The Wiglaf Question

stories_of_beowulf_wiglaf_and_beowulfThe ancient Anglo-Saxon poem Beowulf concludes with the young thegn (thane) Wiglaf as the last of the titular hero’s surviving relatives. Mourning Beowulf’s death by a dragon, Wiglaf envisions a dark future for their people. He knows that news of Beowulf’s passing will spread to neighboring tribes and inspire them to attack.

Without Beowulf’s legendary leadership, he is uncertain of their survival.

The situation we face in the West today is similar to that of Wiglaf. Western Civilization long since passed its apex, its zenith. Despite all the talk of making America great again, it will never be as it once was. America will never be great again in the same way.

This post by Chateau Heartiste contains some good anecdotes about how we’re living in a Post-Americana United States. We are living in the æðel begeondan, the crypto-nation that arose in America’s ashes.

In the years to come Western cultural influences will diminish further and further until the ethnic groups that comprised its founders will become small minorities in what Jack Donovan calls the Empire of Nothing.

This presents a dilemma I have coined the Wiglaf Question:

What will become of us now?

For the elite whites, the situation won’t change much within their gated communities in the affluent part of town where private security forces and deeply-entrenched political connections will keep them safe. But anyone else will have to contend with the years of anti-white propaganda preaching how oppressive we are and how we’re responsible for every conceivable ill in society.

At the same time, the rights Americans have taken for granted for generations will be either ignored by the Third World-style junta running the Empire or overturned by the growing population of peoples who have no ties to the historical Founding Fathers and a cultural background incompatible with Western traditions.

In recent months I’ve frequently cited Jack Donovan’s work here because his writing over the years demonstrates he has a very firm understanding of our predicament and how fruitless the prevailing solutions have been to rectify the situation. His perspective is more nuanced and, frankly, realistic compare to others on the Right who still cling to hopes of restoring America to its former glory.

In this 2012 essay he described two competing mentalities and why the current one adopted by “conservatives” has and will fail (bold emphasis added).

Whites are going to become minorities in a lot of areas, and hopefully being a minority white man who isn’t wealthy won’t suck too much. We can hope that all of the “youths” and “vibrants” who have been taught that we are their natural oppressors—and that we are naturally to blame for everything bad that happens to them—will be kind and benevolent to us. We can hope that they won’t hold a grudge or take advantage of us or attack us in an angry mob whenever the media winds them up.

We can hope that we’ll still have the right to bear arms and defend ourselves, and that we’ll be treated fairly by a legal system run by and for others.  The average guy can hope that judges and legislators will at least be reminded of the Constitution when they give decisions and write laws.

We can hope that freedom of speech will outlast us. We know that writing or saying the wrong thing may get us fired, but we can hope that they won’t put us in prison for it, like they do in more “evolved” nations like France, Germany, or England.

Basically, we can take a conservative positionWe can try to hold on to what remains from the past and what is good in the present. We can vote to keep things from changing too much, too fast. Maybe, if we’re really lucky, we’ll be able to regain some ground every once in a while—to right some wrongs, to correct some errors.

This has been the predominant strategy employed by mainstream conservatism; don’t restore what was, just slow down the degradation. Be the controlled opposition. Ensure the decline is carried out in a neat, orderly manner.

Those among the Alt. Right, neo-reactionaries and nationalists who hope to turn things around with this presidential election are acting naive at best. Whether Trump or Hillary is elected, the welfare state isn’t going anywhere. Social Security, Medicaid, Medicare and WIC will still be there in four years. No-fault divorce, family courts, divorce court, alimony, imputed income are not going to be removed. The Surveillance State will be just as strong or even stronger. We’re still going to be forced to remove our shoes at airports and pay punitive taxes to finance alternative lifestyles.

If the Great Conservative Icon Ronald Reagan couldn’t even kill off the Department of Education, then why should anyone hope for more now?

One of the greatest myths Americans continue to hold dear is that of “one nation, indivisible.” It’s a belief that betrays both the Spirit of ’76 as well as every Founding Fathers vision for the United States. It was never intended to last in perpetuity, nor did they expect it to.

