass media as the victim of butchery in this video—the difference being the mutilation is to our bodies politic and minds: WARNING—this really is intended to make you virtually wretch This is only one of a wide array of offerings by civilization to which we should react with similar revulsion. This is how far out of date our evolved instincts are. 8
Posted by James Bowery on Tue, 05 Feb 2013 22:24 | # Individual: a sexual organism. Human: A moral individual. Individualism: the moral valuation of individual selection. Individual selection: selective pressure applied to the phenotypes of the individual’s own phenotypes as opposed to the extended phenotypes of other individuals of the same species expressed in that individual. Organism: the aggregation of replicators against which selective pressure is applied. Culture: the artificial selective pressure based on transmissible morals. Multicellular asexual organism: An asexual organism consisting of specialized cells. Cell: An organism that cannot long survive if separated from the organism of which it is a part. Group selection: The evolution of multicellular asexual organisms. Gang: Multicellular asexual organism whose cells are modified to fill specialized roles. Tribe: A gang related by consanguinity and congeniality. Nation: Individuals related by consanguinity and congeniality. Nation State: An extended tribe. State: An extended gang usually organized into one or more population concentrations called “cities”.. Civilization: An extended state. War: Gang selection. Peace: Absence of war. The natural history of war emerges with the evolution of eusociality in organisms such as the social insects and in the primate lineage leading up to humans. In the lineage leading up to present day humans war increases in intensity with the exception of the emergence of a culture of individual integrity in northern Europe that reduced war by moral sanction of individual combat. 9
Posted by daniels on Tue, 05 Feb 2013 22:34 | # Hi Graham, You must live in a lovely place in Scotland. I wasn’t aware that it would be necessary to illustrate the many places which are not quite so lovely, those which would lead us, without hesitation, to think in terms of radical White separatism as they do illustrate a horrific failure to the interests of Whites: Detroit, Newark (where I was born), Lagos…I guess other places in Africa would provide easy examples. As for the different visions that Leon, James, you and I may have for our preferred state, I take for granted at this point that we would each have the option of pursuing a state and community of our preference within a European cooperative effort. You would want to live in a Scotland peopled by Scots of various communities; with sister projects of Denmark and Sweden. James has made clear the kind of state/county that he’d like to inhabit. He would stake out a county that could possibly be taken over for Germanic sorts, and set his sites on an ideal of Iowa, Minnesota (giving him some water front), the Dakotas (hopefully the fracking won’t screw it up too much), along with sister states of Germany, Holland and perhaps some states in other continents (and non-continents) Leon’s vision of a state, WZ, a catholic state, hm…don’t know. Perhaps Vatican City and ... I would be satisfied with Poland, Italy, large states in Argentina, perhaps a few places in other continents.. details well, in time.. 10
Posted by daniels on Tue, 05 Feb 2013 22:46 | # /. I apologize if my (only somewhat) tongue in cheek posts appear to gloss over the apparently thoughtful and serious list compiled by Jim just moments before. 11
Posted by James Bowery on Tue, 05 Feb 2013 23:10 | # To be clear, DanielS, I have unified nature preserves and the ultimate punishment for crime within civilization under my preferred human ecology (see episode 1, part 2 of Sortocracy’s Compassion). Exile me and anyone else that is a reject from civilization to nature preserves that are protected from human conquest by imposing, within the nature preserve, the culture of individual integrity to checkmate human eusociality in those nature preserves. In other words, if there is a place for nature, there is a place for my culture. Yes, exiling people to such a “prison” will be a death sentence for many, if not most of them. The “prison population” will be self limiting. PS: Speaking of Rotterdam, as it has the highest crime rate in the Netherlands I, and others within my culture, would, indeed, have our hands full killing the exiles from there. But such would be our fate/destiny for being uncivilized. 12
Posted by Matt on Tue, 05 Feb 2013 23:29 | #
What is your definition of “individualism”? 13
Posted by James Bowery on Tue, 05 Feb 2013 23:41 | # “Individualism” is the moral valuation of individual selection. Individual selection is selective pressure applied to the phenotypes of the individual’s genes as opposed to the extended phenotypes of genes residing in other individuals of the same species expressed in that individual. Note that this permits extraspecific parasite coevolution which can give rise to true “strength in diversity” such as the relationship between man and dog. Note also that if an individual’s genes express a preference for consanguinity, this is still consistent with individualism. 14
Posted by Matt on Wed, 06 Feb 2013 00:47 | # How do we prevent individuals becoming extended phenotypes short of living solitary lives, like many animals do? People tend to have trouble recognizing themselves or others as extended phenotypes. 15
Posted by James Bowery on Wed, 06 Feb 2013 02:00 | # In symbiosis what might be thought of as mutual extended phenotypes are more parsimoniously modeled as simple phenotypes of the organism. In parasitism, the cricket, for example, can in no way be seen as expressing its own phenotype when it commits suicide so that the gordian worm can swim free to continue it life cycle. The natural mechanism for resistance to intraspecific parasitism is male aggression which prevents horizontal transmission of the parasite genes. Horizontal transmission is how virulence, including parasitism, evolves. This is why the Y-Chromosome has much more geographic structure than does the mtDNA.
