March of the Titans, November 16, 2012
The re-election of Barack Obama in the USA has made even the most optimistic of European-American activists realize that demographically speaking, the jig is up in America.
However, almost the same scenario is playing itself out in Western Europe. Third World immigrants and their descendants played a decisive role in the recent French presidential elections; in the UK, non-whites will soon (possibly within 20 years) form the majority of children under the age of 18; and similar scenarios are underway in Belgium, the Netherlands, Germany, and most other Western European nations. There is an inexorable eroding of the European base of a number of traditionally white nations through mass immigration and natural reproduction rates among already present immigrants.
The 2012 US presidential election has mapped out the reality — and middle-term future — of America, Canada, Western Europe, Australia and Canada. It bodes ill for the long-term future of our race.
1. Introduction: The Premise
Demographically, it is no longer possible to win politically. There are sufficient numbers of white liberals (not to mention the fact that counted as white, especially in the US, are large numbers of groups implacably hostile to our race) who will always vote with non-whites to bring in Obama clones from now on.
What then is the solution?
Part of it is continued political activism, to reach as many increasingly alienated white people as possible and inculcate them with a sense of racial self-consciousness.
But that is only half the struggle. What to do with these people, how to keep them motivated, and the long-term solution to the problem, are the real deal-breakers in the conundrum.
Without an ideal, without a practical goal, and without real results, even the most racially-conscious group will ultimately dissipate. This is especially so when surrounded by a sea of non-whites. The vanishing of the Aryans of India, the ancient Egyptians and numerous other examples bear deadly testimony to this fact.
If we do not offer a real alternative to our people, and, even more importantly, deliver on that alternative, then the game is well and truly over.
2. The Only Alternative
T. Lothrop Stoddard wrote in his book, Racial Realities in Europe, that “nationality is what people think they are, race is what they really are.”
Bearing this in mind, we will have to accept that the presently existing states in North America and Western Europe (at least) are going to vanish.
Whites in those states must start thinking in terms of their race, and not their nationality.
The solution therefore, requires a quantum leap in thinking and a total break with the current system.
The historical record shows clearly that the only way in which a race can preserve its identity is through the creation of an ethnically homogenous heartland.
This then, a “European homeland,” offers the only way in which our race can be preserved.
The very concept sounds far-fetched and almost in the realm of fiction.
Where? When? How? Are the obvious questions which spring to mind.
Is it even remotely possible?
Before dismissing the idea out of hand, cynics should rather consider the alternative: the total destruction of the European people, their civilization, and culture.
Posited against that scenario of endless night, the idea of a European homeland seems quite tame.
3. The Zionist Model
The best model for the creation of a homogenous homeland for a defined people is unquestionably the state of Israel.
It is true that there are a number of circumstances surrounding the creation of Israel, both positive and negative. Positive factors included the power of the Jewish lobby, the unity of the Jewish people, while negative factors include the displacement of and resultant conflict with the Palestinian and Arabs.
It is not, however, these factors which should be the focus of our attention. Rather, we should look at and see the methodology which the Zionist movement used to create the Jewish state, and then simply replicate that, avoiding the pitfalls into which they fell.
The Zionist movement was formally launched by Theodor Herzl in 1896, although the first agitation for a Jewish state started several decades earlier.
Herzl, however, was the first to put together a coherent plan, which was then taken up by fellow Jews and ultimately became the World Zionist Movement which created Israel.
Herzl’s plan, which he put down in his 1896 book, Der Judenstaat, contained six chapters:
II. The Jewish Question
III. The Jewish Company
IV. Local Groups
V. Society of Jews and Jewish State
Chapter I deals with the basic concept of the demand for a Jewish state.
Chapter II deals with anti-Semitism, and outlines the justification or need for a Jewish homeland to bring an end to Jewish-Gentile conflict.
It also discusses the question of “where”, with the two main options being Argentina or Palestine, his conclusion is that the Jewish state would be “what is selected by Jewish public opinion.”
Chapter III sets out the core of the project: the creation of a formal organization, which he called the Jewish Company, to physically raise the money, buy land, promote Jewish immigration, the creation of industry, and so on. This “Jewish Company” became the Jewish Agency, which did indeed approach the colonization of Palestine as a business.
Chapter IV discusses how Jews would immigrate in organized groups rather than leaving it up to scattered individuals.
Significantly, Herzl pointed out that anti-Semitism, or persecution of the Jews, would be one of the biggest “push” factors which would drive Jews to the Zionist state. This is of bearing to us, given what will be the increasingly anti-white nature of many of the collapsing states.
Chapter V discusses the set-up of the Jewish state, its constitution and infrastructure, and even suggested a flag.
Chapter VI is the grand conclusion, and ends with these powerful words:
“But we must first bring enlightenment to men’s minds. The idea must make its way into the most distant, miserable holes where our people dwell.
They will awaken from gloomy brooding, for into their lives will come a new significance. Every man need think only of himself, and the movement will assume vast proportions.
And what glory awaits those who fight unselfishly for the cause! Therefore I believe that a wondrous generation of Jews will spring into existence. The Maccabeans will rise again.
Let me repeat once more my opening words: The Jews who wish for a State will have it.