Yet millions on both the Left and Right will scream bloody murder over the mere notion that this nation will one day splinter and fragment.

In the book “Forging the Hero,” the author writes:

To even suggest the potential—let alone the inevitability—of the fall of American exceptionalism though, is to risk raising the ire of both Left and Right. To the progressive of the Left, seeking the support of the uneducated mob, labels such as “reactionary,” or even “racist,” seems to be the standard, as does the accusation of being “opposed to the egalitarian, democratic ideals” of America. The pseudo-patriotic neo-conservative Right, on the other hand, considers it seditious to proclaim anything less than total, unwavering, blind faith in the immortality and divine guidance of the government of the United States…at least as long as the Congress and Presidency are firmly in the hands of the Republican Party. They begin sounding as much like a bunch of spoiled children as their political rivals, throwing temper tantrums, with their fingers stuck in their ears, tongues out, and eyes clenched tightly shut, as they scream, “USA! USA! Divine inspiration! Jesus loves America! USA! USA!

But it is going to happen, whether they want it to or not. The natural order of things dictates this. Rome fell. So will the centralized rule of Washington D.C.

In the meantime, what should Americans who recognize this do?

In 2013, National Policy Institute President Richard Spencer gave a speech at the American Renaissance conference on how we must completely overhaul our priorities.

Before we can move forward, we must come to terms with some rather dismal truths. There are no policy proscriptions or politicians currently open to us that will fundamentally alter our destiny.  And, most likely, within our lifetimes, we will not see the kind rebirth of Occidental civilization that we in this room know is necessary.

What we can do now is begin to set a new and different course.  Our challenge is to reorient our people, spiritually as much as intellectually and politically, to a world that will be hostile towards them and towards a future beyond the United State of America.

Spencer offers several proposals, including the creation of a new state within North America. Before that can happen (indeed, if it should happen) Americans must establish a new identity that is both separate and untainted by the Empire of Nothing.

That starts by removing all artificial associations, foremost the government that rules over you.

Donovan writes:

….. Your vote isn’t going to turn this thing around. The best thing you can do for your country—for the men around you, for the future—is to let the system tear itself apart. The way to increase personal sovereignty for men is to decrease the sovereignty of the state by withdrawing the consent of the governed.  Sure, this could and probably will result in naked power grabs by “elected” officials. These actions will only decrease confidence further. That’s short-term. I’m thinking about the long game. If American men stop thinking of the government as “us” and start thinking of it as “them”—if we stop thinking of ourselves as Americans and start acting in our own interests, things could get really interesting.

I think renouncing their American identity is too harsh a drink for most men to swallow, yours truly included. But the premise Donovan advises is sound.

It can start by Americans redefining, or clarifying, what it means to be an American. It doesn’t mean just living in the Empire of Nothing known as the United States, i.e. magic dirty theory. Contrary to what Doug Casey has said before, America is not an idea. It is a people.

To be American means to be of a certain background. A traditional American is a demographic, not a mentality. There are many hyphenated Americans, but Anglo or English are not one of them.

Back in 1919, writer H. P. Lovecraft did a commendable job describing Americanism as an extension of Anglo-Saxon culture (bold emphasis added, pg. 114; h/t Le Chateau).

It is easy to sentimentalise on the subject of “the American spirit”—what it is, may be, or should be. Exponents of various novel political and social theories are particularly given to this practice, nearly always concluding that “true Americanism” is nothing more or less than a national application of their respective individual doctrines.

Slightly less superficial observers hit upon the abstract principle of “Liberty” as the keynote of Americanism, interpreting this justly esteemed principle as anything from Bolshevism to the right to drink 2.75 per cent. beer. “Opportunity” is another favourite byword, and one which is certainly not without real significance. The synonymousness of “America” and “opportunity” has been inculcated into many a young head of the present generation by Emerson via Montgomery’s “Leading Facts of American History.” But it is worthy of note that nearly all would-be definers of “Americanism” fail through their prejudiced unwillingness to trace the quality to its European source. They cannot bring themselves to see that abiogenesis is as rare in the realm of ideas as it is in the kingdom of organic life; and consequently waste their efforts in trying to treat America as if it were an isolated phenomenon without ancestry.

