Sunday, May 12, 2019

Mailvox: why is civic nationalism wrong?

DK wants to know why an unlimited number of people from different nations should not be permitted to immigrate even if they accept Western Civilization Values:
I am trying to understand how to take the leap intellectually from a Civic Nationalist to a Nationalist. My view thus far has been that as long as people from different nations immigrate, take on and accept Western Civilization Values that there is no reason that we should not accept them into the country. Do you have a particular blog or video posted that would give me more insight into why my view is incorrect.

Thank you for all the free information you have provided. I was a JBP and Ben Shapiro fan before you and you have open my eyes to how deceitful they actually are so thank you.
Go ahead. Demonstrate what you've learned here over the years. Seeing as I've already co-written a book on the subject, I'll leave this one to you all.

Labels: ,


Blogger Laughingdog May 12, 2019 8:07 AM  

"take on and accept Western Civilization Values"

That right there is the problem. Even well intentioned immigrants can't manage that. They can mark off some test answers correctlycorr citizenship. But their background is too different to internalize most, or all, of the Constitution.

Blogger Randomatos May 12, 2019 8:16 AM  

Historically, incoming nations don't really assimilate. They balkanize, undermine the natives, and either drive them off (whether to reservations, other lands, or to the sea), kill them, or kill the men and interbreed with the women. Even in the illusory peacefull coexistence stage preceding balkanization, they naturally push for their own interests rather than the interests of the natives, whether it's settlers on the frontier hunting on Indian lands, or Irish cops protecting Irish gangsters, or Neo-Palestinians pushing for anti-BDS laws.

Blogger Stg58/Animal Mother May 12, 2019 8:16 AM  

If membership in the nation is defined by civic values, then if you change the values, you change the nation.

1950 civic value: no men in women's bathrooms

2019 civic value: children are sex objects

Blogger Dark glasses Woody May 12, 2019 8:20 AM  

Quite aside from the statistics on IQ, the impossibility of testing for western values, the lack of successful precedent or the dissolution of social cohesion; most compelling for me is the observation that a people deserve to endure. None are more actively and sucessfully racist than the jackbooted multi-cultists.

Blogger Mr.MantraMan May 12, 2019 8:21 AM  

My take on civnattery is that it is silly virtue signaling done under duress. Frankly it is an embarrassment especially when you realize that the virtue signalers never scold the "Other" over any trespass, but only punch down on safe targets on the Right.

Take the two accomplished authors that used to post here, the tough macho military dude would probably crap his pants if called "racist" then go on a diatribe against the "real racists" and the other very accomplished author if called "racist" would probably write a 2000 word essay, of mainly moral chaff while again lambasting the "real racists."

Anyway my advice to any civnat virtue signaler, yes please go forth and preach it to the "Diversity" then get back to me.

Blogger basementhomebrewer May 12, 2019 8:21 AM  

There are really 2 simple problems that play on each other. I will start with problem 2 which illustrates problem 1.

Problem 2 is that even if the first generation fully attempts to assimilate into their new society they still remain apart. As a result the second generation tends to notice this separation and chooses to embrace the identity of their parents home country rather than the new country. The easiest illustration of this is that the UK terrorists all tend to be 2nd generation. So, the second generation doesn't embrace Western values this leads to problem 1.

Problem 1 of Civic Nationalism is that there is no mechanism to kick people out for not embracing the values of the nation. Further, there will never be popular support for such a mechanism because no parent wants to risk their children being kicked out of their country. This mechanism would necessarily have to apply to heritage American's as well in a true Civic Nationalist based society. As an example a very large portion of the baby boom generation would have been stripped of their citizenship in the 60's because they did not embrace Western values and actively sought to undermine them.

There is much more to examine, even with just these two problems, but these two problems sum up some of the more glaring issues with Civic Nationalism.

Blogger Tanjil Bren May 12, 2019 8:23 AM  

Peoples make nations.
Different peoples, different nations.

Blogger JG May 12, 2019 8:23 AM  

Diversity + Proximity = War

Blogger Yordan Yordanov May 12, 2019 8:25 AM  

There would be no problems in a society as long as it rich and prosperous, the problem is that the times aren't always going to be good. Even if they are not good in your lifetime, they will down the line - something you will care, if you care what you give your descendants.

And when times do get tough said "special characteristics" groups tend to coalesce into a special interest group that is often trying to get itself ahead at the cost of the native majority. A micro example would be the OJ Simpson case, where a black jury refused to indict a black offender. A more macro example would be the Kurds who after so many centuries have yet to accept Turkish rule.

This doesn't mean that the native majority is in itself a cohesive group, but rather than the subgroups it fractures into does not seek to further it's goals at the expense of the natives. Not to mention that if you welcome a minority that is predisposed to Western Value, there is no guarantee that their children wouldn't start identifying with the interests of their minority group - examples being Turks in Germany.

Blogger VFM #7634 May 12, 2019 8:25 AM  

Because they vote 90%+ for the Democrats, and hence against civilization, running water, and electricity.

For starters.

Blogger Steb May 12, 2019 8:29 AM  

Immigrants don't know what western values are. Do you know what Japanese values are? Maybe if someone offered you money to move there you could say you were accepting them, but what would that really mean?
Secondly, even if you struggled to change your outlook to a Japanese view, there's a good chance your children would embrace Americanism when they grew up, just as a way to define themselves when they felt alienated from Japan

Blogger ZhukovG May 12, 2019 8:32 AM  

The only way that one group can assimilate into another group is to become so submerged, culturally and genetically, that they essentially cease to exist. Any group that still possesses an 'identity' is not assimilated.

As for one 'identity' group taking on the culture of another 'identity' group. I would argue that in all of history this has never happened.

An 'identity' group can adopt features of another group's culture. But, what results is a hybridized culture never the original 'native' culture.

'Good' immigrants destroy a nation as surely, if more gradually, as 'Bad' immigrants.

Blogger peacefulposter May 12, 2019 8:40 AM  

A nation is a people who share common blood, history, traditions, language and culture.

Not a piece of paper.

Blogger Colonel Blimp May 12, 2019 8:40 AM  

The easiest way to answer this is to take off the blinders modern society gives you and merely ask yourself, "If I were to move to China permanently without speaking the language and more than likely in this analogy have no marketable skills other than my grunt labor, would i be likely to adopt a love of all encompassing government, robot-like soulless striving, and a taste for dogmeat??? Would I welcome being forced into one child only, abandon my religion by law, and tow the party line in all things? Especially the 95% that are anti-American/western? Would I take Chinese glories of the past super seriously and most tellingly would I willingly stand a post and die fighting Taiwanese or Americans in a future war. Would I kill my cousins???"

This should clear things up.

Blogger Lovekraft May 12, 2019 8:59 AM  

Unless one accepts that there are limits on a nation's capacities to accept and integrate new and potentially-hostile cultures and races, there is no debate.

But if one accepts this premise, the onus is on the open-borders advocate to demonstrate to the rest of his nation which steps have been put in place to prevent balkanization and general social apathy.

I would also require investigation into the advocate's family history and whether a strong father was present.

Blogger Skyler the Weird May 12, 2019 9:01 AM  

The Hapsburg Emperor of Austria Hungary thought he had a good Civnat thing going and diversity was his strength until the Fall of 1918 when even the Hungarians left him high and dry and the Austrians were routed at Vittorio Veneto.

Blogger Doktor Jeep May 12, 2019 9:04 AM  

What's missing here is the damage it does to kids. Both the kids of the immigrants and those of the natives. The experience of the children is on the same lines of the experience of a race-mixed kid. A race-mixed kid is not going to be "enough" of either race to satisfy either race. But even those who are not race-mixed still get some of that experience.
I come to these conclusions more so out of concern for people who come from other countries who I consider friends. Thusly, I'm not trying to be a bigot: I hate everybody equally. But those who cross the membrane and earn my trust and respect individually lends me observations I normally would not have. And the conclusions I reached from this is that while they may have gotten the "better life" they were seeking, they are no more happier than the usual characters in the usual "rags to riches" sort of story. Yes they have air conditioning where they might have not had it before (most of them did, BTW). Yes they might have a car, or a new car, where they didn't before. Yes they have a better house so far as the USA has better building codes. Yes they have better jobs and more money where they might not have had it before - yet we don't see everybody dropping like flies back in their home countries because of the job market, do we?
But are they happy? No. No more than say some white kid from a trailer park who gets lucky and ends up living in a mansion somewhere. He can say life is better, but he just gets a new set of problems and concerns to replace the old one.
Now add in multicultural unhappiness. It's its own flavor. I hear it from the hispanics all the time: the worst treatment a hispanic gets in the USA is from other hispanics. Talk to them long enough and you find out that they don't like each other. Ecuadorians don't like Venezuelans. Puerto ricans don't like Mexicans. Etc. But they still end up having to date and work with each other, and the term "hispanic panic" exists for a reason.
Thus they white kid from the sticks is going to be more happy and in his element back in the sticks, he'll waste his life in some city slurping Starbucks until he faces the reality and decides that money is not so important, I could say the same for these immigrants. Sending them back would be doing them a favor and for that I would not shed a tear if that day came. And I say this as an American whose ancestors came off a boat from Italy, but I had to put up with Germanics and Jews in my youth and that sucked. But we had it easy: in previous generations, according to my dad, even the white people in NYC were beating each other up over their differences.
Diversity needs to be recognized as the bad thing that it is. And it needs to be unwrapped from the emotion and brainwashing that surrounds it. Take diversity at its core and study it, weigh the pros and cons, and one finds it lacking in pros. Oh but urban bugmen can get some foreign recipes at any time of the day or night! Who really gives a shit? It's not like we don't have an internet.
Nationalism, ultimately, is not some incursion against the religion of diversity and it's fundamentalist wing we know as equalism. Nationalism is the conclusion when one takes a cold honest look at diversity and what it does to people.

Blogger Gettimothy May 12, 2019 9:11 AM  

Who pushed civiv nationalism on us? What motivated them? Civic Nationalism was inthinkable to Charles Lindbergh. What changed between then and now?

Are the same techniques that indoctrinated you still at work today?

Who? Why?

Blogger Damn the torpedos May 12, 2019 9:18 AM  

Move to Chicago or LA

See for yourself how well the experiment of expanding the definition of American to include non Europeans is going.

Blogger Freeholder May 12, 2019 9:24 AM  

The immigrants change the culture as much as the culture changes them, assuming that are actively trying to assimilate. If they are not trying to assimilate then it then it is even worse. If you are letting them in, then you are agreeing to the culture shift in your own culture.

