Defending Tribal Bonds
Politics, philosophy, and human nature are the conceptual terrain of nationhood, tribal bonds, and natural states. I am a nationalist, indeed, but not in the sense that has become so twisted and maligned. It is grounded in a profound respect for the natural states of man as tribal bonds that have been acted out upon every stage of human development since time immemorial, most especially in civilisation.
The ancient tribes united people by blood, custom, and shared purpose. Through today’s propagandised spectacles all groupings of people are merely collections of individuals. These families, tribes, and nations, however, remain dependant organic entities, bound together by ties stronger than any imperial decrees. The ancient tribes respected the boundaries of nature, this was not due to an ignorance of the truth or superstitions but was an innate understanding handed down to them through the generations that harmony comes from balance, and strength from actual and legitimate cohesion, which can hardly be faked.
What does all this mean in practical terms? It means recognising that nationalism is inherently the singular form of anti-empire. Where empire seeks to homogenise, to standardise, and control by imposing its plans upon diverse peoples with disregard for their own unique identities. Nationalism, on the other hand, respects the natural bonds of tribe and clan, the organic structures that have evolved over millennia to suit the needs and aspirations of their members.
I do not a call for isolation or insularity. Far from it. True nationalism, that is tribal nationalism, is rooted in principles of mutual respect, commonality, and recognition. It acknowledges that while each tribe may be unique, all share common ground as having these same needs for tribe and identity. The peril is that of Victimentality (read more about Victimentality and Stockholm culture in my first book). Empire, now called “globalism” euphemistically, is when nationalistic pride is twisted into a tool for exploitation.