“Americanism” is expanded Anglo-Saxonism. It is the spirit of England, transplanted to a soil of vast extent and diversity, and nourished for a time under pioneer conditions calculated to increase its democratic aspects without impairing its fundamental virtues. It is the spirit of truth, honour, justice, morality, moderation, individualism, conservative liberty, magnanimity, toleration, enterprise, industriousness, and progress—which is England—plus the element of equality and opportunity caused by pioneer settlement. It is the expression of the world’s highest race under the most favourable social, political, and geographical conditions. Those who endeavour to belittle the importance of our British ancestry, are invited to consider the other nations of this continent. All these are equally “American” in every particular, differing only in race-stock and heritage; yet of them all, none save British Canada will even bear comparison with us. We are great because we are a part of the great Anglo-Saxon cultural sphere; a section detached only after a century and a half of heavy colonisation and English rule, which gave to our land the ineradicable stamp of British civilisation.

Most dangerous and fallacious of the several misconceptions of Americanism is that of the so-called “melting-pot” of races and traditions. It is true that this country has received a vast influx of non-English immigrants who come hither to enjoy without hardship the liberties which our British ancestors carved out in toil and bloodshed. It is also true that such of them as belong to the Teutonic and Celtic races are capable of assimilation to our English type and of becoming valuable acquisitions to the population. But, from this it does not follow that a mixture of really alien blood or ideas has accomplished or can accomplish anything but harm. Observation of Europe shows us the relative status and capability of the several races, and we see that the melting together of English gold and alien brass is not very likely to produce any alloy superior or even equal to the original gold. Immigration cannot, perhaps, be cut off altogether, but it should be understood that aliens who choose America as their residence must accept the prevailing language and culture as their own; and neither try to modify our institutions, nor to keep alive their own in our midst. We must not, as the greatest man of our age declared, suffer this nation to become a “polyglot boarding house.”

…….Total separation of civil and religious affairs, the greatest political and intellectual advance since the Renaissance, is also a local American—and more particularly a Rhode Island—triumph. Agencies are today subtly at work to undermine this principle, and to impose upon us through devious political influences the Papal chains which Henry VIII first struck from our limbs; chains unfelt since the bloody reign of Mary, and infinitely worse than the ecclesiastical machinery which Roger Williams rejected. But when the vital relation of intellectual freedom to genuine Americanism shall be fully impressed upon the people, it is likely that such sinister undercurrents will subside.

The main struggle which awaits Americanism is not with reaction, but with radicalism. Our age is one of restless and unintelligent iconoclasm, and abounds with shrewd sophists who use the name “Americanism” to cover attacks on that institution itself. Such familiar terms and phrases as “democracy,” “liberty,” or “freedom of speech” are being distorted to cover the wildest forms of anarchy, whilst our old representative institutions are being attacked as “un-American” by foreign immigrants who are incapable both of understanding them or of devising anything better.

This country would benefit from a wider practice of sound Americanism, with its accompanying recognition of an Anglo-Saxon source. Americanism implies freedom, progress, and independence; but it does not imply a rejection of the past, nor a renunciation of traditions and experience. Let us view the term in its real, practical, and unsentimental meaning.

Americans can start separating themselves by the words they use, as language is the basis of any and all culture. They must separate themselves as a people from the government that claims to represent them. Americans are under the rule of the U.S. government but it is not their government.

Americans need to come to terms with the reality that they do not have a country anymore as properly understood. The prevailing culture is not theirs. The society does not represent them. The education system actively undermines the values they claim to hold. Ironically, the typical modern church, where one might expect to find refuge from such teachings, have become enemy strongholds.

The answer to the Wiglaf Question, what will become of us now, is for Americans to begin thinking and acting like their ancestors. They came to America because they were willing to separate from their homeland for the sake of their beliefs. They formed a new way of life.

Americans don’t need to leave America (where can they go?). They can form new institutions that specifically promote their values and clearly differentiate “us” from “them.” Reforms will go nowhere as they always have. The current system is beyond salvaging.

