|
|
|
The Liberal Project Bumps into an Ecological Wall (Part I) One of the hallmarks of the ongoing Liberal catastrophe that we’re all experiencing is its inability to respect the natural boundaries and barriers of human existence. For example, we all know that by flooding our society with alien peoples and thereby ignoring the natural boundaries of identity that we are consigned to live in societies that have less trust and an ever dissolving social fabric. Moreover, we also know that by violating these boundaries of identity that we can expect the Liberal system to experience convulsions of anger, however incoherent, from the body of our own people as they slowly become aware of the dissolution that’s been planned for them. And just as the battle intensifies between the Liberal system and our people’s incoherent desire for life, ecological walls begin to loom over the horizon. From America’s paper of record just a few weeks ago: Arid Australia Sips Seawater, but at a Cost Take a moment to read the article. If I may briefly summarize the situation, the Liberal system has planned for Australia to become an overpopulated stew of various peoples that will require more fresh water than what the arid continent can supply in the long-term. The system’s solution to Australia’s next water crisis is not to plan for a sustainable society that aims to bring population levels in line with what the land can support but instead build more expensive desalination plants and pass off the costs (some of them unintended) to the natives. As you might imagine, some are starting to suspect that mindlessly growing Australia through an endless wave of immigration (sound familiar) might not be such a good idea after all. From the NYT article:
That’s what I call game, set, and match for the natural order of life on this planet. The Liberal system and the ideology that fuels it is so far removed from the natural order of things that it will come crashing down this century. Even if the natural life affirming instincts of our people fail (and I think they largely have) ecological walls will start to loom large this century for which there is no answer other than what the Liberal system refuses to do. To wit, how can a Liberal economic system built around the concept of endless growth answer the limits of nature? It can’t. In my opinion, the politics of the revolutionary Right must capitalize on this fundamental failure and present a vision of a sustainable Western society that is in harmony with itself and the world around it. As the ongoing crises of resource scarcity continue to rock the politics of the 21st century I think you can expect the wind to be at our backs with such a vision. Addendum: After reading Dan’s comment I was moved to write the following:
Comments:2
Posted by marlowe on Thu, 29 Jul 2010 11:01 | # http://www.vdare.com/walker/050202_sierra.htm Reminds me of Jew David Gelbaum’s strings-attached “donation” to the Sierra Club. Selfless, noble, charitable…a light unto the nations. 4
Posted by Notus Wind on Thu, 29 Jul 2010 11:14 | # PF,
Thank you for the welcome! 5
Posted by Guessedworker on Thu, 29 Jul 2010 12:31 | # I’ll second PF’s welcome. Very pleased to see you writing here, and I very much look forward to your work on the brain having us rather than us having a brain. 6
Posted by Notus Wind on Thu, 29 Jul 2010 12:43 | # GW,
Thank you once again for allowing me to contribute to MR! 7
Posted by Dan Dare on Thu, 29 Jul 2010 13:26 | # As the population of the United States trends inevitably towards 500 million by mid-century, desalination plants are likely to become as common there as they are in the Persian Gulf. The principal difference is that the Gulf Arabs will continue to have local access to free petroleum to drive them, Americans won’t. 8
Posted by Notus Wind on Thu, 29 Jul 2010 13:48 | # Dan,
Indeed that could become a reality along the California coast, perhaps someone from that part of the country could comment on how they see the situation evolving. 9
Posted by Dan Dare on Thu, 29 Jul 2010 14:34 | # As a general comment on the theme, I do feel that nationalists generally and immigration restrictionists in particular fail to give insufficient weight to the environmental impact of the demographic transformation. This is a missed opportunity to take a more oblique approach to the issue, one which handled deftly can avoid the usual charges of racism and xenophobia. Some ‘green’ organisations like the Sierra Club mentioned earlier are hopelessly compromised, but there are others which fulfil a similar a function and which are deserving of support. One such is the Optimum Population Trust, whose projections of long-term sustainable population on a global, regional and national basis are based on solid evidence and have never been effectively refuted. The OPT does affect a politically-correct ‘fair shares for all’ approach in the alocation of global resources but having been a member for several years and privy to internal discussion I am convinced that this is mostly camouflage intended to ensure that the population question receives a proper hearing in the media and government, as it is starting to do. With respect to the two countries mentioned here already, the OPT estimates long-term sustainable population levels for Australia and the US at 19 million and 241 million, respectively. This assumes the adoption of a ‘modest’ lifestyle, with per capita energy consumption at 40% of the current Western European norm. If ‘present’ lifestyles are to be attained, with corresponding energy consumption and CO2 emissions, the sustainable population drops to 10 and 91 million, respectively. 10
