Gambling With God
Or, "Why I Call Myself Liberal"
Longtime readers and new additions may be surprised at the slew of my recent takes on Mr. Academic Agent’s streams. They would be forgiven for believing I’ve gone off the deep end, or that I’ve started accepting paychecks from Mr. Thiel or Mr. Soros. Trust me, if I wanted to cash out on the scant influence I’ve built thus far, I’d have sent a discreet letter to the Claremont institute and gotten triple-vaxxed. No, I am the only man who can be held responsible for the beliefs and conclusions I’ve come to.
I can no longer call myself right-wing. I once did, very proudly in fact, and do not regret that period when I did such. It was necessary to recognize certain forgotten factors foundational to reality. Yet that period is coming to a close, as its purpose has been served vis a vis the general diagnosis of certain Civilizational ills that must be corrected not as a matter of existential necessity, but as a matter of dignity. Getting rid of troons and drag queens is more like a janitor mopping the floor than it is holding the line at Helm’s Deep, and thank God for that.
People often forget that things are, that their fundamental essences remain despite the external contortions and shapes they take. Tea remains tea whether you pour it in a Mason Jar or a Collins Glass. Such is the case for the current time. Race remains a fundamental truth of the ordering of reality, whether negroes are given participation prizes or not. Sure, pre-existing problems (such as the prevalence of suicide amongst young white men) can be exacerbated by external factors, but those problems are always pre-existing. Things are; their essences do not change based on outside factors.
This is true for the set of fundamental assumptions we can call the “Right-Wing”. While certain ideological subsets may characterize one or another specific iteration of these assumptions (e.g. Monarchism, Conservatism, Fascism etc.) the assumptions remain the same:
If time operates in a cyclical manner,
Then change is a net negative;
Society must be unchanging.
In extreme forms, these assumptions can result in generally negative beliefs such as Reaction, Ludditism, and a return to Paganism. One of the strengths of this argument is the assertion that the concept of “Progress” does not exist, and in certain respects this is true. This means that in certain respects, the fundamental assumptions outlined are also true.
The most notable Civilization which took these assumptions as its foundational thesis was (and is) China. The cyclical theory of history has always been the most true when applied to China. China’s cycle is so ubiquitous that even the American public school system teaches it in High School history class. Dynasty takes mandate of heaven, prosperity ensues, bad things happen, Dynasty loses mandate, new Dynasty revolts and conquers old Dynasty, repeat. This is further ensured that each time a new Dynasty takes over, all old histories and records are burned away and completely written by the new Dynasty. So in a sense, China’s history is literally unchanging.
If the dear reader accepts these assumptions I’ve outlined as the “Right-Wing,” China is the most “Right-Wing” Civilization to ever have existed. This is not to disparage China nor the Right-Wing (though I have zero good will towards the former,) but to point out the consequences, the essence of the thing.
The Right-Wing has positive aspects as well. It is the most practical, the most in touch with fundamental reality. It is the most grounded, literally emphasizing the blood and soil which moves us all. It is the most feminine principle, in the highest sense of the word.
It is a common misconception in these spheres that women represent chaos, and only chaos. This is not entirely true. Women, by virtue of their constitution, are chaos. They are moody, needy, sensual, ephemeral when not grounded nor given reason to be grounded. But this is only their starting point. Their aspiration, their marker of self-actualization, is order. When women become ordered, when men train them to become ordered, they reach their highest potential and become ideals. The Right-Wing is, counter-intuitively, the highest feminine principles.
Men are the opposite. Order is our starting point, and from a young age we learn to control the more chaotic aspects of ourselves in sublimation to ambitions and desires. Yet men seek to always be movers, to possess agency over all things. To possess agency is to have the potential to create chaos. To create chaos is to bring about a better order. Therefore, chaos is the aspirational principle for men, the ability to keep themselves within themselves even if their entire world is undone. Therefore, the Left-Wing is, counter-intuitively, the highest masculine principles.
Which brings me to the purpose of writing this piece. Recently, I have begun calling myself a Liberal, which has brought about much criticism and misunderstanding from those who heard it. Being Liberal and calling yourself such is a very easy way to place yourself opposite an audience’s friend-enemy distinction. But it doesn’t matter how much the occupational factions shout and screech about how castrating children is Liberal, or accepting the teeming brown hordes is Liberal, the essence of the thing is unchanged.
Liberalism is, as I’ve come to understand it, the latest iteration of an ethnic ideology which stretches as far back as the Aryan tribes on the Pontic Steppe. The kind of people that come to be in the Steppes have to possess certain characteristics to remain there. The cold winters and scant food sources meant that from the get-go, nature is a deadlier enemy than your fellow man. Therefore, the kind of people that choose to live in this environment are about as high-trust as you can get by necessity of survival.