They segregate themselves from the influence of the state and form new universities, education centers, churches, social clubs, sports organizations, etc. These institutions cannot be for everyone or else they will be for no one.

Americans must have their children educated by other “Americans.” Only a fool lets his enemy educate his offspring.

They must also stop attempting to get their beliefs and viewpoint expressed through the state. A culture must be able to survive on its own; social norms must be enforced with strict non-coercive penalties for violating them. These values cannot be determined, defined or dictated by those outside of the tribe.

One of the reasons conservatives got their “cuckservative” nickname is because they claim to oppose progressivism but eagerly and unwittingly adopt whatever talking points, claims and concepts the Left throws out there. They speak out against leftism as they send their daughters and sons to universities where they are brainwashed into leftist teaching.

Americans must reject the legitimacy of the state to undermine or define their right to association. They must be prepared to ignore laws when needed and operate covertly and teach their children to do the same. They must throw off their universalist mindset and reject demands by others to include others in their “tribe” so to speak. They must completely remove themselves from the state institution of marriage, commonly in the form of bureaugamy, “a family pattern involving a mother, a child, and a bureaucrat.”

Lastly, this movement must be led by men; fathers, husbands, sons, brothers, uncles, nephews.

It must be patriarchal or it will fail.

This should not and will not be accomplished by official proclamations or declarations. It must be carried out quietly, subtly, and organically. Everything must be implemented unofficially and off the record with a know-nothing style form of denial.

These institutions are all Fight Club.

It should be noted that in the Beowulf poem, Wiglaf is the only warrior who stands by Beowulf’s side to the end when all other warriors flee the dragon’s wrath. Upon Beowulf’s death, he exiles the warriors as punishment for their cowardice.

The answer to our dilemma is like that of Wiglaf’s. The only question left is whether Americans have the courage to act while there is still time.

Beowulf is dead.

We are all Wiglaf now.

Photo credit: Wiki Commons.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in borders, Central Government, communism, conservativism, cultural marxism, Culture, education, free market, general political thoughts, Immigration, libertarianism, marriage, philosophy, political correctness, private sector, Public Schools, Religion, Social issues, society and tagged , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to The Wiglaf Question

  1. Gunner Q says:

    “Contrary to what Doug Casey has said before, America is not an idea. It is a people.”

    America was a religion, Protestant Christianity. Lovecraft himself noted this in the quoted portions above. Compared to Catholicism, Protestantism values rule of law over aristocracy (Bible over priests) and individual self-determination over group identity (priesthood of the believer over obedience to authority). I cannot imagine a non-Protestant people accepting and implementing Constitutional principles.

    Religion is one of the few forces as capable of organizing a society as tribalism. That was how America could endure as a heterogeneous nation. Now that the Churchians have poisoned Protestantism to death, I see no chance for a return to limited gov’t. Not when government makes such a useful replacement for God… the old game of Kings and Pawns.

    “A culture must be able to survive on its own; social norms must be enforced with strict non-coercive penalties for violating them.”

    This cannot be. There is no such thing as non-coercive enforcement.

    Like

    • The Question says:

      America was a religion, Protestant Christianity. Lovecraft himself noted this in the quoted portions above.

      Interestingly enough, Ann Coulter noted this in her interview with Stefan Molyneux.

      This cannot be. There is no such thing as non-coercive enforcement.

      I think there is confusion over what non-coercive means. Using violence to protect my property rights is not coercive because it is justified. I may compel someone to respect my rights through violence, but it is not coercive or aggressive.

      Likewise, many social norms can be enforced by shaming and ostracizing. A man who disgraces himself may not suffer from coercion or aggression as a result, but if it means no one will associate with him because of it, this not only punishes him but it has the effect of discouraging others to mimic him.

      Like

  2. Pingback: A New America Will Be Created By the Young | The Anarchist Notebook

  3. Pingback: “The Last Resort of the Thinking and The Good.” | The Anarchist Notebook

  4. Pingback: Thoughts On An “Amerikaner Free State” | The Anarchist Notebook

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s