Posted by Notus Wind on Thu, 29 Jul 2010 15:23 | # Dan couldn’t be more correct here:
The environmentalist movement is deeply right-wing in at least two ways. It is to the Right both philosophically and aesthetically, we can see the former in its goal to preserve the natural world, which comes out of a conservative instinct, and the latter in its anti-humanistic and pessimistic tendencies. In my opinion it is an accident of history that the Left adopted environmentalist sensibilities as a quazi-cynical maneuver to attack polluting corporations (and by extension the capitalist system) while conveniently ignoring the fact that the worst environmental atrocities were committed by state governments (i.e. USSR and China). Furthermore, the Left’s decision to accept the moral authority of environmentalist thinking makes it a fabulous Trojan Horse for the discrediting of the Liberal vision amongst elites without even having to mention cultural matters. For example, anytime a Leftist tells you that we should restrict our carbon output and reduce the energy demands of our society to a sustainable level you should never fail to tell them that having a policy of zero net-migration would go along way towards achieving this goal. To wit, you cannot bring Third World peoples to Western society without also increasing their rate of consumption. There are powerful ideological tools here that we haven’t even begun to use and the best part is that the Left has no prefabricated response to any of it. I’ve been called “Racist!” on a number of occasions but never when making this kind of argument. 11
Posted by Dasein on Thu, 29 Jul 2010 16:16 | # Razib Khan (subcon at GNXP) was taken to task recently by a bunch of leftist anthropologists for this comment: If Eyak language was so awesome, why wasn’t the article written in Eyak? I find the paeans to linguistic and cultural diversity tiresome and knee-jerk. In 1820 there was a relatively wide range of diversity of views in regards to slavery. No longer today. Today the diversity in attitudes toward legal equality between the sexes is diminishing due to the implementation of gender egalitarianism by cultural elites and international institutions. More seriously, this needs some fleshing out: “That the Earth is becoming more homogeneous?—?less of a patchwork quilt and more of a melting pot.” Yes, the patchwork is being torn about, but smaller pieces are being reassembled. There are for example people today who are half-Chinese & half-English devotees of Vaishnava Hinduism. There are more combinations as the fuller possible parameter space is being explored, despite the decrease in the number of modes across the distributions. If you look at his profile pic, he kind of resembles a pigeon. Imagine a pigeon rummaging through some burger wrappers. That’s a metaphor for 3rd worlders in the West. Notus Wind, let me welcome you as well. I’ve enjoyed your comments, and look forward to reading more from you. 12
Posted by Bill on Thu, 29 Jul 2010 16:19 | # This is something else I don’t get. It is as Helen Meyer of Tugun Queensland infers, the Liberal power elite have an innate hardwired disconnect to totally ignore such things as the carrying capacity of the nation states they intend to flood with the surplus populations of the third world. I read only yesterday, where in Britain, we will have to build in the region of 100,000 new houses per year for ever in order to accommodate our vibrant newcomers and their future offspring. Not to mention the usual attendant infrastructure of highways, hospitals, waste disposal systems, power plants, water systems, places of work, etc. 100,000 home is a fair sized city for a small place like England with limited space. All of this will take place at a time of dwindling raw materials, dwindling energy, carbon emission capping and peak everything. An aside question arises at this point - where are the jobs to come from for the newcomers? Especially as has been announce today workers of the future will be expected to work beyond the age of 65. The intended future for the coming Brave New World is a sustainable living system with a much reduced world population. It is quoted in most NWO elaborations that it is intended the world population is to be culled from its present population of 6.5 billion to below 2 billion within two or three generations. If this true, why bother building millions of new homes? In a postmodern world, most discourse on such subjects as this very little make sense. Hey-Ho. 13
Posted by Dasein on Thu, 29 Jul 2010 16:20 | # Dan, thanks for e-mailing that pdf. I probably won’t get a chance to put that other post together before I leave town for a few days. It seems there’s lots of new stuff up at the moment anyhow, so I’ll save it for when I get back. 14
Posted by Notus Wind on Thu, 29 Jul 2010 16:24 | #
Thank you for the welcome Dasein! 15
Posted by Dan Dare on Thu, 29 Jul 2010 16:49 | #
Leaving aside the economic, cultural and societal impacts, Notus Wind correctly highlights the insanity of transplanting third worlders into the west from an ecological perspective. A Mexican turning up in America or a Pakistani in England automatically increases his eco-footprint (ie call for resources) by probably an order of magnitude. 17