Blogger Zaklog the Great May 12, 2019 9:24 AM  

Look at opinion polls. The simple fact is that these immigrants from non-western countries simply do not accept our values. They do not want the kind of society we want to live in. Your western-values-adopting immigrant is vanishingly rare, and even when they do exist, as others here have pointed out, their children frequently revert to values more like those of their home country.

Assimilation, at least from non-European countries, is simply a myth.

Blogger Jab Burrwalky May 12, 2019 9:27 AM  

Different people are genetically predisposed to value certain forms of social structure. This is readily apparent by the latino inability to shed dictatorships, the Chinese complicity and love of a totalitarian state, both pre-communist and modern, the passion for equality and accountable rule that pervades Western history and is the reason there were no thousand year dynasties, and the reason democracy is unsustainable in the middle East. Besides that, a nation is far more than its civics, which are mutable. It is rooted in a heritage which a person cannot change.

Blogger Ingemar May 12, 2019 9:29 AM  

It is also becoming increasingly obvious that highly skilled, high IQ immigrants are as corrosive to the social order as unskilled low IQ immigrants. E.G. The worldwide Chinese real estate grabs. Ask the citizens in US and Canada permanently priced out of their housing markets how they have benefited.

Blogger Miguel May 12, 2019 9:32 AM  

Whats wrong with CivNat? Skin in the game. If you did not build, you wont take care.

Blogger Shimshon May 12, 2019 9:33 AM  

Because if it were about values, then what about the first generation of "native" offspring? Reversion to the mean (in this case, non-Western values of ancestry) is real and common enough. Should they go back if those values are no longer shared, whether by them or their descendants?

How many immigrants subscribe to the tenet that because they (or their ancestors) are immigrants, immigration should be open to others (including my cousins, aunts, uncles, and so on down the line)? Too many. This is NOT a Western value. Therefore, no.

Blogger Rocklea Marina May 12, 2019 9:39 AM  

DK, NPC is a powerful meme because it is true of us all. You have been programmed, by the media you consume, the books you read, the movies you watch and the schools you attended. You even have friends and acquaintances that will say things like, "The real problems is the ones who don't assimilate." and, "I'm not racist but...". Sometimes civilisations make mistakes which history then corrects.

The new immigrants may even be able to answer more questions correctly than you on a civics exam. But the right answers to words on paper have no relevance to ancestry and what you know in your bones. Blood is thicker than intellect.

Blogger Dave May 12, 2019 9:42 AM  

Well, DK, to start with watch these free videos that can be seen on Unauthorized.TV here:

Voxiversity 001: Immigration and War
A Voxiversity describing the intrinsic relationship between immigration and war.

Voxiversity 002: Sink the Ships
The YouTube-banned Voxiversity on the historical dangers of allowing entry to refugees.

Also I highly recommend the book Vox referenced in the OP; Cuckservative: How "Conservatives" Betrayed America written by Vox and John Red Eagle. It's not free, but for the low, low price of $5.99 it can be yours. Buy it here or find it on Amazon if you prefer.

Vox, note Cuckservative ebook page, the link for the audiobook version jumps to SJWAL Amazon page.

Blogger Robert What? May 12, 2019 9:44 AM  

Regardless of your views on Civic Nationalism, all you have to do is look at the results: a deeply divided country with millions of migrants who have zero interest in assimilating to your bogus Civic Nationalism.

Blogger Boris May 12, 2019 9:48 AM  

Different races are genetically hard-wired with different values and different propensities for, and tolerances of, various behaviors. Lumping a bunch of diverse races together and expecting them to live together harmoniously is the height of idiocy.

Blogger RC May 12, 2019 9:52 AM  

Vox has an apt saying that he’s used many times in various forms: Let reason be silent when observation and experience gainsay it.
This test, this tool, may provide the best evidence that civic nationalism simply does not work. Honestly weigh the results of immigration as they do not lie. One can examine world history to build an overwhelming case, but the American Experiment is more than sufficient.

Start by familiarizing oneself with the American Founder’s writings and arguments. They are readily available. Read their books; read their letters but start with the Constitution, the Federalist Papers, and the Anti-Federalist Papers. Write down primary points of contention between the factions. Then move forward through American history and see how the Founder’s values and their American nation have been systematically deconstructed and destroyed by those not of the nation. The vapid arguments of today’s U.S.A. bear no resemblance to the bedrock of the founding. Their Constitution is without meaning in the U.S.A. If the Posterity were in power, they would.

Eyes so opened will not then be shut. The people are the bedrock upon which a nation is built. Without the people, the nation is meaningless. Remove the Japanese from their islands and replace them with Africans or any other people (nation, tribe) of your choosing. What becomes of the Japanese islands? The rock remains, but the nation is no more. They would have no posterity. Welcome to the U.S.A., a nation being systematically destroyed on an increasingly accelerated basis, the treasured Posterity replaced with Other. Whatever form the country might take, it won’t be the American nation.

Blogger Mike May 12, 2019 9:56 AM  

What a retarded question. You have the values of a culture by being born to and raised by parents of that culture within a community of other members of that culture. Otherwise, you're a foreigner. You do not and cannot choose to "take on and accept" another culture and magically change your identity. At best, you can just accept your status as an inferior outsider and try to be as unobtrusive as possible.

Blogger Ransom Smith May 12, 2019 9:56 AM  

My view thus far has been that as long as people from different nations immigrate, take on and accept Western Civilization Values that there is no reason that we should not accept them into the country.
Western Values is a vague and frankly deliberately catch all phrase.
The values of Scotland and different than the values of Sicily.
They don't worship the same, act the same, or even think the same.
Attempting to lump people of very different cultures into a single pot doesn't lead to gumbo .It leads to ingredients that don't mix and are at odds with one another.

Blogger D E K May 12, 2019 10:00 AM  

There is the genetic component to it. The muslim lived for centuries in tribes, that has to show up in your genes. As well as the Chinese acceptance of authority. Even when an odd Arab or Chinese does behave like us, loves our way of life and becomes a super civic nationalist....the problem is with his gene pool and his children, they will come back to the normal middle of his ancestors.

Blogger Lazarus May 12, 2019 10:00 AM  

My view thus far has been that as long as people from different nations immigrate, take on and accept Western Civilization Values that there is no reason that we should not accept them into the country.

Rather than paraphrase Vox, I present the following quote:

America is not, and has never been, an idea. America is a nation, which means, by definition, that Americans are an actual and distinct living people. The claim that America is an idea or a creed is not merely an insult, it is an existential attack on the genetic Posterity of the American Revolution, a nation that has been invaded, adulterated, betrayed, confused, and demoralized to the point that it doesn't recognize itself or even know what it is.

They FEEL American

Blogger megabar May 12, 2019 10:00 AM  

Group A will form resentment towards Group B when they can clearly perceive a difference between groups, and they feel that B is a threat in some way (cultural, economic, political, etc).

There are multiple forms of difference, but we'll limit it to 2. Learned differences include languages, favorite sports, etc. Innate differences include physical and psychological traits such as IQ, propensity towards crime, athletic ability, etc.

Note that learned differences fade in a generation if there are no innate differences, and if a group isn't brought in rapidly enough to establish its own sub-society.

Innate differences are much more persistent, and so you must be much more careful -- it takes a lot of time for them to eventually interbreed and fade out as a distinct sub-group.

Note that immigration is *not* the only way to generate groups. Assortive mating and freedom to travel in the US is producing two distinct subgroups among whites: elites and underclass.

Basically, the US is doing everything in its power to form as many groups with resentment potential, as fast as it can. Combine this with a backgroup of dysgenics.

Blogger Brett baker May 12, 2019 10:02 AM  

I'm doing the transition myself. Basically, what it comes down to is that most CivNats, when you say we're going to have to deport people who can't support our values, freak out.

Blogger David Ray Milton May 12, 2019 10:03 AM  

Diversity is real. All of the people’s of the Earth are very different from one another in the ways that they process the world, rationalize, behave, and communicate. We are all also born with a God-given in-group preference for our own families, which is all a nation is... a large family. The best way for everyone to prosper is by living with their own large national family.

The idea that someone could overcome their genetic family heritage by accepting some civic proposition is silly, especially when you consider that proposition is the product of another family’s ancient heritage. Just as you could never really be the son of someone who is not actually your parent, you could also not belong to a different nation besides the one that you are born into.

Blogger johndoe03526 May 12, 2019 10:09 AM  

Here's some examples of why civic nationalism is a joke. Look at foreign born office holders Hirono, Lieu, Omar. Have they accepted Western values? Hirono doesn't agree with due process, innocent until proven guilty. It's a travesty people like this are in our national legislature.

Blogger Daniel May 12, 2019 10:10 AM  

Forefathers means blood. Even the far-Left Abraham Lincoln understood the plain meaning of the term: his lineage was pure English, his nation was America, dating to 130 years prior to the Revolution, his grandfather was killed by Indians, and his conquest of the South was the deepest imaginable (at the time) expression of what we now call "civic nationalism."

Leave your fairy tales behind. A handful of mixed/impure descendants of Americans can consciously, actively pass for Americans, but "nation" doesn't just mean means lineage.

Blogger Desdichado May 12, 2019 10:11 AM  

The only way that Civic nationalism works is wity such big caveats that it isn't really Civic nationalism anymore.

The statement about immigrants is true IF the number of immigrants is so small that they cannot threaten demographic change and they intermarry with the natives and their descendents in a few generations are essentially indistinguishable from the natives.

Because ~80% of our behavior is genetic, the idea that vast waves of fake Americans can move into America and become Americans in their behavior and Civic values is anti-scientific.

Blogger Sam May 12, 2019 10:13 AM  

If they truly internalized western values, they know they are universal and it is their duty to remain in their home country and spread them. See Christianity, history of.

After all, what kind of person would come to accept one way is superior and then decide against giving their family and nation the opportunity to BUILD (not parasite) a better life?

Blogger Garuna May 12, 2019 10:17 AM  

The fundamental mistake civic nationalists make is that they assume immigrants want to assimilate.

Immigrants don't come to America for "values". They come for the money. Do you honestly think all these people would come to America if they could make more money back home? You're not stupid. You know the truth about their motivation.

Now if they're very small in numbers, they are forced to assimilate or they'll be outcasts and have trouble prospering. But if they are large enough in numbers, they don't have to assimilate at all to prosper. They can just ghettoize. Which is exactly what they do.

Latinos love being Latinos. Sharia Muslims love being Sharia Muslims. The same is true for any group that becomes large enough to ghettoize and remain who they are. Why should they give up their identity for America? What is the incentive? Why should they assimilate? It is not convenient for them. It is convenient for you. Why should they inconvenience themselves for you? Why should they throw away that which they are proud of for you? Do you think you're special?