16
Posted by Honey bubbles on Wed, 06 Feb 2013 02:52 | # I once spent months making plans to snare a wild unicorn by approaching it from out of a rainbow. So it wouldn’t see or hear me creeping up I wore elf boots and a magic invisibility cloak sewn by sorceress aunty Cleopatra. Sadly, unicorns are psychic… kenned the jig was up, fled the waterfall where they snuggle together, now I don’t know where they are! So sad! My aunty says I needed to write my plans backwards using a mirror. I think you should do something like this because otherwise jews will find out your plans. Vm1A aliriW :>i1lsi1a<>ariT :vsW aril ni 10111Iud blO If you need more help writing elvish…just let me know! Bubbles
17
Posted by James Bowery on Wed, 06 Feb 2013 06:48 | # Yes, Lord of the Rings did violence to Der Ring des Nibelungen but Frederick Parker-Rhodes may be forgiven for merely pointing out the fact that few are familiar with Wagner’s version compared to Tolkien. Get over it and grow up already. 18
Posted by Wandrin on Wed, 06 Feb 2013 07:49 | #
Yes. The only problem is this is most true when leveraged with technology - which is that demographic’s weak spot. However for those who may consider themselves too old to help, you’re wrong, but it may involve forcing yourself to become up to date on communications technology. 19
Posted by DanielS on Wed, 06 Feb 2013 08:11 | # I would like to note that it does not necessarily take huge numbers of our own personnel to enforce border control. Of course the critical problem is the powers that be. Otherwise, a great deal of border enforcement might proceed as TT suggests - for example, on the Mexican border: you would pay some Mexicans well to enforce the border, to shoot any Mexican who tries to cross illegally. The rest will generally shy-away. 20
Posted by DanielS on Wed, 06 Feb 2013 08:34 | # I’d like to think more about that one, though. It might be taking too much responsibility off of our own shoulders. 21
Posted by TH on Wed, 06 Feb 2013 09:28 | # America - the American state, and Jewry are synonymous politically, and America annihilates people who resist it. The people at present who are making war on Jewry and resisting Jewish hegemony are the men who go on Jihad. For anyone who is serious about literally going to war against America, that isn’t hard to do at present - so it’s hard to take it seriously when WNs claim they’re just waiting for an opportune moment, that conveniently never arrives, to ‘‘make war on ZOG’‘. Now you might say that people like Franklin or McVeigh ‘‘made war’’ on ZOG, but the white people you claim to be fighting on behalf of don’t view it that way. They think lone wolves are just felonious maniacs. So this kind of thing is a political nullity. 22
Posted by DanielS on Wed, 06 Feb 2013 09:41 | # The Internet is still new and we’ve got some more public relations work to do in terms of raising White consciousness. Regarding “the right time”, the White life-span provides one answer as noted in the post. 23
Posted by Thorn the Unicorn on Wed, 06 Feb 2013 13:36 | # What WN needs is a contingent of geriatric billionaires. 24
Posted by daniels on Wed, 06 Feb 2013 14:19 | # Maybe you can pull some strings, Thorn the Unicorn: That would put some geriatric boots on the ground. 26
Posted by last letters of Kamikaze pilots on Sat, 15 Aug 2015 11:03 | # Andy Nowicki reads last letters from Kamikaze pilots: https://soundcloud.com/jnow1101/last-letters-home-from-kamikaze-pilots http://alternative-right.blogspot.com/2015/08/last-letters-home-from-kamikaze-pilots.html Andy Nowicki:
27
Posted by Great Leveler & The Cycle of Civilization on Mon, 27 Jul 2020 19:29 | # The Great Leveler and The Cycle of Civilization - James Bowery Post a comment:
Next entry: Mobility, Immigration, The Big Sort and Political Polarization Yields Sortocracy
|
|
Existential IssuesDNA NationsCategoriesContributorsEach author's name links to a list of all articles posted by the writer. LinksEndorsement not implied. Immigration
Islamist Threat
Anti-white Media Networks Audio/Video
Crime
Economics
Education General
Historical Re-Evaluation Controlled Opposition
Nationalist Political Parties
Science Europeans in Africa