Posted by Bill on Thu, 29 Jul 2010 17:24 | # Something else which has not been touched upon but only sparingly - is the economic impact of limitless immigration into Western nation states. I’ve mentioned before here, is it coincidence that all (or mostly all) white nation states have gone belly up economically with staggering government borrowing to keep immigration afloat in a post industrial world? I would opine, (as an economic illiterate) that importing and fast-tracking third worlders to a Western consumer lifestyle has been a major factor in our nations economic woes. 18
Posted by Bill on Thu, 29 Jul 2010 17:42 | # Just seen this. Britain to be the biggest country in Europe by 2050. What is wrong with this picture? It must have taken some research to find it. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/7916924/Britain-to-be-biggest-country-in-Europe-by-2050.html 19
Posted by Notus Wind on Thu, 29 Jul 2010 17:45 | # Bill,
I definitely think that limitless immigration hurts the economic opportunities of the native population in an advanced post-industrial society but I have no idea how to make this kind of argument without mentioning a bunch of numbers and statistics (a la Brimelow). Unfortunately, I’ve found that empirical arguments just aren’t very effective in a rhetorical setting because the other side can always present fraudulent data. On the other hand, who can deny the ecological consequences of immigration with a straight face? 20
Posted by Gorboduc on Thu, 29 Jul 2010 18:59 | # Welcome, Notus Wind. GW’s crack about brains reminds me of the old Christian retort to the hackneyed question: And speaking of Christians and race-replacement, well this shames us, but what the hell, 21
Posted by Thorn on Thu, 29 Jul 2010 19:05 | # The wealth transfer/redistribution from white nations to non-white nations is picking up steam:
22
Posted by Dan Dare on Thu, 29 Jul 2010 19:34 | #
If it were merely wealth transfer that would be one thing, however in many of the areas such as the four countries of Nile watershed where climate change will result in extreme water shortages at the same time as the population is in the process of doubling, no amount of money will create the water in the place where the need is. Guess what comes next. 24
Posted by PF on Thu, 29 Jul 2010 20:05 | # Dan wrote:
Wow, never thought of this before. 25
Posted by Rollory on Thu, 29 Jul 2010 20:55 | # Eh. Part of human nature is to modify the environment to better suit us. It’s what we do. The objectionable part of this is that the desalination goes to support a population increase that is essentially an invasion, not the fact of population increase itself. 26
Posted by Notus Wind on Thu, 29 Jul 2010 21:38 | # Gorb,
That’s alright, I got in plenty of my own fireworks in an exchange we had earlier, GW really handled it with aplomb. 27
Posted by Tom on Thu, 29 Jul 2010 22:35 | # From a chain email: A letter to Europeans and those of the European Diaspora; in other words, a letter to all white people. Dear White Man, We regret to inform you that your kind has been slated for termination. We, the various Third World majorities of Africa, Asia, India, South America, and the Middle East assert that your long history of success at building civilizations, developing new technologies, creating stable governments, fostering good will, feeding much of the world, and increasing peace and prosperity even amongst the riotous hordes of our own homelands, has made us envious and resentful of you. We, who make up 92% of the global population, feel that we can no longer accept the great disparity between your success and our abject failure. The solution to this inequality should be obvious to all concerned. We are planning to invade your ancestral homelands, little by little, and to facilitate this, we have the full cooperation of your controlled media and government, academia, and law enforcement organizations. While we, personally, do not control any of these entities ourselves, we are profiting endlessly from the crypto-Marxist system put in place many decades ago by an ethnic fifth column which operates with complete impunity at all levels of your political, academic, and media culture. Their interference in the natural development of your constitutional republics has been indispensable to our efforts to wrest from you the control of everything that you’ve struggled to build and maintain over the last century. Indeed, were it not for them, none of our present plans would have even been possible. By carefully controlling and managing the schools, universities, media, and press, this out group has managed to convince the great bulk of your racial kinsmen that not only is resistance futile, but that it is immoral, barbaric, depraved, and unworthy of a thinking individual. By promoting the stereotype of a racist redneck resistance, they have made the idea of a struggle for White Identity a veritable sin in the minds of nearly every White person. In short: they have convinced European-derived peoples that a prolonged suicide is preferable to the unmitigated evil of racism. Vergil, Mozart, Shakespeare, and all other bourgeois manifestations of your high culture will be vanquished forever. All of your legends and heroes will be spat upon, purged, and finally forgotten. Your cultural folkways will be transgressions; your identity will become a crime.