They can just join La Raza or BlackLivesMatter or the Muslim Brotherhood. They can vote against free speech, gun rights, capitalism, small government, liberty, and everything else you "value". They can burn the American flag. They can tear down statues of all your heroes and founding fathers. They can literally rewrite your history as they please. Certainly they can rewrite your laws and your precious constitution. They can beat MAGA people in the streets. Hell, they don't even need to bother learning English. And a lot of them don't.

Why shouldn't they? They lose nothing. They only win more than ever before. They only gain from being tribal. And if the country collapses due to bad decision-making, they can just head back home. Or hell, they can just claim American territory as their own and secede. We all know California is gone. It will never be American again. And in a collapse scenario, the latinos will just take it. Because why not? It's neat real estate.

What are you going to do about it? Tell them to drop their effective strategy that has lead them to gain money, land, and power?

There is literally no reason for minorities to assimilate if they are large enough in numbers.

By the way, none of this behavior is evil. It is how people have always been. There is no point being consumed with feelings of hatred and wrath towards these foreigners. What is wise is to never let them in in the first place. And if they are inside already, it is prudent to find a way to send them back. Or violence may be inevitable whether you like it or not.

Blogger Stg58/Animal Mother May 12, 2019 10:17 AM  

All of you writing novellas, stop. Totally ineffective dialectic sperging. This is why you lose.

Blogger Johnny Ducati May 12, 2019 10:22 AM  

I always thought our role as leader of the Free World was to transmit our foundational ideals to the world, rather than meddle in alien cultures and accept the wretched diaspora of the resulting chaos.
We violated the Prime Directive, and we are paying the price.

Blogger Quilp May 12, 2019 10:24 AM  

The first thing they do after gaining citizenship is very often to try and bring more of their own kind here. They want a little (at first) community of their kind in America, not to be a lone outsider trying to become American. They don't show up on a Sunday morning at the local Episcopal Church looking to join, they try and bring a congregation of their faith here.

Blogger Dave May 12, 2019 10:33 AM  

Anecdotally you don't have to look any further than the post immediately preceding this one. How long has this woman that calls herself a Jordanian-American (see Twitter and Amazon author profiles) been a hyphenated U.S. citizen and lived in the DC area?

Take a look at her Twitter profile where she's place the Jordanian flag in front of the U.S. flag. According to her Amazon author page, she's appeared on PBS's Foreign Exchange, Scarborough Country, and BBC's Up all Night, and her byline has appeared in the Washington Post, Al Jazeera, Huffington Post, and the Jordan Times. Assimilate? Take on and accept Western Civilization Values? She's spitting in our faces; not even making an attempt to appear to assimilate. I mean; Scarborough Country and the Huffington Post?

She needs to be stripped of her hyphenated U.S. citizenship immediately as she still doesn't understand you never, ever publicly criticize or even comment on the activities of a black person on the DC Metro, especially a black female DC Metro employee, and especially a black female DC Metro employee eating on the DC Metro.

Blogger Gettimothy May 12, 2019 10:33 AM  

Consider that Nationalism is a positive moral good on both Biblical and , increasingly, genetic grounds.

That it is necessary for human flourishing and happiness.

We should never abandon the moral high ground.

Civic nattery is corrosive to the dignitydand well being of the several peoples

Blogger The Depolrable Podunk Ken Ramsey May 12, 2019 10:40 AM  

Wherever people move, they start fixing the place up to be "just like home". That's why the original Colorado people have come to hate Californians. And the original Florida people have come to hate New Yorkers. Because look what they've done.

You don't even have to be a foreigner to permanently alter the places you move to.

Blogger David Ray Milton May 12, 2019 10:44 AM  

That last paragraph is gold.

Blogger VFM #7634 May 12, 2019 10:49 AM  

Immigrants don't come to America for "values". They come for the money.

@42 Garuna
More like: the rest of the world, which is overwhelmingly socialist, sees America as a Special Economic Zone.

Blogger Crave May 12, 2019 10:53 AM  

Politics is downstream from the culture, which comes from the people. If the peoples of Mexico and Japan swapped locations Japan would cease to be Japanese and Mexico would quickly become Japanese. No matter how much these new "Mexicans" love and promise to keep Mexican values, the true internalization is the natural beliefs, values, art, and other aspects of culture developed through the ages that works for their people. Their children will not become more Aztec, regardless of how close their birth is geographically to an Aztec Temple. That is the truth behind your proposition nation and magic dirt. Nations are the people. An extended family. Ideas do not create them. Certain patches of land do not make them. They create unique ideas and make where they live work for their people.

Blogger Yordan Yordanov May 12, 2019 10:54 AM  

@43 Just because some people refer rhetorical answers, doesn't mean we should stuck exclusively to rhetorics. I suspect many of the visitors to the blog or the Darkstream audience are here/there because of dialectics.

Blogger Gettimothy May 12, 2019 11:00 AM  

Consider that Nationalism is a positive moral good on both Biblical and , increasingly, genetic grounds.

That it is necessary for human flourishing and happiness.

We should never abandon the moral high ground.

Civic nattery is corrosive to the dignitydand well being of the several peoples

Blogger Jim May 12, 2019 11:02 AM  

See the French Revolution for the problem with civ nationalism. Those people weren't being lined up for the guillotine because their blood was insufficiently pure.

Blogger pauer May 12, 2019 11:04 AM  

No matter how much we preach individualistic "Western values" in European nations, there will always be other nations which reject individualism and are more nepotistic and ethnocentric. Regardless of what one might think is 'moral' or 'right', the reality of the matter is that those groups and nations which are high in ethnocentrism will out-compete the groups and nations which are low in ethnocentrism (this has even been demonstrated with computer models). Thus, if a nation wishes to survive in the long-term it must have a sense of ethnocentrism otherwise it will be undermined and overrun by other nations and peoples who are ethnocentric.

It's akin to the prisoner's dilemma: a group can't consistently play nice towards another group without reciprocation otherwise the entity which is consistently playing nice will be completely destroyed by the group which isn't. And no matter how 'tolerant' we become in the West, the reality of the matter is that there will always be other groups which do not share that tolerance.

If we want our nations to survive they cannot simply be an unorganized scattering of individuals but must be a collective group which share brotherhood, blood, language and identity with a certain degree of negative ethnocentrism. Otherwise we will consistently be taken advantage of and picked apart by other groups who actually know how to cooperate and work as a team (as is already being demonstrated in the current timeline).

Blogger J Van Stry May 12, 2019 11:11 AM  

If they were capable of fitting in, they wouldn't have to because their home country wouldn't be the s!!thole it is today. All of these countries are just about as old as ours, but they haven't changed one iota in the last one hundred years, not to mention two hundred years or more.

Ever notice that you can't run away from your problems, you always end up bringing them with you? Because so many of your problems came from yourself in the first place? And you had to learn how to deal with them personally to really make them go away? It's just this writ large.

On a smaller scale, I used to live in Oregon. Loved it there. Then the Californian's started moving in. Because Oregon was 'better'. Then they started to complain about the things that were 'different' and after that, when there were enough of them, they started to change everything to the very things that they had fled California for. Oregon is now a worse s!!thole than California actually is. I left over a decade ago and when I went back to look at it, it was like being in a banana republic. Highly corrupt, highly repressive, and getting worse every year.

Blogger Didas Kalos May 12, 2019 11:16 AM  

just 1 example.

Blogger SmokeyJoe May 12, 2019 11:31 AM  


Blogger buzzardist May 12, 2019 11:33 AM  

Nation, from the Latin "natus," by birth. Nations are a people born of the same stock over centuries. Putting "civic" in front of it is essentially declaring that the thing is no longer a nation in any literal sense, but merely in a metaphorical one.

The idea that immigrants can share values and assimilate is fantasy akin to two parents adopting a child, and then pretending that the child will share all the same genetic risks for diseases as the parents because they share the last same name. Economic historian Gregory Clark has written a series of books that started, with A Farewell to Alms, raising the question of the extent to which economic behavior and the propensity to build wealth is genetic, and he's found that certain family lines, regardless of where individuals start life economically, show a strong pattern for success in building wealth. Even if the last generation leaves them dirt poor, the next generation bounces back. Many other people lack the traits necessary to build wealth and civilization. Genetic inheritance matters.

No matter how much people declare that they want to participate in the American dream, act American, speak English, embrace American values, and so on, they ultimately do not and cannot. You would be hard pressed to find a single example in history where a large movement of people into another nation did not result in war and the virtual extermination of one of the two groups. You'd be even harder pressed to find an example of people assimilating the values and behaviors of the culture into which they move. Genetically, linguistically, culturally, and in every other way, those people moving into another nation are predisposed to different behavior patterns. They pass these traits on to their children, children's children, and on for a century or more, long after any specific memory of the "old country" has faded. When people immigrate in large numbers, they tend to clump, preserving these genetic and behavior patterns even more strongly. If people are flooding into America from a nation where as many as 90 percent of the people vote for one of the two main political parties, both of which are socialist, do you really think that any of them will stop voting socialist, or that their children won't, once they are granted American citizenship? No, if they saw the error of their ways, those people would change their behavior patterns in their own countries. But they don't do that because they cannot, nor will they be able to simply by virtue of setting foot on American soil.

Blogger Birdman May 12, 2019 11:35 AM  

western civ values = greco-roman legacy+eruopean nations+christianity. if you take one of them, it will not be western civ values

Blogger peacefulposter May 12, 2019 11:35 AM  

If America is an idea, then a lot of people need to be deported.

Blogger Ian Smith May 12, 2019 11:42 AM  

Leaving aside for the moment that it is less viable than communism as a guiding philosophy:

(1) Why should they be let in? Your default position for people joining your household is not one of a blacklist where anyone is automatically welcome save a few; why is joining the nation different? It isn't. Therefore there needs to be extremely good justification for letting in people.

(2) Why should an organization as notoriously corruptible (and, in this case, provenly so) as the government be put in charge of demographics? Even if you think the bank of the slippery slope is okay, why would you presume we wouldn't slip back down here after getting on the bank?

(3) The nation is not defined by "values." The nation is blood. If you're rejection the poison of JBP you should be acutely aware of changing definitions like that and the insidiousness of such a thing. Leaving that aside, if we redefine who gets to be in the nation based on "values" you inherently invite a far more authoritarian, Orwellian society than could exist otherwise — will you be testing for allegiance for these values and kicking out the insufficiently enthusiastic? And if you don't care for thought police then you concede that you cannot base such a thing on "values." A person can change their values but can't change their blood.