Life on the Steppes is a series of weighing options and hedging bets. If you track a herd of deer, you may feed your whole tribe or spend a week with no gain. If you spend that same week harvesting the few edible plants that grow on the Steppe, you can feed some but not all of your tribe. So you have two individuals perform both actions, that they both reinforce each other. Eventually, you figure out who in the tribe is the best at hunting, who is the best at gathering, etc. and send them out to do each task. This in turn creates a sort of pride, an individual separation from the tribe in that the tribe is solely dependent upon this one individual to perform this one action.
This comes to be as the demands of survival are so specialized, so ephemeral, so fleeting on the steppe that your (already limited) human stock needs to be as focused as possible on one task to maximally utilize your limited human capital. Simultaneously, you cannot put all your eggs in one basket because the tribes best hunter could be mauled by a bear and you’re SOL in finding food. So each individual needs a working knowledge of the task every other individual performs. The saying, “Jack of all trades, master of none,” is a bastardization of the real saying, “Jack of all trades, master of one.” The Aryan people have always been required to fill this demand.
From this comes individualization, competition. The limited stock gaining mastery over specific fields so too gains them awareness of their mastery. They become observers. Observing themselves, others, the environment. They take nicknames from what they kill, which soon lose any bearing in what they once killed and become things-in-themselves. Soon young hunters are named for great older hunters, and from this comes the nascent ego. Only a people which has so carefully secured their own existence in the harshest of conditions is capable of such.
Steppes differ from Tropical or Forested environs, where food is more bountiful as a matter of course, or Deserts, where food can be found in a few but a dependable few locations. Steppes are the barrenness of Deserts, combined with the changing nature of Forests, and only an adaptable and high-trust people can thrive there.
The Faustian man as described by Spengler is merely the latest iteration of the Aryan consciousness that came to be on the Steppes. I slightly disagree with Spengler about the Faustian man’s relation to the forest, as wherever he goes the Faustian man seeks to re-create Steppes (though his herbs and plants are far more dependable by farming,) by beating back the forests which encroach on his villages and towns.
In short, the essence of the Aryan spirit is perpetual gambles made against God and nature, first with the continuation of his existence, then with the winning of his prosperity, and finally with the establishment of his supremacy. Many have critiqued the Aryans (including myself in the past,) especially the Faustian iteration, for possessing the hubris to gamble with God. Yet this is how we’ve always played it, for tens of thousands of years, and we’ve always known the whole time that God and nature will, eventually, get the better of us. We’re the patrons in God’s grand cosmic Casino, and the house always wins.
What makes us unique is that we don’t care if everything we do will come to nothing, as we feel compelled, like that Roman soldier in Pompeii, to keep doing it.
Thus the Aryans always keep a balance. We never forget who we are, why we are, and how we are, but the who, why, and how have been in many ways defined in competition with yet never the defiance of God. Masculine and Feminine, Chaos and Order, Left-Wing and Right-Wing, Hengist and Horsa, Castor and Pollux, all are in balance as we know how the story will end. We just want to keep the story going for as long as we can.
The essence of Liberalism, stripped of the screeching mutants who soil its name with claims more indicative of their inclination, is this fact of Gambling. It’s predicated on the trust of God being so absolute that there’s nothing that can be done to undo creation, and the sacrifice of his son Jesus Christ to redeem all sins. This descent into debauchery, hedonism, decadence, the evils committed that will be repaid in full when the time comes, this is merely to remind us that God’s mercy is as eternal and everlasting as his wrath. I can keep betting on Red 21 and keep winning larger and larger amounts, but I can never leave the Casino and I wouldn’t want to, because there’s always something new going on.
Liberalism, I suppose, is meant to fit a people as individualistic and adaptable as those sons of Aryas. At least the continuity of what the Aryans believed, in our 21st century where we gamble with much higher (and much less seen) stakes to the point where the foolish can declare the end of the story and total mastery over existence. But the story doesn’t end until God says so, as we’re finding out.
The next leg of the story is what Henry Adams, Oswald Spengler, Lothrop Stoddard, Robert E. Howard, and Francis Parker Yockey foresaw in their time at the turn of the 20th century. The sons of Aryas have reached the point where the rest of the world knows them, and sees in them the agent of their ruin. As BAP said, there are Indians and Africans who will not rest until the entire West is destroyed, as the West forced them to use toilets and eat with silverware. They do not know our essence, and can only look upon us and curse us, be we English or German, French or Italian, American or Boer, as “The White Devil.”
It is always our enemies that define us.
The next leg of the story is a war. Not like my 2ACW thesis, but certainly tied to it. It’s a war between the whole of the “White” world, and those of other colors. The “Colored” world if you will. The leg-up God has given the Colored world is that they knew they were at war long before we did. The cards are shuffled, the dealer stands on 19.
I don’t know about the dear reader, but I’m excited.
I used to be interested in ideology.
Now I'm only interested in outcomes.
I wrote an article many years ago that reminds me of this one, just far less erudite/educated. I think it's important to be grounded in what is before aspiring to what could be. Good read and I look forward to talking to you about this one day! Bless you Paul~