All Non-Whites 29
Posted by Bill on Fri, 30 Jul 2010 04:03 | # I little while ago, I posted I was trying to get a handle on Tory Cameron’s newly trumpeted agenda the Big Society. Cameron even had a a tete a etete about it on his recent visit to president Barak Obama. They were discussing Cameron’s Big Society. So what! I hear our American colleagues retort. This will explain. http://www.ukcolumn.org/articles/our-common-communityis The Big Society is Communitarian and is the new sustainable (big buzzword) living arrangement for the 21st century. No wonder our elites want us whites gone. The blueprint for this agenda (NWO) is the UN’s agenda 21 project which is is in the process of being rolled out. In fact it has been in place here in England for the past 12 years and was introduced By Blair’s New Labour project in the guise of the ‘Third Way.’ IOW’s, the convergence of capitalism and communism. http://www.hudson.org/files/publications/transnational_progressivism.pdf There is a more up to date version but I cannot find it. 30
Posted by Angry Beard on Fri, 30 Jul 2010 07:13 | # Before being colonized Australia supported a few hundred thousand stone age Aboriginal peoples in more or less the same manner as they had when they first set foot there. 31
Posted by Angry Beard on Fri, 30 Jul 2010 07:41 | # Of course massive uncontrolled immigration is all a load of complete bollocks. 32
Posted by Leon Haller on Fri, 30 Jul 2010 07:47 | # Very good, notuswind. Of course, some of us have been very fully versed in carrying capacity theory for decades (I played a role in the 90s in helping to formulate some of the cc propaganda for population stabilizers to wrest control of the Sierra Club from the immigration enthusiast/city-densifiers; ah, we came so close ...). People like Garrett Hardin and Roger Pearson have been warning us for over a half-century about the intersecting trends of Western-created Third World population growth, global resource scarcity and ever-easier migration possibilities (the latter’s Heredity and Humanity is the outstanding short summary work here). And there have been leftist traitors for many decades talking up ‘open borders’ as a means of alleviating what they call enviro-population imbalances between the West and the Rest. Let’s cut to basics, shall we? The (sociobiological) problems are simple to state: 1. overpopulation generally (threatening biosphere) OK, everybody (I sense Fred and others getting huffy) ... 5. Judeo-ethnic dominance of power levers in US; disproportionate influence within “global power elite”. Yes, we must use the environment and local sustainability as rhetoric to end what we would end anyway: the mud invasion. But notuswind overestimates their value (a mistake I made 20 years ago - perhaps he is young; no offense if not). I recall a date I was on in the 90s, during the heat of the Sierra Club immigration war. I patiently explained what we were about, oh so careful to avoid ANY mention of race and immigration. I couched my entire concerns in population-environment sustainability lingo. Alas, no dice. The bimbo started getting very agitated (shocking to me, as she had previously seemed pretty cool; I was sure she wasn’t too political, and even thought she might be a Republican); I remember (this was after a bunch of drinks) her saying that this “sounded sooo conservative”, “keeping our resources for ourselves and not wanting to share them”, along with more of same. Rapid psychological shift from flirty comments about assorted naughtiness at her all-girl boarding school, to defensiveness and the I’m-offended look our modern bitch females have had incised into their not very autonomous psyches (our racial enemies got to us at least as much through our females as our consciences). The date was a failure (though thank God it was only drinks, and not dinner!). Sorry, notuswind et al. Every issue goes back to the West’s denial of the Racial Principle. As long as we are unwilling militantly and proudly to assert our own collective genetic interests ahead of those of alien groups, we will lose every discussion and issue, no matter how valid, rational or scientific our position. For years I have been identifying the essence of “PC” as simply “whatever course of action, at any given moment, is the worst for the white man”. Can data defeat that mentality? Of course not. Our enemies will always find some way around our reasons, some way by which, at enormous cost to whites, we can maintain a pro-mud position. “Immigration-generated overpopulation?. Hey, don’t cut the immigrants! Impose cap and tax to reduce carbon footprint of natives, encourage Maybe One (child) (remember that environmentalist shitbag manifesto?), high-density ‘living’, public transportation ... but we caaan’t cut immigration!!!” We need, with the late Garrett Hardin, A New Ethics for (racial) Survival. Empirical data helps us build our case, but it will never be dispositive (except for plague ... maybe ...) without ethical change (really, ‘awakening’). 33
Posted by Fred Scrooby on Fri, 30 Jul 2010 08:42 | # The “chain mail” posted by “Tom” above is exactly right, one of the best short summaries of what’s going on I’ve ever seen. 34
Posted by Angry Beard on Fri, 30 Jul 2010 10:06 | # No-one but the most stupid, delusional fool (apparently this categorary contains a good many ‘highly trained economists’), could doubt that given the chance (ie if Labour’s secret immigration protocols, aka Neathergate were actually fully implemented), the *entire* population of bangladesh would immediately start to decamp to Britain over night.Yes, I do mean entire when I write entire, Bangladesh really is such a hopeless, purgatorial shit-hole. 35