(4) Racial mixing and multiracialism are diametrically opposed to every good and wholesome instinct in Man. Why would you give bread to the dogs while the children go hungry? Civic "nationalism" inherently (and illegitimately) gives away the inheritance of the nation to foreigners (mostly against national will). Racial mixing too inherently makes the nation more foreign. You're making your children, grandchildren, etc. more foreign to you, the opposite of the natural and healthy instinct to have children like you. Take it far enough and your posterity (if it even counts as such anymore) will be as related to you as any other human in existence (i.e. practically not related at all). And that's leaving aside all the practical concerns (decreased health, decreased medical care (try finding a donor match for your mystery meat children), decreased intelligence, decreased attractiveness, decreased adaptability, etc., etc., etc.).

(5) Civic "nationalism" inherently creates multiculturalism and multiracialism, and I think enough has been said about those social ills without me having to summarize or supplement. If you want demographic warfare, civic "nationalism" is how you get it.

TL;DR: civic "nationalism" is how you lose at the game of life. Embrace it at your own peril. Those who wisely reject it will conquer or rule over your descendants — if you have any by that point.

Blogger Andrew Brown May 12, 2019 11:45 AM  

Nationalism is rooted in Logos. Civic nationalism is rooted in chaos and disorder which is of the devil. If DK can't see that then he's a child of the devil.

Blogger Triumph of Rome May 12, 2019 11:48 AM  

Culture is the lullabyes your mother sings you as a baby on her breast, and the way your family interacts, and the stories about who your specific grandfathers are and what they did and what they’re proud of. Even more importantly it’s about what you worship and value not as a platitude but in a religious sense.

It’s technically possible in cases of marriage to actually do what you’re talking about, where you love someone from another person a whole bew set of songs and lullabyes, a whole new way of relating to those around you, new dances and new foods, and genuinely convert to the Christian faith of the West.

Outside of such a case of marriage and cultural conversion, it’s simply not possible. Public school can instill civic virtue and civic myths, and parents can try intentionally to not pass on their culture. But there’s no way to fill that void with the real American culture, and the kids end up raised by Hollywood and public school. That dynamic has I think a lot to do with why almost universally immigrant kids even more than you’d expect end up as leftist drones.

Even in the case of a marriage, such a marriage requires the death or at least suppression of one party’s culture. I am so intensely Celtic-American I couldn’t ever do that personally and I’d have an extremely hard time marrying someone who didn’t share my culture or wasn’t willing to learn to share it.

And non-Christians, including our apostate elites, cannot ever comprehend the internal context of Western Civilization and should not be allowed in.

Blogger doctrev May 12, 2019 11:49 AM  

Let's see what gets to you as a civic nationalist, DK. I'm betting you read "conservative" news that says Europe is about to be lost to sharia, right? While America is a strong and indivisible nation?

Have you learned anything from Vox's reports from Europe? How Poland, Hungary, and especially Italy are resisting the attempts from Germany to destroy their nations through immigration? How nations that don't resist, like the United Kingdom, are becoming increasingly weaker? Looking back through history, even retarded ideologies can end up conquering half of Europe, all because they're backed by a strong conqueror nation with a strong national identity (France, Germany, the Soviets).

Of course, if you restrict the franchise to white European Protestants who can trace their family line back to the Mayflower, you'll end up handing a lot of power to rich enclaves in Boston, Washington DC, and New York. Can white nationalism work when a large number of whites hate you and want you to die of an overdose? I don't think anyone will like the answer. Nonetheless, the cure to America's problems is definitely not more immigration.

Blogger Johnny Ducati May 12, 2019 11:51 AM  

As for the Jordanian chick, she just got caught in that trainwreck the Progs call Intersectionality.

Blogger Chesapean May 12, 2019 11:51 AM  

If you seek a materialist explanation, consider the Butterfly Effect, or Gresham's Law, or the economics of public transportation. Tower-of-Babel effects are inevitable because they derive from given, unalterable, attributes of the human condition.

Intermarriage is a potential, temporary, solution, but even there you eventually get a different natural nation than the one you started with. Whether the new natural nation can sustain or be sustained by the original civic virtues is a crap shoot.

Blogger Theproductofafineeduction May 12, 2019 11:57 AM  

It takes a long time, on the span of generations, for immigrants to internalize the values of the new country and that in turn can only occur if the host nations culture is dominant.

Even then there are examples, the Jews, Gypsies and Amish, where despite being in a nation for centuries they never internalize those nations values or assimilate to any great degree.

Blogger Ominous Cowherd May 12, 2019 11:58 AM  

ZhukovG wrote:The only way that one group can assimilate into another group is to become so submerged, culturally and genetically, that they essentially cease to exist. Any group that still possesses an 'identity' is not assimilated.

There are groups here whose ancestors were here centuries ago, and are still identifiable as separate groups: Amish, some Jews, most Blacks, probably some others.

Even when given centuries, assimilation isn't a given, even for groups which are genetically close like the Amish.

Blogger Ariadne Umbrella May 12, 2019 12:02 PM  

Google any map of "individualism vs collectivism." It's the Benelux, United Kingdom, parts of France- the parts that were Huguenot/ Gascon, the Basque parts of Spain. The next level is the rest of France,"Austrasia", parts of Germany. Not the Scandinavian parts, even. Literally no one else in the entire world is like this, except for the diaspora of this: native stock Americans, English descended Australians.

Literally no one else in the world thinks like this. They generally try to kill them for being some version of bad- religiously bad "heretics" "freethinkers"- politically bad- financially bad, personally bad "immoral."

America was the safe space for individualist Christians. It is the deep pockets that keeps Christianity financed against tyranny.

America was a set of families that were willing to risk everything to be around each other in peace, and far,far away from the rest of you homicidal maniacs or depressed victims.

Just because we succeeded, everyone else wants to show up. No one wants to go through the bad times, though. People return home- not "the old country"- when there's a war, or a recession. Well, this is our home, and if you're going to act like a guest in bad times, we get to call you a guest all the time. And guests, eventually, are asked to leave. Or, they are a home invader.

Blogger Hammerli 280 May 12, 2019 12:02 PM  

Back to the original question...

Everyone has a certain amount of "cultural firmware" - assumptions and customs about how the world works and what is and is not acceptable behavior. This is stuff you learn at your mother's knee, and it is almost impossible to eradicate. You may overlay it with lessons and philosophies learned in later life, but the cultural firmware is still there. This is why Vox and others have asserted that an immigrant CANNOT become completely American - there is no way to swap out the foreign cultural firmware. An immigrant's descendants may be truly American, but it's going to take outbreeding from the immigrant group, or enough generations to ensure that "the old country" is a phrase the kids never hear.

Because of this, simply adopting the culture of the West is not enough. The cultural firmware you learned in early childhood must also be American. Otherwise, you are a foreigner to one degree or another.

The second issue is that a society can only deal with a certain proportion of immigrants. And that proportion depends wildly on whether or not the immigrants are clumped together, and the degree to which they can be encouraged to assimilate. Waves 4b (Irish 1850-65) and 5 (Central European medley 1890-25) had a strong tendency to settle as "little foreign-land" communities that assimilated poorly. Earlier immigrants made their way to the frontier, settled as families, and assimilated rapidly. And with no anti-discrimination laws to protect them, immigrants of old had to get with the program quickly.

Finally, the current crop of immigrants to the West have no interest in becoming Westerners. Their interest is in our money...and in getting power over us. They view us in the same light that the pre-Trump United States was regarded, as the Great Rube to be bilked. And the Great Rube is starting to catch wise to the scam.

Blogger Meanoldbasterd May 12, 2019 12:02 PM  

DK is is on you to,provide evidence that civic nationalism has worked anywhere and ar any time in history.... Aaaand go!

Blogger DonReynolds May 12, 2019 12:11 PM  

A civic nationalist is a fool who believes in "magic dirt". No matter how many non-Americans are added to this nation, the civic nationalist insists that the society and the mores of the people and the country will remain unchanged, because ALL of the newcomers are eager to embrace Americanism and patriotism and our way of life. The newcomers have already forsaken their home country by coming here and have presented themselves as immigrants, eager to work for what they get, and willing to adapt to the customs, language, traditions, and manners of the people already living here. They will be almost invisible and quickly blend into the background of this country and contribute to the success we all crave for the future. And most especially, the new Americans will not be bringing their old country with them.

The only thing wrong with civic nationalism has never been true in the past and it is not true today. Did the three rivals of the English civil war transplant their disagreements to America when they crossed the Atlantic? Certainly, they still exist today. Did the Irish change America by leaving Eire? Did the Italians have any impact on the history of this country? How about the German settlers? or the Chinese? or the Vietnamese refugees? or the Koreans? Of course. And now we have millions and millions of Mexicans and Central Americans invading this country and the civic nationalists insist they will have no negative impact on American society or government or commerce. There are only positive outcomes.

I spent a few weeks in Miami in 1962, before the Cuban influx became the society of south Florida, while Americans were still the government and commerce, while English was still the common language. I can tell you the civic nationalists are basically wrong because they always assume an "absence of malice". They would operate a convenience store on the honor system, replacing the cash register and clerk with a bucket next to the door for people to honestly pay for their purchases. Without their own printing press to create more money, they would quickly go bankrupt and the shelves of the convenience store would soon be empty. But the civic nationalists have a printing press and they borrow heavily on public credit, so they can be indifferent to theft and loss. Just get some more. There is plenty where that came from. Soon, there may not be plenty. Then what?

Blogger Meanoldbasterd May 12, 2019 12:14 PM  

^ this

Blogger BillD May 12, 2019 12:21 PM  

Thanks for the link to "Cuckservative." I just bought the ebook from Arkhaven. Smooth purchase experience via PayPal.

Blogger The Pitchfork Rebel May 12, 2019 12:28 PM  

"even if they accept Western Civilization Values"

Which ones?

Who is actually doing this?

Blogger sammibandit May 12, 2019 12:31 PM  

Doktor Jeep has a good point about multikulti affecting kids. It's cruel to put children on the front line of the race war so Ms and Mr Madysyn and Teygyn Civnat can have Szechuan with their Ethiopian bread delivered by Ungbugo the Skip the Dishes indentured servant.

Blogger Unknown May 12, 2019 12:34 PM  

Hey Vox, Owen says he will upload all his specials to vimeo. I thought paying 275 per year would at least equal with exclusivity of content. Whats that aboout?

Blogger Brick Hardslab May 12, 2019 12:41 PM  

I've never yet met a Civic nationalists who could answer the first question nor can they say what to do with those who prove later to be unable or unwilling to live to the values they agree to.

If it were a real proposition nation then disagreeing with the proposition would disqualify you as a citizen. So, they say, "proposition nation" but they mean, what exactly?