Of Note MR Central & News— CENTRAL— An Ancient Race In The Myths Of Time by James Bowery on Wednesday, 21 August 2024 15:26. (View) Slaying The Dragon by James Bowery on Monday, 05 August 2024 15:32. (View) The legacy of Southport by Guessedworker on Friday, 02 August 2024 07:34. (View) Ukraine, Israel, Taiwan … defend or desert by Guessedworker on Sunday, 14 April 2024 10:34. (View) — NEWS — Farage only goes down on one knee. by Guessedworker on Saturday, 29 June 2024 06:55. (View) Computer say no by Guessedworker on Thursday, 09 May 2024 15:17. (View) |
jr1qS11l’J1T19beMW Iln lllB 100 9&i! OJ ~Inunoqqo lnB110qm l 9I1l 9~BI ,911181blool1a _ ,1ev9WOH
Posted by Leon Haller on Tue, 05 Feb 2013 14:16 | #
The problem with even a mixed Normal/Geriatric Army is that it is likely, even in this technological age, to be less effective as a fighting force than the usual kind filled with healthy, young, high testosterone males.
Indeed, one thing that needs to be considered in terms of the military defense of the Euronation (though really, we ought to consider the military question of how to establish the Euronation before getting overly detailed about post-establishment defense), a point that I have made repeatedly in my verbal joustings with Graham Lister, is that any White Racial State will have to spend a lot of money on its military (in the early years, this could be in the 25-50% of GDP range; those numbers are not typos). This further implies that such a state will have to foster very high economic growth, which in turn will require that it be extremely capitalist (certainly more so than any existent country) so as maximally to harness individual initiative, knowledge and, frankly - let us be honest conservative realists and not utopian, tiny-scale ethnocommunitarians - the power of raw greed, to the larger collective task of ensuring white survival.
(This, BTW, is the answer to the conundrum about the proper relation of the individual part/person to the social whole WRT the race issue: the white individual should be afforded as much liberty to direct his own life as possible, subject to and disciplined by the larger national telos; viz, the perpetuity of the Euronation, and more broadly of the race itself. Thus, white individual liberty of course would never extend to such actions as selling weapons to our enemies, importing nonwhite workers or spouses, refusing to provide monies or manpower for the common defense or to submit to necessary vaccination, despoiling the natural environment, or perhaps to other activities collectively deemed detrimental to Euronation’s longer-term power and prospects, such as sex clubs, burning the flag, serial divorce, etc.)
Also, it should be noted that in the future, warfare is likely to be even more rigidly bifurcated than today between ultra-hightech drones on one hand, and very labor intensive infantry and special forces work, on the other. I suppose oldsters could drive tanks and APCs, or monitor surveillance cameras in border guard towers, but you don’t want a 75 year old flying a $100 million fighter jet, nor a bunch of them enduring the rigors of long periods spent underwater in submarines. And, outside of senior strategists (who are not recruits, but older, career military men, like one of my uncles), insurgency / counterinsurgency is a young man’s game.
I agree that many elderly could be far more useful in a Racial State than they are today under our current, ludicrous market welfare states, particularly as teachers, mentors and childcare providers. Something that even moderate conservative parties should be proposing as a vote getter is to add “Age” to the long list of impermissible grounds for workplace discrimination. The idiot Romney should have made such an ‘implicitly white’ policy a second-tier centerpiece of his campaign (ie, most of the elderly and near-elderly in the US are white, and will be at least through my generation - and many of us want and need to continue working late into our lives, thanks to the evil combination of socialism and multiracialism destroying our wealth). We have every sort of anti-discrimination group benefit - for racial minorities, non-Christian religions, women, possibly soon homosexuals - why not add to the list something benefitting upper middleclass white guys?