Posted by Notus Wind on Fri, 30 Jul 2010 10:16 | # Leon, I agree with you that as a political matter revivifying our Western identity in both its racial and ethnic forms is our most important goal but I think that it must done within the context of a new vision for society. The liberal and socialist visions of society have very much run their course, I think, and it is not enough to just exchange out the current egalitarianism with our old sense of patriotism and leave everything else the same (I am certainly not the first to make this point either). And I am well aware of the fact that all of these ideas have been developed before but that doesn’t concern me because I see our task as being one of constantly recycling and refining already existing ideas in different ways so as to run them through the dialectical fire. Just to ram the point home, before there was any talk about ecological carrying capacity in the 20th century or even conservationist talk in the 19th century there was J. S. Mill himself! To briefly summarize my point in the main entry and comment here: (1) Ecological concerns serve as a completely independent critique of the Liberal system without reference to identity. (2) Environmentalist thought has a natural home in the intellectual Right and should be incorporated into its vision and ideology. 36
Posted by Leon Haller on Sat, 31 Jul 2010 05:50 | # Notus Wind, I agree with your points 1 (though I would like more elaboration of what you mean by “Liberal system”) & 2 (and thanks for the Mill quote; somehow that one escaped me; I read the most famous minor Mill works a quarter century ago - I wasn’t about to read Principles of Political Economy then, or now - but I was not ‘ecolate’ at that time, and so would not have remarked it). (And didn’t Alexander von Humboldt precede Mill? This is from memory so I might be wrong; I could check Wiki but that seems like cheating.) But I disagree about the need for a completely new vision. Liberalism and especially socialism haven’t run their course: they were always assinine. Ask any conservative/traditionalist. Why then can’t we reject the Left and return to or revivify at least the essence of historic national patriotisms (while recognizing that the locus of patriotism changes over time, invariably ascending to larger units: we are living through another ‘ascensionist’ period in the West, this time from nation to race, though nations very much still exist, and still exert a powerful pull)? Environmentalist thought also has a traditional place on the Right, or better, a place on the traditional Right. But we need to be careful about neopaganism, whether literal (eg Druidism - though it might be fun to prance at moonlight with a bevy of naked chicks), or modern (investing some sort of sacredness in the planet, even if it’s a recognized artificial imputation by questing humans fully aware they are in the GW/Dawkins “void of meaningless materiality”, or whatever). We should indeed practice ecological stewardship (a now common Christian concept, one representing a genuinely new moral advance in theology), but as a matter of intergenerational ethics, not because we seek to replace traditional Western metaphysics, or the morality derived from it. New political visions have a tendency to produce new horrors. Or, as the A/author of Ecclesiastes put it, several thousand years ago, “There is nothing new under the sun.” 37
Posted by Notus Wind on Sat, 31 Jul 2010 13:05 | # Leon,
What I mean by the Liberal system is the hybrid of liberal and socialist ideas that currently form the consensus of Western societies. We can see our liberal heritage in the general setup of our marketplace, overall access to the product of elite institutions, atomized conceptions of political identity, the potential for social mobility amongst ordinary folk, and many other things besides. On top of this liberal heritage sits a false morality that is socialist in origin and seeks to conform the liberal engine to its particular sensibilities and utopian vision. Yes, I would argue that this vision has run its course because we can now clearly see that it ends in an abyss that includes the destruction of Western peoples, rejection of traditional society in all its forms, and irrevocable degradation of the Earth. From a Christian perspective it is not hard to identify that this system is adversarial to all that is good, which means that it is empowered by spiritual energies that will always be with us in this life.
Agreed.
All I am looking for is a new vision (or philosophy) that will harmonize the timeless truths of our existence with the many changes that the modern world has brought. To my knowledge this has never been done. Contrast this with the development of socialism, which endeavored to create its abstract vision from whole cloth and completely break from the past and all it has to offer. Is it any wonder that an ideological system that starts with rejecting humanity would become inhuman. Post a comment:
Next entry: Black parents, white baby, Jewish journalism?
|
|
Existential IssuesDNA Nations
|
Posted by Notus Wind on Thu, 29 Jul 2010 10:43 | #
First of all, I am very pleased to be writing for MR. I hope that those who have taken the time to read the many comments that I’ve left at various websites and blogs will enjoy what I have to contribute to MR’s main page.
As a teaser, I do have a series of articles planned around the metaphysics of consciousness in the offing and I anticipate that my first contribution in this direction to appear sometime next week but possibly earlier.