Blogger sammibandit May 12, 2019 12:50 PM  

The civnat state tells citizen children, which by nature are selfish and self-absorbed so they fully enculturate, to put aside their needs to serve immigrant invader children. The citizen child becomes unstable because they have to balance their selfishness with loser invader children's selfishness with the acumen of an adult though they aren't even enculturated. The citizen child therefore does not derive the full spectrum of enculturation to serve their needs. How cruel are you to put citizen children last exactly when they need to be put first?

Blogger Doug Cranmer May 12, 2019 12:50 PM  

Here it is.

"The story concerns a teacher at school in Vienna whose classroom was full of belligerent, abusive, violent migrants. After a long series of deliberate provocations by the young thugs, the teacher reacted by spitting in the face of one of them. After that it was determined that he did not “meet the teaching qualifications” required by the school, and he was let go."

The video is maddening.

Blogger Uncle John's Band May 12, 2019 12:51 PM  

Kennel : breed

Blogger Jack Amok May 12, 2019 12:52 PM  

CivNattery will never work because the people moving here from other nations are moving here to get away from people like their own grandchildren will be.

Blogger Patrick Kelly May 12, 2019 12:54 PM  

When I first started reading this blog about 15-ish years ago I would have considered myself a Christian libertarian civ-nationalists.

Now I still consider myself Christian, but no longer libertarian or civ-nat.

Cracking the civ-nat nut is the hardest for me. I still relapse a bit out of hope that somehow the ideals and principles I was taught were American could overcome whatever other differences or challenges diversity brings. It's hard to let go of. The alternative was the unpleasant current and coming war raged over who will populate and govern North America. I see it as inevitable and necessary now.

The bs melting pot narrative makes it sound like the immigration gates were wide open since day one after the Constitution was signed. Not so. Until 1965 it was a very narrow, intermittently open gate. Not sure how to shut it without lots of kinetic fighting and bodies piled high. I still hope there is a chance to avoid such a bloody mess.

My heritage is very mixed mutt Irish-Mexican-English-German and maybe a couple more the family has buried deep in our genealogy somewhere. I don't know for sure I qualify as "prosperity", but I would rather live as a second-class citizen ruled or governed by those who are than live anywhere else that would have me. I don't care if I can vote, but can I at least keep a bolt-action rimfire for therapeutic plinking sessions?

Blogger Monotonous Languor May 12, 2019 12:57 PM  

You CivNats are simply useful idiots for the left. As such, you're responsible for the destruction of this nation.

This may come as a shock to you, but only whites are generally capable of valuing other kinds of people on the basis of a CivNat mindset. The reality is that almost all non-white people come from low-trust societies, where they value their immediate family first, their extended family less, and everyone else not at all. This has enormous impact on such issues as corruption, as well as assumptions and expectations about interpersonal relationships in their societies. (For example, see the Corruption Perceptions Index, .) These are primary components of each person's identity, which develops from genetic and environmental factors over thousands of years. Identity then affects culture, which next affects politics.

Once such people immigrate, they are unable to shed their identity and adopt Americanism as if it were a new set of clothes. That you believe otherwise proves you've been thoroughly brainwashed to accept the premise that all types of people are like you, have essentially the same outlook as you do, will respond to the same kinds of non-economic incentives as you do, and will accept, appreciate, and assimilate into your culture based on your equalizing overtures. But again and again, history proves otherwise. If you'd take off your blinders you'd recognize it as the cause of the disaster occurring here and now in the US.

The very few who may be an exception to this simply prove the generalization, which is pattern recognition applied to peoples. There are also supporting studies about which the left wants you ignorant. Furthermore, if you're going to actively look for those exceptions, how are you going to do it? There is no set of tests ever devised that can filter out one from the other. Certainly a 100 question test on US government is not going to cut it. That's also where you CivNats are completely irresponsible; you blithely assume that once someone moves to this country, they will be imbued with the spirit of Americanism, no exhaustive stress tests required. This nonsense is called 'magic dirt' theory, and it's a monumental lie.

The vast majority of non-white immigrants come here with only one thing in mind: economic opportunism, and let the rest of American society be damned. These people are cultural parasites, because they don't care how they get their economic largesse, whatever it takes just as long as they get it. It can be running a store, scamming the locals, or Uncle Sam's welfare machine, just as long as they get the Benjamins so they can Western Unionize it back to the home country. Unbelievably they also quickly get the right to vote, where they are automatic supporters of identity politics.

Like it or not, there are billions of people in the world who have a completely different kind of self-awareness than you do. If you still believe in CivNattery, then you and your children deserve all the destructive consequences. The only problem is that your stupidity is dragging the rest of us down with you.

Blogger The Gaelic Lands May 12, 2019 1:05 PM  

Any book recommendations on the French Revolution?

Blogger English Tom May 12, 2019 1:11 PM  


Skin in the game.

Very succinct and to the point.

Also, we must recognise that long term mass immigration into the West is championed by people who want us destroyed. That should be enough to show how evil mass immigration really is.

Blogger Alphaeus May 12, 2019 1:14 PM  

If foreigners are so enamored of a different country's values and culture and civilization, instead of going there and destroying it, they should work to change their own country's values, etc, to be more like what they think they prefer.
I believe the problem boils down to the fact that you can take the foreigner out of the foreign country, but you cannot take the foreign country out of the foreigner.
At this point, as someone who lives in an America which has been deformed by an inundation of mostly well meaning foreigners, I don't want anyone from anywhere to come here any more. Not even English people, because England ain't what it used to be either.
I don't know that it's a matter of "right" versus "wrong," it's a matter of I like America the way it used to be, and I despise the crap hole that it has become, which is only partly the blame of all the foreigners.

Blogger VD May 12, 2019 1:18 PM  

I thought paying 275 per year would at least equal with exclusivity of content.

No. We've never said anything about exclusivity, nor is paywalling things our business model. As a general rule, my supporters have always favored broad distribution and the expansion of the ideas, that's why Voxiversity is completely open.

Owen's specials have always been available elsewhere. That doesn't mean he won't do some exclusive specials for Unauthorized in the future, but this is nothing new.

Blogger English Tom May 12, 2019 1:18 PM  


You omitted the Hindu homo prime minister of Ireland, who is hell bent on Africanising that island as quickly as possible. However, let's also not forget the traitors of our own race, like Tony Bliar, who,have sneaked in millions of muds.

Blogger Azure Amaranthine May 12, 2019 1:19 PM  

Because blood is thicker than the wind that comes out of your mouth when you claim to believe something.

Apart from that, what if one of the civilizational values is European descent? No amount of goodwill is going to make a foreigner cthonic. Their children, maybe eventually, but they can't have such children in the first place if they're not allowed in, can they?

A third argument is that as differentiated parts of humanity, a child born into a society of people different from their parents will inevitably look around and say, even if only subconsciously, "this is not of me, these are not my people, we are not alike, this is not my home". While it is possible that some people do not come out of that with a negative solution, it is more common than with the native population that their solution is "since this is not me, these are not mine, and I cannot become them, I should destroy them and replace them with ones more akin to me". Even worse, "This is not me and I cannot live here. I will die, so let these strangers join me in death."

The logically necessary result of this is that the foreign is always toxic compared to the familial. While some level of toxicity is a necessity around the edges, both because of vergence on foreign lands and the necessity for some amount of conflict to maintain the immune system, high levels of toxicity introduced to the body necessarily kill the body, reducing higher and heavenly orders to baser and more chaotic lesser forms of life.

Blogger HouellebecqGurl May 12, 2019 1:25 PM  

You can kill a bear, wear it like a skinsuit, all while adopting the behaviors & mannerisms of a bear, still doesn't make you a bear.

There's this weird accepted "fact," that the huge waves of immigrants that came in throughout the early 1800s-mid 1900s had all assimilated so well that by 1965, it was fine that we opened up immigration again, when it is patently untrue.
Sure, these folks were able to "assimilate" more easily due to their somewhat shared Euro history, the expectation that you would take on the accepted rules, morals & behaviors of the white patriotic America, including learning English. At that time, the country was approx 85% white, without our current welfare system, as well as also being deeply Christian.

Even with all of that, there were still lots of race rioting, white flight, ethnic Balkanization, & various other types of proximity conflict, etc., as well, and it's going to get much, much worse as more and more exotic & violent 3rd worlders continue to invade us.

Blogger Fuzzums Wuzzums May 12, 2019 1:27 PM  

Q: Why is civic nationalism wrong?
A: Cause it's totally gay.

Blogger Azure Amaranthine May 12, 2019 1:34 PM  

Here is another. What is different is different. If a foreigner comes here and accepts everything about this place, everything that could possibly signify them as a foreigner must logically be gone.

If we accept that their skin color is different, even this difference will have effect on their ultimate beliefs, understanding, thought processes. Perhaps they get more or less vitamin D from sunlight -- this changes attitudes, however slightly. There can ultimately be no remaining differences if the ideology is to become entirely heterodox.

If the foreigner becomes completely indistinguishable from the local, everything foreign about him has been strained out. He is not. He no longer exists.

In reality though this is astronomically improbable. Everything about him will not be strained out. Some parts of him will sneak through into the general population eventually, and replace the previously dominant traits of the locals. The locals have been adulterated, changed by the foreign. The standards and values will change to match the adulteration. Blood is the soil from which human law grows much more than the reverse.

A fifth argument. Why should anyone from outside be allowed in in the first place? Do we need outsiders to come in? Why do they not need us to come into their lands? Would it not be better if seeds from a better plant were sent to mix with and improve the lesser plants, rather than seeds from the lesser plants being sent to mix with and lessen the better ones? The former benefits everyone. The latter damages everyone.

So, here again is the ultimate form of the argument: Blood is thicker than wind.

Blogger Ultrahardcore May 12, 2019 1:48 PM  

I see a lot of long comments on this post and I'm sure they are very good comments but I think DK's concern can be addressed very simply. The fact of the matter is the vast majority of foreigners do not want to assimilate and will not assimilate. The few who do are not worth the rest who won't and it's impossible to weed out "the good ones". Western Civilization is ours and ours alone and it always will be.

Blogger Damn the torpedos May 12, 2019 1:50 PM  

Rhetoric 100% effective

Blogger Ariadne Umbrella May 12, 2019 1:56 PM  

A thought exercise: China has overbuilt cities with very few citizens. Entire great shopping plazas, towers of apartments, townhouses. Do you support anyone in the world moving there and living? It would change China. Do you support all those people moving there and then being subject to Chinese laws? Chinese working conditions? If not, why not?