We shall live at last as free men on our own soil, and die peacefully in our own homes.
The world will be freed by our liberty, enriched by our wealth, magnified by our greatness.
And whatever we attempt there to accomplish for our own welfare, will react powerfully and beneficially for the good of humanity.”
3.1 Herzl therefore accomplished a number of things:
3.1.1 He laid out the moral justification for the creation of a Jewish state (anti-Semitism, the demand for self-determination and so on — in other words, all the essential arguments to make the case presentable and justifiable to world opinion.)
3.1.2 He mapped out a realistic plan, which, he said, might take decades to fulfil. This plan was followed to the letter, starting immediately after the foundation of the World Zionist Movement.
3.1.3 This plan entailed the holding of conferences which:
18.104.22.168 Announced the project to the world and gathered up Jewish support for the project;
22.214.171.124 Laid the intellectual effort which went into identifying the Jewish homeland, morally justified its existence, and worked on a political level to bring the state about;
126.96.36.199 Established the Jewish Agencies; and
188.8.131.52 Launched real immigration policies in tandem with Jewish support agencies from the immigrants’ originating countries.
4. The European Homeland: “Nova Europa”
Working on the Herzl model, there are therefore four significant steps which have to be undertaken.
4.1 A seminal work outlining the idea has to be published.
This work must, like Der Judenstaat:
4.1.1 Outline the reasons why a state is necessary (e.g. the threatened genocide of the European people; their moral right to survival, and so on).
4.1.2 It must be phrased and delivered in such a way that it can be argued before any audience, anywhere, and justified as a plan which does not result in the infringement of the rights of any people on earth.
In this way, accusations of “white supremacism” and the nonsense about wanting to be supreme rulers over others can be deflected.
Also, because of the majority population nature of a homeland, racial segregation will not be necessary (for example there is no segregation in China — they don’t need it…)
4.1.3 This work must also, like Der Judenstaat, call for the creation of a “European Company” to take charge of the financial and logistical backing of the enterprise. This will entail the setting up of a company with trusted directors, shareholders, etc.
4.1.5 This work must then either map out, or at the very least, call for, proposals on where the European homeland should be.
4.2 Announce the project to the world, possibly by way of a Congress (a la World Zionist Congress) at which maps and details can be discussed. The advent of the World Wide Web has facilitated the exchange of ideas and concepts so that it is possible to bring in the most sensible ideas and proposals first, even before a public launch.
4.3 The creation of a Nova Europa Company, which would fulfil the duties of a European version of the Jewish Agency, as outlined above. Critical to the planning of such a company would be the solicitation of investment in industry to create manufacturing-based jobs in the “the territory.” Without that pull factor, there will be no growth point to which people will be attracted.
The final step in the process is implementation. Without real progress in this regard, the project will come to nothing and dissipate. Critical to this step is, therefore, the selection of an area which can be majority occupied.
This is possibly the most difficult of all, because, unlike at the time of the creation of the state of Israel, there were no empires on the point of dissolution, the number of independent states was far lower, and, most importantly, there appear to be no “open” territories left.
This is a real problem, of which a possible answer is suggested below.
6. The Territory
Given the above — that there are no “new” areas to be opened up (even those sparsely inhabited are now parts of existing states), there appears to be only two options:
6.1 A number of territories, located in different nations, can be selected as target immigration areas. This would allow for the ultimate creation of several proto-states, of which some might be more successful than others.
For example, we could look at selecting a town in rural America, and embark on a deliberate campaign of colonization by “our” people. Eventually, a series of towns could possibly link up. This could also be done in other nations: Canada, Australia, and of course the western European nations as well.
This would solve the twin problems of (a) identifying areas which impinge upon existing states, and (b) the issue of cross-national immigration for many people, but would have to be done with the understanding that this would then be a long-term project which would very likely only result in full proper independence once the “rest” of the “host” nation had collapsed into Second or Third World anarchy. This is, by the way, the plan behind the Orania project in South Africa.
6.2 Following the Zionist example (where Herzl lobbied the British, the Americans, the Ottoman Empire, and the German Kaiser, among others), a direct political approach might possibly be made to one or more Eastern European states which are, of all currently existing nations, the most receptive to such an idea and who are all suffering from serious population decline problems — which they would possibly want to address by promoting inward European immigration.
Once again, before this is dismissed as a fantasy, the geo-political realities of those nations should be overviewed by any cynics. Many of the former Soviet bloc Eastern European nations are seriously concerned about population declines and have seen what has happened in Western Europe — and have launched pro-white birth-rate population drives of their own.
The idea of a European homeland may sound far-fetched, but then again, so did the idea of a Jewish homeland sound farfetched when Herzl wrote his book. In fact, one of the wealthiest potential backers from who Herzl sought help, the Rothschilds, dismissed him out of hand.
Rather than focusing on the nay-sayers, thoughtful activists will consider what the alternatives are.
And realistic activists will have to agree: essentially there are no alternatives to geographic consolidation. The historical record is clear: those people who do not possess a territory in which they form the majority population, are doomed to extinction.
The challenge is open. Will we have what it takes to survive, or will we perish?