Okay, so how about the parents and grandparents of any mass shooter immigrant. They moved here to "be free." They didn't bother trying to 'free' their own homeland. They don't know how to get to freedom; they don't know how to maintain freedom. It's a magic good. They have no idea how it works, the mechanics behind it.

Or, the best case scenarios: all the famous dissidents who end up in the USA. They are usually appalled, completely appalled, by how democracy is done in America, for any small town deliberation. They are citing things they've read, while the people who grew up here are citing their neighbor's name. The people who grew up in New Hampshire aren't being hornswoggled by Viennese econ theorists.

And, again, most places put some major effort into killing off the people who founded America, even if they find them elsewhere: Spanish Catolicos killed off French Huguenots in Florida, on first sight. They were there minding their own business and someone, somewhere had a theory about some stupid Pope being the boss of everyone everywhere, and so idiot conquistadores killed them off on sight. They didn't kill Indians on sight. Just their neighbors in Europe, found here, just because.

Or, say, Treaty of Tordesilla: divided the whole world up between two Catholic powers. They still behave like that's a valid thing- see the EU, the Hague and so on. At least when an American president said it, he said "Leave us alone on our own hemisphere." And, for the most part, we did try to keep China, Russia and the Europeans from really messing up South America. As it is, South America is now being manhandled by Russia, China, the Middle East and Europe, and not one of them is thinking about what is best for South Americans. They are going to regret the end of the Monroe Doctrine, which was defensive, not imperial.

Or, monarchy Twitter? Safely in America, making the sort of living you can only get in a technologically advanced, farming innovative, nation, all these well-educated, literate guys totally begging to be under the feet of a Catholic monarch? Hapsburg revival? No clue that the handiwork of Protestantism is universal literacy? That literacy gets used for what regular people want: cartoons, farming books, how-to mechanics manuals, science fiction, romance novels?

Blogger peacefulposter May 12, 2019 2:02 PM  

Civic Nationalism is an oxymoron.

It is unnatural.

It is evil.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash May 12, 2019 2:07 PM  

"... as long as people from different nations immigrate, take on and accept Western Civilization Values that there is no reason that we should not accept them..."
Would you care to enumerate those Western Values?
The major reason this country is tearing itself apart is the ethnic diversity introduced over 100 years ago. Why is Gun Control even an issue? Those of Irish descent, unlike English and Germans, don't like guns.
Why is welfare even a concept in this country? Too many Germans and people from countries without primogeniture.
Why is Feminism and abortion etc an issue? Look no further than your local (((college faculty))).
Why is there a culture of pervasive corruption and disregard of law in the government of every major and most minor cities in this country? Irish and Italian voters.

These are all western ethnicities whose values are supposed by CivNats to be compatible with the American culture. It's precisely at the points of divergence that the breaks occur.

Blogger Ariadne Umbrella May 12, 2019 2:11 PM  

#86, Simon Schama has the most current idiom book. Pair it with two chapters in Ann Coulter's Demonic.

Burke & Carlisle have books. They were contemporary to the whole thing.

Blogger Akuma May 12, 2019 2:14 PM  

Its wrong because it ignores genetics. Genetics being the fundamental building block of the behavior of an organism. You can have Europeans emigrate into America cause they are all from Europe and originate from a similar base genetic stock. Sure there will be cultural differences, but the common thread that connects them is Christianity. Theres at least a stable pillar for assimilation to sping forth from.

An immigrant from Somolia will always be from Somolia and will bring all that with them. Sure they can be trained to not act like a savage (thats called playing nice), but when times go hard they will revert to Somolian style behavior. This is why Africans from America act different than Africans from Africa. To put it bluntly, the Lemba act like Jews.

Blogger sammibandit May 12, 2019 2:24 PM  

Snidley has a good point I'll riff off. Why is schooling designed to serve a German colony? The Prussian model of streaming pupils by their abilities is a German design, not Anglo. If you have Catholic schools in America they're likely French in design. (Schooling was and is a major constitutional hurdle in Canada between Anglos and Francophones or Hutterites, Mennonites (German) and Francophones).

Blogger Roninf9 May 12, 2019 2:28 PM  

"as long as people from different nations immigrate, take on and accept Western Civilization Values that there is no reason that we should not accept them into the country."

What are Western Civilization Values? The values of 1776 America or modern Diversity promoting Trans accepting America? Now, for the sake of argument, lets assume we can agree what "Western Values" are (which I am sure would mean Judeo-Christian values to the average civnat). How do we determine if a immigrant group takes on these "Western Values" or not? What happens if they do not? Are they stripped of their citizenship and deported? What if their American born kids reject them? What about Africans-in-America and other minorities that have been here for hundreds of years and reject Western Values?
My guess is the normie civnat will call for "education". How do we gain control of the education system from the anti-American left and how many generations have to go by before we admit that "education" had failed? How to we rectify the damage done to society that was caused in the meantime?

The fact is Civic Nationalism nor its adherents can solve basic, practical problems. It's useless.

Blogger Quadko May 12, 2019 2:38 PM  

And after a while they take over teaching the kids and following generations become "unassimilated", immigrant background or not.

Blogger Ariadne Umbrella May 12, 2019 2:41 PM  

or the simplest: the tribes who were here at the signing of the Constitution still haven't assimilate? Blacks still have a distinct culture. Indians still have a distinct culture. If they won't assimilate, why would anyone else?

Blogger John May 12, 2019 2:42 PM  

"even if they accept Western Civilization Values:"

Because their children and grandchildren WON'T.

The only way their posterity could accept Western values is if they take on the identity of the host nation. And the only way to do that is if they are a tiny minority that intermarries the host nation. This is precluded by "unlimited".

Blogger Joe Smith May 12, 2019 2:52 PM  

@basementhomebrewer Good point. A proposition nation should actually have a mechanism for ejecting those that no longer accept the proposition. That would clear out America of half its population over night.

Blogger boogeyman May 12, 2019 2:54 PM  

Immigration without assimilation is colonization. Large scale immigration naturally precludes assimilation. Colonization is bad when whites do it to brown people, and it's bad when brown people do it to whites. It's bad for the colonizer and the colonized.

Look at the Cherokee. They welcomed in the white man more than any other tribe. They actively did everything they could to adopt the newcomer's culture, and it still wasn't enough. When the colonizing whites had enough numbers and clout, they expelled the Cherokee from the lands they had lived on from time immemorial, sending them beyond the frontier into hostile and foreign territory. If you want a good argument against large scale immigration, look to the Indians. If you want a good argument against civic nationalism in the face of immigration, look to the Cherokee.

Blogger Up from the pond May 12, 2019 2:57 PM  

Monotonous Languor wrote:almost all non-white people come from low-trust societies, where they value their immediate family first, their extended family less, and everyone else not at all

Brooklyn was very multi-ethnic. And an old Brooklyn saying was: "You can trust your mother, but cut the cards." That's not a decent society to live in.

Blogger Samildanac May 12, 2019 2:59 PM  

Civic Nationalism is a tool of Ethnic Nationalities to allow those who are not of their blood to adapt to their culture, language, faith etc.., while they marry in and subsume their bloodline into the ethnic nation. It is an important tool, but still just a tool and cannot rest as the foundation of a society without severe consequences. Think of a clear pond that is so reflective it is hard to tell if the water is below and the sky above or the reverse. It may look solid but if you try to build on it then it will work as well as it did in Monty Python and the Holy Grail, your castle will sink into the swamp. If you're really unlucky then it'll burn down, fall over and sink into the swamp.

For comparison take what we know of ethnic nationalism and do a compare contrast. Ethnic nations are based on blood and nothing else. France is France because it is full of Frenchmen, however distasteful that is, and if you change the people then the name of the nation as well as customs will change. France was once called Gaul after all and Israel was the land of Canaan originally. Blood is important. It does not matter the politics, France can be Republican, Democratic, Authoritarian, Totalitarian, Parliamentarian, Capitalistic or Socialistic, just as long as they are all French. Import any other group in large numbers and it will change. Thus a nation state needs to defend it's people and by doing that it must have secure borders. So you will need police, an army and a natural defensible border like an ocean or mountain passes. Build a wall if you have to in order to make an artificial border, like the Great Wall of China for instance. Where your border is not as secure expect higher rates of incursions. Remember, the people are what is important, protect the blood and the nation will continue, don't and the civilization will fall. Now compare this to a Civic Nation.

Civic nations are based on ideas so hypothetically it can be of any bloodline, except that isn't true because other people are not a tabula rasa and they come into your propositional nation with their own ideas and this is dangerous. Remember, blood is important and must be defended in an ethnic nation while ideas must be in a civic one. If you change the blood you change the former and if you change the ideas you change the latter. If you don't want to change you will need to defend your ideas. Propositional nations have their own police force/military they are called SJW's. They have their own wall it is called Political Correctness. These are the tools they use to maintain their propositional nation. They must control thought thus Freedom of Religion and Freedom of Speech must be eliminated because they introduce new thoughts and ideas into your nation. If you change a nation of ideas from Christian, Freedom of Religion, Freedom and Speech and Rule of Law to Secular Atheistic Humanism, Freedom from Religion, Hate speech and Rule of men then you have changed the nation.

If you do not want to live in an oppressive and controlled society that promotes debauchery in order to pacify its people then you must support the ethnic nation. That's all there is to it.

Blogger Primus Pilus May 12, 2019 4:06 PM  

"Civic Nationalism" isn't even a coherent phrase, it's an oxymoron, like saying you're a proponent of "Dry Wetness". It's the same reason saying "Ethnonationalist" is redundant. A nation /is/ an ethnos.

Trying to build some sort of philosophy on the bedrock of an incoherent contradiction was never going to work, and it demonstrably has been an absolute disaster (for anyone to the right of Trotsky) in the United States, and literally everywhere else it's been tried since the dawn of recorded history.

As an aside, I used to be an avid reader of another ostensibly right-wing author's (whose work I still mostly enjoy reading) daily blog, but after being told for the Nth time that anyone who wasn't a Racial Equalist Proposition Nation Civnat was a Leftist, I had to quit. Claiming to hate International Marxism while fighting to define its fundamental assault on the West and Christianity as somehow the "true right wing" became intolerable.

Blogger Alcuin May 12, 2019 4:26 PM  

Great discussion. Here is a point I have not seen made yet. What is the most important issue facing our country? The populist revolution. Who advocates civic nationalism? Enemies of the populist revolution, mainly, but also friends that think it will enhance their political power (President Trump). We can try to discern when it is used against the people, which is 9 times out of 10, and when it is used for the people, such as potentially forming a basis for getting a moratorium on immigration. In other words, civic nationalism has to be either assimilated or eliminated. To the extent it does not support the populist revolution, it is inimical to it, and thus to the people.

Blogger Daniel May 12, 2019 4:45 PM  


Blogger DonReynolds May 12, 2019 4:59 PM  

boogeyman wrote:Look at the Cherokee. They welcomed in the white man more than any other tribe. They actively did everything they could to adopt the newcomer's culture, and it still wasn't enough. When the colonizing whites had enough numbers and clout, they expelled the Cherokee from the lands they had lived on from time immemorial, sending them beyond the frontier into hostile and foreign territory. If you want a good argument against large scale immigration, look to the Indians. If you want a good argument against civic nationalism in the face of immigration, look to the Cherokee.

There were numerous wars between Anglos and Cherokees over the years, so the relationship was not always peaceful. Yes, quite a few Cherokee and Choctaw Indians assimilated into the larger society, started farming, became Christian, learned trades, and started businesses. These were not the Indians that were relocated to Arkansas and Oklahoma. The ones who were relocated were the ones who did NOT assimilate. They refused to live by (white) state law. They preferred to live by their own law and continue their own tribal government and society. They were provided areas where they could do that, outside all of the US states and these later became reservations within states, where only treaty (Federal) law applied. The assimilated Indians still live in the same areas as before, some of them still work the same farms as before and go to the same churches. They became part of the larger society and that is why I am here.

Blogger Daniel May 12, 2019 5:01 PM  

Or evilness

Blogger lowercaseb May 12, 2019 5:44 PM  


Because they hate you and want you gone.

Everything said above boils down to this.

Blogger ErotemeObelus May 12, 2019 6:01 PM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger mike May 12, 2019 6:14 PM  

Good move by Vox to play it this way. However, I do understand issues with civ nats, my issue is with the solutions. 1) How to move from civ nat country to nationalist country without bloodshed? 2) how to ensure nationalist country stays this way without extreme measures?

Vox himself lives in Italy, isn't the point of freedom to be able to vote with your feet? That's the basic premise of not having global state where everywhere is the same.

To me real nationalism is to embrace nations, care about your country first but help other countries stay true to their nation. When I go to Italy i want to talk to italians not arabs, africans or vox day unless he's deeply embedded in that culture while also having a broader view as immigrant, who knows a lot about culture that he came from.

I think there's a middle ground here. What if a country would be a nationalist country which accepts immigrants according to its needs at the time like keeping property prices stable (believe it or not that might be their motivation for current migrants), growth, low birth rate etc.
Yet, accepted and screened immigrants would need to a assimilate, learn the language, and were not granted citizenship and right to vote until 3rd generation. However, they could be deported only if a crime was committed. In other words they would live there but no voting rights ever until 3rd generation. This way nation could be preserved and it would not require drastic measures just a good entry filter.


Blogger CynicalMan May 12, 2019 6:15 PM  

A nation is defined by its people. If the people cannot be defined with commonality, you do not have a nation common to its people.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash May 12, 2019 6:25 PM  

mike wrote:However, I do understand issues with civ nats, my issue is with the solutions. 1) How to move from civ nat country to nationalist country without bloodshed? 2) how to ensure nationalist country stays this way without extreme measures?
1) We can't. The war is already underway. Thing is, you are only allowed to see the ethnic violence when the <1% that's perpetrated by Whites occurs. And it's the CivNat idiots who refuse to face reality and instead insist on their right to pretend that are responsible for the bloodshed.
2) Define "extreme". Likely it will will involve some kind of treason charges for literally tens of thousands of Americans. Certainly it will involve removing millions of non-Americans, or more likely millions of people self-segregating into separate areas, which will them make war on one another.

That's what really pisses me off. In their desperate effort to feel good about themselves by denying reality, CivNats are dooming thousands, perhaps millions to death.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash May 12, 2019 6:27 PM  

mike wrote:What if a country would be a nationalist country which accepts immigrants according to its needs at the time like keeping property prices stable (believe it or not that might be their motivation for current migrants), growth, low birth rate etc.

Yet, accepted and screened immigrants would need to a assimilate, learn the language, and were not granted citizenship and right to vote until 3rd generation. However, they could be deported only if a crime was committed. In other words they would live there but no voting rights ever until 3rd generation. This way nation could be preserved and it would not require drastic measures just a good entry filter.

So you prefer a slow war of extermination of all against all to the coming economic collapse and all-out civil war?

Blogger Primus Pilus May 12, 2019 6:47 PM  

mike wrote:Good move by Vox to play it this way. However, I do understand issues with civ nats, my issue is with the solutions. 1) How to move from civ nat country to nationalist country without bloodshed? 2) how to ensure nationalist country stays this way without extreme measures?

1) "I invited a pack of starving wolves into my living room, how do I avoid bloodshed?" Too late. Your ancestors spilled blood to create the current nation. It was weakness that allowed its adulteration. It will require bloodshed again.

2) Make sure your people remain vigilant against foreign subversion, which includes not letting said foreigners control the stories told by your people.

Blogger tublecane May 12, 2019 6:54 PM  

"as long as people from different nations immigrate, take on and accept Western Civilization Values..."

Stop right there. They don't. At least not en masse.

Blogger Hammerli 280 May 12, 2019 7:01 PM  

The weak spot of civil nationalism is that it requires a civic ideology - and fairly strict enforcement of it. This came under serious attack with Wave 5 immigration, and took a substantial effort to hold things together. Wave 6 tossed aside any effort to demand assimilation - if anything, it encouraged Balkanization.

Which is a recipe for civil war.

Blogger VD May 12, 2019 8:13 PM  

1) How to move from civ nat country to nationalist country without bloodshed? 2) how to ensure nationalist country stays this way without extreme measures?

1. You don't. An excess of civic nationalism and immigration has guaranteed bloodshed.

2. You don't.

Reality doesn't care about your "issues". You can have an "issue" with having to drink water to live too, but you're going to die if you don't drink no matter what you think.

Blogger Sheila4g May 12, 2019 8:34 PM  

Lots of good points/comments. My attempt:

1. DNA matters. People of different ancestry/ancestral origin/race are DIFFERENT by design.

2. Genetics > culture. Each different group has created different cultures regardless of where they've settled. These different cultural patterns can be observed throughout history. Although not absolutely ironclad deterministic, about 80% of one's traits (physical and cognitive and behavioral) are heavily genetically influenced.

3. Numbers matter. A handful of different people can get along presuming there is a predominant and accepted cultural/societal norm. Large number of different racial stock inevitably leads to social conflict. Look at history and any multi-ethnic empire.

4. Although constantly thrown around, the term "assimilation" ultimately means absorption by the native stock - i.e. through social pressure, law, intermarriage, and TIME. Most people cannot/do not change easily. Consider the wisdom of Horace: Caelum non animum mutant qui trans mare currunt" (Those who cross the sea change their skies not their souls).

5. If there is large scale immigration, that "assimilation" will ultimately change the original population and either the new arrivals will dominate, or some sort of new, interbred population will result. Not automatically bad, but inarguably different.

6. Add in reversion to the mean, continuing arrival of new and visibly different stock, and the result is today's cultural chaos ironically called "America," where I can wait in line at the post office in Texas (I have not done so in years for numerous reasons) among Arabs, Han Chinese, Mexicans, Negreos, Russian Jews, etc., and observe a subcontinental Indian try to discuss "American" postal rules with a Han when neither individual understands each other's attempt at English, and the multicultural line grows out the door.

7. Ultimately, diversity + proximity = WAR.

Blogger JovianStorm May 12, 2019 8:41 PM  

It's also a percentage problem ... Japan allows in only a very tiny fraction of foreign people and permits only a fraction of that fraction to attain permanent residency.

After you get to 10% of a population, there is enough of a critical mass to embolden any of the more revolutionary types to start acting up and challenging the status quo. I see it on a micro level in my graduate classes where 4 idiots in a class of 40 feel bold enough to act up and disrupt things. Seeing as how the US is waaaay over that threshold, there's no chance of ever suppressing the destruction of US tradculture (white, Christian values) and its a free-for-all.

The best way would have been to be like Japan ... But i guess now we just need to be planning for what to do after the inevitable conflict. I'm sad but hopeful that a reconstruction of the US around those traditional values plus a wall around the Southeast will give people a solid core to rebuild from.

Blogger Stacey May 12, 2019 8:46 PM  

This is the best comment thread. I've been raised to think the same as DK. I get the big picture, but couldn't quite put the pieces together. These comments have cleared the murky water for me. I really am getting it now. I'm learning more from this blog and comments than I did in four years of public school in the 80's.

Blogger ZhukovG May 12, 2019 9:04 PM  

For the United States, it appears the fatal flaw was woven in at the founding. Probably from the ratification of the Constitution. Certainly by 1865 the course to destruction was set. And 1965 the beginning of the final act.

So if Civic Nationalism is a tool, then it is a tool of Imperialism.

It can work for a time, so long as one Nation completely dominates all others within an empire. But no matter how hard you push Romanization or Russification or Americanization, the empire falls.

Blogger CitizenOutkast May 12, 2019 9:54 PM  

I just tell people that, if the United States is seen as such a desirable nation to live in, why haven't we been copied by those desiring to be here? You can no doubt get copies of the Constitution, the Declaration of Independence, muh Emma Lazarus holy writ poem, the Federalist Papers, and pretty much anything else you need in whatever major language you speak. The simple fact that we haven't been copied means those outside who want to be here are either unwilling or incapable of creating or maintaining a nation like this. So why would we want them here? If South Americans want to live in the U.S., let them make their own version, then they'll be there. Give them all the materials they need to have their own "Founding Fathers" kick it all off. Problem is, they can't or won't. So, let them enjoy the way they are now and stay out of here.

Blogger CitizenOutkast May 12, 2019 9:57 PM  

Stacey wrote:I'm learning more from this blog and comments than I did in four years of public school in the 80's.

Not really. It's just that the quality is so much higher that it looks that way. I also learned in school, stuff either false or useless, but the quantity was greater. ;)

Blogger Unknown May 12, 2019 11:48 PM  

"even if they accept Western Civilization Values:" this question is a non-starter as that will never happen.

And even if it did, add all that was mentioned before, and add the very practical reality that the host country has limited resources, infrastructures and space. These should be alloted to the natives in priority, for the simple reason that they are the ones who created them and paid for them.

Blogger Dave Dave May 13, 2019 12:27 AM  

The nation is comprised of individuals with a shared ethnic background. While accepting the nation's values is important, being from the same ethnic background is just as important, if not more. In Germany, they sometimes accept Austrians, Poles and Danes into their communities because the ethnic background can be very similar and they have a shared history to an extent. If Civnattery stopped here, that would be reasonable. But Civnattery goes further and not only says that Germany should accept these foreigners into their communities, but acknowledge them as German. In Europe, the most important factor that influences identity is race. Muddying the waters destroys social cohesion. It gets even worse when Turks and Arabs start flooding in because they have literally nothing in common with Germans other than being human. They look different, speak different, think different, play by different rules, and so on and so forth. They will never be German, and that is to the benefit of all Germans.

Blogger Ominous Cowherd May 13, 2019 12:37 AM  

Patrick Kelly wrote:I don't care if I can vote, but can I at least keep a bolt-action rimfire for therapeutic plinking sessions?

If you can't be trusted with a gun, you can't be here, period. Not alive, anyway. Anyone can have six feet of good American dirt, as long as he's six feet under it.

Voting needs to be restricted - not all citizens should be allowed.

Blogger Ariadne Umbrella May 13, 2019 1:00 AM  

How about: if I am part of a family, it really does not matter if I am a good person or a bad person or agree with 50% of the people, or some abstract notion. I am part of the family, no matter what. Now, if I were part of an idea, who gets to decide what's the right idea?

I have the dubious pleasure of having lived in one state and all of my adult life in one city that attracts immigrants. Immigrants with access to printing presses. Immigrants who write articles about 'real X', "genuine Y", "Truly Z" and checklists about 'real, authentic, true" experiences- usually highly expensive consumerist beerfests and so on. So, if I haven't done any of these things, am I real? Am I authentic? Am I genuine? According to every last published list, I'm not.

One delightfully patronizing article tried to shade a private school-the students were excited to attend a local musician's concert. The author was surprised that rich young men wanted to listen to a local musician. I told my friend who attended the school, and got "He can go **** off. This school was here before this was a state. We were here first." He had a point.

Blogger FP May 13, 2019 1:21 AM  

Why is civic nationalism wrong?

Make California Mexico Again.

Many signs seen in California with that phrase during protests of Donald Trump rallies in 2016.

Blogger John Rockwell May 13, 2019 1:44 AM  

Sort of unrelated. But I do not have words.

I think there needs to be a refutation of this nonsense.

Blogger Rocklea Marina May 13, 2019 3:19 AM  

Immigration is Identity Theft.

Blogger Meng Greenleaf May 13, 2019 5:51 AM  

CNN: The woman who invented Mother's Day came to hate it

"Today, more people purchase flowers and plants for Mother's Day than for any other holiday except Christmas/Hanukkah. This year alone, "Americans" will spend.... "

WDRB: Pilot for American Airlines arrested at Louisville airport for 2015 triple homicide
"A pilot for an American Airlines subsidiary indicted in a 2015 triple murder in Christian County was arrested in..."

This was just off Drudge. It's highly unlikely to maintain a particular civilization, once the nation/prosperity is lost. The attacks will be subversive and relentless.

Blogger U May 13, 2019 6:01 AM  

"Seeing as I've already co-written a book on the subject"
Sorry, new here, which book is Vox referring to?

Blogger Philippe May 13, 2019 7:13 AM  

This is a good question. And I think there are two ways to look at it.

As most people want to move in Western civilization and not the other way around, we have to look at this from the Christian perspective (we already have a hint). Secondly, we can look at it from utilitarian perspective. Then giving counter examples to Civic nationalism

From the Christian point of view, I would refer to Matthew 15, 21-28. Jesus did not try to integrate the Canaan woman into her disciples. And she clearly stated that she is ready to eat the crumbs of the table like the dogs. In this image, she is basically saying “I have nothing to bring you, so please give me the bare minimum”. Now how many immigrants do you know are asking for the “bare minimum”? Knowing the bare minimum means “to live” (aka going back home at some point in time). Integration is not a Christian value. We are told to spread the Word, not to integrate. Therefore immigrants, even Christian immigrants, cannot and will not magically become the people they immigrate to.
Also it is worth mentioning that everyone who immigrates to the West is there to enjoy the fruits of Western civilization (Vox usually give the example of indoor plumbing and it is 100% accurate). These people did not bring ANYTHING (even the ones you qualify as the “good immigrants”) to Western civilization. Therefore, these people are here to take, not to give. No matter how well intentioned they are. To give an image. Imagine someone who cannot run 100m in less than 20 sec and cannot run 1km before collapsing to the ground. He wants to join a professional soccer club (let’s say Chelsea). It does not matter how well intentioned he is, how well he fits in the team or how generous he is… how is he going to be of any help to Eden Hazard? He will be a liability no matter how hard he tries. It does mean he is a bad person, it does not mean he is not well intentioned. It just means he is not in his league, or in his sport. Soccer is just not for him.

From a practical point of view. It has already mentioned here, so I will just repeat the fundamental questions:
- What do you do with 2nd, 3rd, 4th generations of immigrants?
- How can you measure how well someone fits in a Western nation?

Counter examples:
The Jewish community has been in the western world for over 1800 years. Where is the integration? They keep crying about how bad they have been treated throughout history. Yet they have not endured a fraction of the suffering of the German, French, Ukrainian or Russians people (which they all have problem with). How often do you hear Russians crying about how they have been treated by Bolchevist? How often do you hear Germans complaining about the treaty of Versailles?... this kind of constant victimhood is not a Western Value. That is why.

It all depends what you call “integration” for this one. However, let’s say you point me out an Arab who is intelligent and running a descent business in Belgium (finding him won’t be easy, but let’s say you do). He pays his taxes, he does not support ISIS. Great! He is integrated! Or is he? What do you think will be his reaction when he hears he kid had to pray “our father” when starting school in the morning? Or when he learns that the first crusade was totally justified because of Christian pilgrims being refused from their holyland?

I could go on and on and on. But I think this is a good start.

Blogger Stacey May 13, 2019 7:22 AM  

Stacey wrote:
I'm learning more from this blog and comments than I did in four years of public school in the 80's.

Not really. It's just that the quality is so much higher that it looks that way. I also learned in school, stuff either false or useless, but the quantity was greater. ;)

I totally agree, and I stand corrected :)

Blogger CM May 13, 2019 8:19 AM  

What's wrong with Civic Nationalism is the attempt to completely hijack, manipulate, and erase your identity through culture, language, representation, and history.

When they keep writing themselves into your history, it's gone too far.

Blogger Avalanche May 13, 2019 9:44 AM  

@130 "Give them all the materials they need to have their own "Founding Fathers" kick it all off."

Ha, yeah. Liberia. 'nuff said.

Blogger MightyKevster May 13, 2019 10:07 AM  

As on orphan does not adopt its parent, an 'immigrant' does not (nor ever could) adopt its nation.

Blogger xevious2030 May 13, 2019 10:34 AM  

Civic nationalism is wrong because it is contrary to the God given creation of the nations. It is foolish, at a human level, because it contradicts the reality of biology.

40% of behavior is learned, 40% is behavior a person is born with, and 20% of behavior is not defined. Dealing not with individuals, but with large groups. Differing peoples with geographic isolation from one another have developed different behavioral norms, genetically inherited ones. They have developed societies and cultures based on these genetic norms (the 40% of behavior people are born with). Moving in small groups that grow will bring the genetically inclined behaviors into a society and culture based on, well, conflicting norms. The struggle for these norms is “diversity.” Populations strive for proximal homogeneity. The diversity introduces core conflicts so deep, that one variety of eradication or another is not unusual. Resulting in a replacement of the original or an eradication of the foreign contaminant. When large groups are brought in, the process can be accelerated. When you have those inclined to actual Western Civilization being infused with those naturally inclined to another civilization, with dominant (expressed) behavior related genes in the latter, what has been introduced is necessarily a threat to Western Civilization. Responses to this foreign contaminant can vary, especially with social programming, but the pressure by the foreign contaminant is detrimental whatever the response. As groups. It is possible to bring “benefit” by the addition of certain individuals to a main genetic group, by care and consideration, not by flooding or by no standards admittance.

Blogger Unknown May 13, 2019 11:40 AM  

A nation is blood, not ideas, not even culture. The only way to integrate with blood, is through intermarriage. During the French terror, were the French a new nation because of their new ideas? No. Civic nationalism is false because the nation is not and cannot be "civic"

Blogger White Rationalism May 13, 2019 11:46 AM  

@140 '"Seeing as I've already co-written a book on the subject"
Sorry, new here, which book is Vox referring to?'

Cuckservative: How "Conservatives" Betrayed America

Blogger PJW Gent May 13, 2019 1:10 PM  

There is a problem called reverting to the mean, so no matter how hard the initial immigrant tries to become like the natives of the land he has adopted, his children/grandchildren will revert to the mean and become more like the culture he originally left, an island of that culture within the native environment. It just doesn't work.

Blogger Beardy Bear May 13, 2019 1:38 PM  

After Henry VIII established the Anglican church, new ideas influenced English culture, and changed it. After the French Revolution, Napoleon changed economics drastically. Multiple countries including Venezuela and Cuba had socialist revolutions, greatly changing their cultural ideas.

The notion that ideas are a nation, is absurd. Not one of the nations above became a new nation as a result of changing ideas. In the same way, changing your ideas does not make you a part of their nation. Ideas can have consequences on a nation, but ideas do not constitute a nation.

The Nation is posterity. It is not: Ideas, borders, government, religion or culture.

"The mark of a Scot of all classes [is that] he ... remembers and cherishes the memory of his forebears, good or bad; and there burns alive in him a sense of identity with the dead even to the twentieth generation."

-Robert Louis Stevenson

Blogger sammibandit May 13, 2019 9:37 PM  

Clan Hyndman's motto is Never Forget. Neat that it folds into that RLS statement.

Blogger Owen May 13, 2019 11:26 PM  

Yep. The Chinese are great test takers and know how to answer the citizenship test questions. They don’t understand the constitution much less internalize the ideas behind it.

Blogger Vulgar_Display May 13, 2019 11:56 PM  

Ask a black conservative if they will go to live with their own people when the collapse and reorganization of the country along ethnic lines comes.

That horrified expression on their face is why civil nattery is for fags and retards.

Blogger Beardy Bear May 14, 2019 12:12 AM  

sammibandit wrote:Clan Hyndman's motto is Never Forget. Neat that it folds into that RLS statement.

Indeed. Also note, USA hasn't even been a country for 20 generations. The nation is older than that, just barely.

Blogger Ominous Cowherd May 14, 2019 6:24 PM  

Avalanche wrote:@130 "Give them all the materials they need to have their own "Founding Fathers" kick it all off."

Ha, yeah. Liberia. 'nuff said.

If they can't or won't, it's on them, not on us. The American Ideal is totally Open Source.

Post a Comment

Rules of the blog
Please do not comment as "Anonymous". Comments by "Anonymous" will be spammed.

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts