Robert T. Burnham, The Occidental Quarterly, Fall 2010
Editor’s Note: Below is an abridged version of an essay that first appeared in The Occidental Quarterly.
We shall witness the development of physical and political segregation between racial and ethnic groups within the United States and other Western nations, however this will not take place in the deliberate and clear-cut manner described by the architects of various plans put forth thus far for consideration. Rather, this segregation shall be the organic, spontaneous, and unpredictable product of natural human tendencies manifesting themselves as dynamic activism based on religion, race, and ethnicity and driven by economic, demographic, and geopolitical forces and trends. Certainly, some of the stated objectives of plans for formal separation should be pursued with vigor by agents acting in the interests of our religions, races, and ethnicities. Nevertheless, the processes, timescales, and ultimate results shall be far different than those depicted in current proposals.
Plans for formal, ethno-racial partition of these United States can be classified into two broad categories:
- Some plans advocate a separate, White homeland that occupies some portion of the contiguous United States, while the bulk of the country (which is a continuation of the United States of America) remains in its current, multicultural state. Such plans may include the creation of separate Black and/or Hispanic homelands as well. Examples are Professor Michael Hart’s “Racial Partition of the United States” and “Separation: Is there an Alternative?” by Rabbi Mayer Schiller.
- Some plans propose to subdivide the country into ethno-racial enclaves with no provision made for a multi-racial or multi-ethnic state. These models may offer a continuation of the United States of America as a political entity and where they do, the White enclave is the inheritor of this political entity. Richard McCulloch has written two articles describing such a plan; one appearing in The Occidental Quarterly and the other in American Renaissance.
One could refer to the former as visions for White escapism. While some interesting insights may be found within these proposals, on the whole I believe them to be unviable. McCulloch’s analysis and critique of Professor Hart’s plan and his conjecture regarding the author’s underlying motivations is a sufficient basis for dismissing them from serious consideration.
The late Sam Francis published a critique of separatism in American Renaissance in reaction to the Schiller and McCulloch essays. Rather than recap this analysis and critique, I refer the reader to McCulloch’s essay in The Occidental Quarterly and McCulloch replied to Dr. Francis’ critique shortly thereafter. I do not believe, however; that all of Dr. Francis’ criticisms, many of which are echoed in this essay, were effectively rebutted and there are other aspects of these proposals deserving of criticism.
CRITIQUE OF EXTANT SEPARATIST PROPOSALS.
The Absence of a Positive Religious, Philosophical, or Ideological Basis. Existing proposals lack any compelling religious, philosophical or ideological basis for the new society they aim to produce. A proposal for revolutionary upheaval of society has to offer some positive vision for the future — what this upheaval will produce. It cannot simply be a reaction against something.
The Enlightenment introduced to the world a model of unending human progress, the result of which was to be heaven on earth. This model — never realizable — is in its death throes. It has been the fuel for all of the societal perturbations which have brought our civilization to its current state of cultural crisis. It has simultaneously masked this inner collapse with outward signs of material success which have blinded all but a tiny minority. This is coming to an end. What should our world be like in the future?
One cannot simply propose the fragmentation of our country without addressing the philosophies of being that brought us to our current state. What is needed is a vision for a world that exists within a state of balance and continuity, unlike the cult of constant growth and change that has fueled our concomitant rise and descent. This is the future of which anti-moderns such as Nietzsche and Evola spoke of when they referred to that which comes after modernism, which is emphatically not a return to some prior existence or mode of beliefs, but rather the passing through of the modern, nihilistic age into a new one.
The development and communication of an emotionally compelling vision is the key to reanimating Western civilization.
A Discrete View of Historical Time. Current separatist ideas have a simplistic and inadequate view of historical time. Although they are all informed by the rapidly changing demographics of the world we inhabit — itself the immediate source of our discomfort, these plans do not envision a world moving onward through time leading up to, during, and then beyond the establishment of some utopian vision. The creation of the racially separated world is not presented as a progression of incremental events, but rather as an implementation of an ideal that takes place en masse across a negligible time period Unfortunately, the devil is in the details of the chronological events that would constitute such a monumental transformation of the world. This is not to say that one must reflect on and solve every potentiality that might occur. It is to say that the vision must be one of a continuous process rather than one of a discrete transition.
The Assumption of Common and Coincident Visions, Wills, and Capabilities. Proposed conceptions of separatism tend to assume an unrealistic, common worldview among Whites. This refers not only to White visions, wills, and capabilities vis-à-vis non-Whites, but vis-à-vis one another too. Certainly any plan requiring massive dislocations of Whites themselves would produce a welter of conflicting perceptions and conflicts of interest among Whites. While this might not be a significant problem when referring to relatively docile and unarmed populations, for others it will be. An example would be McCulloch’s relocation of White Texans and the subsequent surrender of the entire Lone Star State to other peoples. One wonders how easy it will be to encourage this population (probably one of the least docile and better armed in the Nation) to comply?
War of One versus All — All at the Same Time.
McCulloch’s plan insists on what would in reality be a war of committed Whites versus all — and simultaneously at that.
The idea that wholesale and effectively instantaneous dislocations of entire ethno-racial populations can be a peaceful affair is dangerously naïve. One can be certain that most if not all would be accompanied by at least sporadic and spontaneous violence. Others would most certainly involve clashes of military and paramilitary forces. I would not exclude the likelihood of Whites with differing objectives clashing violently. The point is that there is no distillation of the idealized vision through a filter of the possible.
In the realm of Machtpolitik as it might be exercised by definable entities within the United States, there will be players and non-players as well as enemies, neutral parties, and allies. In some cases, certain parties may be supported by external financial and/or military aid of a covert or overt nature. An effort to throw everyone out who is not White — by whatever definition is put forth by whoever is in a position to put it forth — will force non-players to become players and neutral parties and potential allies to become enemies. Given the realities of American demographic projections, patriots would do well to consider how we might best take advantage of such existing divisions rather than commit our aging and likely only partially committed population to a conflict against all comers — all at the same time.
No Differentiation is made between Ethno-Racial Groups. Plans that reject the continuation of the multi-ethnic state typically assume no differentiation will exist in White attitudes toward the potpourri of races and ethnic groups that must be removed from the White state. In practice, however, there is a huge difference in terms of our ability to peacefully cohabit with different ethno-racial groups. There are some groups with whom we cannot and effectively do not cohabit. There are others with whom we have a history of cohabiting successfully. One can see the manifestations of this when one considers the demographic trends within the United States.
Achieving separation is a means not an end. Limiting the discussion to the U.S. for a moment, that end is the preservation of Europeans as a biological descent group and their cultural legacy in the New World. Formal separation is not the only means available to achieve this. The proposed plans dismiss mechanisms used successfully in the past to protect culture and tradition as well as genetic integrity. I am referring here to intra-societal segregation reflecting natural human tendencies and codified and enforced via moral and often legal means. A goodly portion of Dr. Francis’ aforementioned essay deals directly with the question of ‘separatism versus Supremacy.”
Proposals of “one-size fits all” solutions for White relationships with every discretely identifiable ethno-racial category in the universe of peoples are neither workable nor desirable. There will be some races and ethnic groups from which we will be segregated (largely at their behest, one might add). There will be others with whom we shall coexist, but remain distinct from (through legal or moral constructs which create boundaries within shared space). There will be others with whom we shall assimilate. Concerning the latter, the rate of assimilation can be regulated by the imposition of immigration restrictions and/or the reanimation of ethnic pride, which will naturally slow rates of even relatively benign assimilation.
Whites are not delicate flowers needing special care and over-weening protection. Handfuls of our not-so-distant relatives conquered entire continents and remained distinct for hundreds of years while surrounded by the conquered natives. We did not lose the ability to accomplish this — we lost the will. We are not currently being defeated by any people. Rather, we are surrendering on all fronts to opponents whose weapons are our own pathological philosophies. It follows that these models of domination could be reconstructed should the Whiteman once again find the will to assert himself in the struggle. It also follows that without such will, separatist proposals can be neither implemented nor maintained.
The solutions to various inter-group relations shall differ from place to place, from peoples to peoples, and importantly, from time to time.
Ignoring the Fundamental Nature of Whites Themselves. As Sam Francis pointed out, secessionist plans generally ignore the realities of who White people are and how they behave as illustrated by an abundant body of historical evidence.
Firstly, ‘Whiteness’ has never been a fuel for action on the part of Whites outside of very specific and limited circumstances. One can make use of Whiteness as a means of differentiating populations and awakening some sense of self-preservation amongst Caucasian populations. However, developing an ideology of Whiteness is insufficient by itself and in many if not most cases it will be the least effective means on hand. This is clearly illustrated in Europe, where appeals to ethno-national sentiments are logical targets of appeal — not just on the national level but on the proto-national level too. One need only point to independence movements among the Basque, Bretagne, and Scottish peoples.
One can also appeal to attachments that are not explicitly racialist in nature: defense of the Christian or Catholic world, preservation of European or Western civilization, preservation of specific cultural or linguistic patrimonies. In the United States one can point to obvious ethno-cultural and ethno-political bodies, the most obvious being Southerners; although there are other, latent examples that could be brought to life in New England and possibly the Midwest. One can further the process of dissolution in ethno-political terms by encouraging virtually all sources of intra-national stress and tension — including that of other ethnic groups.There are also political separatist movements that generate stresses and tension among sub-populations, the current ruling class, and the government which is their instrument of power. The Vermont secessionist movement comes immediately to mind, but similar sentiment exists in Texas and Northern California.
One can further the process of dissolution in ethno-political terms by encouraging virtually all sources of intra -national stress and tension including that of other ethnic groups.
These proposals also ignore the historical sentimentality and empathy for others that Whites exhibit. It is politically incorrect to suggest that Whites have such tendencies, but the examples of this are legion. When one considers the unsuccessful track record of Negro political entities of any size, it is facile to pretend that a Negro state created out of whole cloth would be anything but a failure. With that in mind, can one pretend that Whites would sit idly by while a massive population Blacks and mulattos suffered in an artificial nation of our creation? This implies that our relationship with the Negro in North America will be the continued existence of segregation, which one might envision could eventually become part of a more strategic plan towards consolidation of various Black ghettos and Bantustans into one or more larger ones — probably occupying a region or regions in the former Confederacy. Such a transition could take place over decades or longer and would be gentle enough in character that the Black populations in these regions would be able to maintain some semblance of order and rudimentary economic activity — something that could not be expected to accompany massive population transfers and dislocations in compliance with a partitioning plan.
Downplaying the Obstacle of Geographical Diffusion. Current proposals ignore or downplay the obstacle posed by geographic diffusion of distinct racial, religious, and ethnic groups. This is a key difference between separatist proposals put forth today and those of the past. Consider the difficulty of segregating the US compared to the relative ease (in theoretical terms at least) of fulfilling any of the pan-ethnic visions of late 19th- and early 20th-century Europe. It is one thing to envision redrawing the border between the Germans and the French. It is quite another to expect to separate America’s Caucasians, Negros, various flavors of Hispanics, sprinkling of Asians, etc. Doubly-so if one expects to carry this out en masse and within one brief and discrete time frame.
Ignoring Non-White Actors.
It seems appropriate to try to formulate an image of our world in the tragically not-so-distant future, because it will be from this reality that possibilities can be formed. This is not an attempt to formulate the vision for the future previously mentioned. Rather, this is an attempt to imagine the world as the Enlightenment model collapses.
We must tailor our actions to the world in which these actions will be put into motion. One cannot expect to realize an idealized outcome given the current, rather dismal state of affairs. To pursue such a model will result in the expenditure of what resources are at hand for naught.
Military tactics are like unto water; for water in its natural course runs away from high places and hastens downwards. . . . Water shapes its course according to the nature of the ground over which it flows; the soldier works out his victory in relation to the foe whom he is facing. Therefore, just as water retains no constant shape, so in warfare there are no constant conditions. He who can modify his tactics in relation to his opponent and thereby succeed in winning, may be called a heaven-born captain. (Sun Tzu, The Art of War)
One can see trends and inertia that can be made to work to our benefit. If the premise that what we wish for is in fact a reflection of man’s nature, then at some point such an order shall come to pass of its own accord. The question for us is to permit this natural inertia to carry us along, while directing our energies towards an order that is to our benefit.
The Seeds of Destruction. The defining trend of the coming age shall be dissolution. This is counter to the desires of our current masters and contrary to the fears of many in our movement and in associated movements — even of left-socialist, anarchist, anti-capitalist movements who ironically share a great deal of core concerns with those they would consider to be their arch enemies.
Our alien elite and their co-opted servant shave been endeavoring to consolidate power and wealth. They have been remarkably successful, but the processes by which they have accomplished this are processes which lead to or accelerate dissolution. Since they have safely completed the amassing of wealth, one imagines that their position, at least initially, in this world of dissolution shall be rather secure — unlike that of the rest of us. Examples of these sources of ultimate collapse, which served their masters so well during the past era include the following: massive immigration; the outsourcing and off-shoring of entire industries; the manipulation of real and engineered inter-group tensions; the replacement of assimilation as the American model by multiculturalism; the cult of consumerism and the credit boom which fueled it at its zenith; and the ever-expanding socialist policies that enrich the unproductive under-classes at the expense of the shrinking middle.
These factors, now malignant and no longer controllable have in turn produced:
- The growth of self-sustaining, alien populations; distinct and inassimilable or hostile to assimilation, within formerly homogenous societies.
- The exhaustion of resources, coupled with the massive growth of human populations, which tax these shrinking resources at ever-increasing rates.
- The collapse of the economic model of constant growth and change, which will result in the restoration of many of the traditional ties binding humanity to that which is local — simply because the mobility of humanity and goods which defined this model will no longer be possible.
These internalized flaws will like result in the fragmentation of all supranational entities, including the United States and the European Union.
Fragmentation of Democratic Political Bodies.
It wastes, exhausts and murders itself. There was never a democracy yet that did not commit suicide. — John Quincy Adams
The democratization of governments within the West, coupled with the aforementioned partitioning of populations into groups competing over-scarce resources, will rend these nations apart. As these democracies devolve into inter-group competitions, governments will cease to provide the basic functions of order and protection that are ultimately their legitimate justification for being. This will force populations to find means of providing these basic functions. A likely solution will be the expansion of power vested in sub-national political entities (e.g. state and local governments) as well as the development and expansion of extra-political entities (e.g. private security forces, ethnic gangs, etc).
This parallels the decline of the Roman Empire and the dissolution of political power from a centralized empire to the feudalism that followed.
Whether this means the near-term, formal dissolution of these political entities themselves is unknown. It is almost certain that there will be internal fragmentation along explicit and implicit ethno-racial lines long before the idea of formal separation takes place. This process will not be smooth: it will take place in fits and starts and it will not be peaceful. There will be escalating violence on the part of ethnies exercising their will to power and on the part of the State itself attempting to maintain order through increasingly totalitarian and brutal measures. It is likely that the focus of such measures will bea ctivist elements within the nation’s originating population in order to maintain the unthinking allegiance of these populations.
Ultimately the Caucasian people within a given geopolitical entity will coalesce into a unified and self-interested body or they will simply cease to exist. Such coalescence will occur primarily as a reaction to outside pressure — e.g. from the stresses caused by conflict with other, better organized ethnic groups coupled with economic stresses and the failure of the state to fulfill its fundamental obligations. This will also be furthered by the existence of model movements. As nativist movements arise and are successful in various countries or regions, they will serve as models and encouragement for similar movements in neighboring states. The greatest, immediate danger will be the tendency of those in power to co-opt the concerns and rhetoric of these movements in order to marginalize them and perpetuate their own power. Such actions on the part of the powers-that-be can only delay the inevitable, because the agents of other groups (e.g. the Muslims in Germany who will continue to push for the implementation of Sharia law) will not be co-opted. Their ever-increasing belligerency will undermine the ability of “moderates” to defuse nativist movements catalyzed as a result of these external pressures.
The Fragmentation of the United States. In the United States the first ethnic separatism as a movement inspiring a plurality within an ethnic group will be Brown, not Black or White. There already exists considerable sympathy in the Chicano population for ethno-nationalistic visions of the world. Indeed, they have their own mythology at the ready, which infuses this sympathy with sentiments of injustice, desires for vengeance, and images of a greater Mexico. This ethno-nationalism manifests itself today in the de facto ethnic cleansing of both White and Black Americans in areas occupied by large populations of Central American mestizos. This ethnic cleansing refers not only to residents of an area, but also private sector business owners and employees, government employees and elected representatives, and eventually, police officers, sheriffs, etc. When the energies of the local government become directed by minority interests, the region has functionally seceded from the body politic.
Blacks will never effectively assert any form of ethnic nationalism — such as open and concerted agitation with the intention of creating a Black homeland. As previously suggested, de facto segregation will continue to define the relationship of the Negro to all other homogeneous ethnies. Thus, regions of the country will continue to darken and this consolidation of Black Bantustans in our midst will likewise produce the concentrations of abject poverty, senseless violence, structural deterioration, deindustrialization, and civilizational collapse that have become depressingly familiar.Eventually this Chicano ethno-nationalism will begin to express itself in more overt means. It will only be a matter of time before more vocal and passionate members of this massive and unassimilated population will agitate for more formal connections with their beloved Mexico. Whether this agitation takes the form of open violence or acts of terrorism remains to be seen, but if history is any guide there is little reason to doubt it.
One can envision essentially the same process taking place for every other unassimilating ethnic group. Many of these ethnic pockets will become more and more lawless — or rather, dominated by their own “laws” and enforced by their own de-facto forms of law-enforcement, i.e. gangs. This process will be exacerbated by the “de-policing” exercised by law-enforcement as they attempt to avoid accusations of racism and other consequences of trying to impose the White man’s law on populations who are unwilling to obey it.
Other pockets may in fact be largely orderly and civilized in nature. For example, one can image a very orderly, orthodox Muslim ethnic enclave dominated by Sharia law. (Germans, the Dutch, and Frenchmen reading this should spend a little time imagining this because such enclaves will be a reality in Europe in a few years.) However, these Muslims would not be American in any sense that our Founding Fathers would recognize.
With regard to the more assimilable minority groups, a certain degree of assimilation will continue. A certain amount of interracial mixing will take place in a world that is no longer flat. There are two, critical aspects to such inter-breeding that would differentiate it from that which takes place currently: the frequency (e.g. the percentage of live births from mixed pairings) and the nature of it (e.g. whether it is dysgenic).
Whites will continue to recede backwards from fronts of conflict like beachgoers retreating from the tide. How long this process will continue is impossible to say, but there are precious few signs of it abating. If current events are any indication, we have a long, hard row to hoe. It bears mention that this is not an entirely negative process. Rather, the migration of Whites, consciously or unconsciously, into majority white regions serves to further the process of segregation. In addition, Whites continue to control a most valuable physical asset — arable land. Surrendering blighted inner cities dotted with abandoned and outmoded hulks of factories to other ethnic groups is no great loss; and puts these groups at a decided disadvantage in the long-term.
Outside of problems, explicitly ethno-cultural in origin, the expanding gulf between the obligations of the State (which the Federal government continues to elaborate) and the actual fulfillment of these obligations will force Americans to implement proxies in order to see to it that their needs are met. We already see many of these proxies in action: homeschooling, private security and gated communities, local government action substituting for Federal government inaction or ineptitude, etc. This process will continue unabated, excepting the occasional suppression of these competing proxies by the State, which — although unable or unwilling to fulfill its obligations — will nevertheless jealously guard its authority and power.
The inadequacies and failures at the Federal level will fuel political secessionist movements. They will be expressions of the newfound political power of sub-national elements — whether these are states, counties, cities, or portions thereof. Fragmentation of states will be likely too, as there will inevitably be friction along the various fault lines within the states — economic, linguistic, ethnic, and racial. The distinction between northern and southern California immediately comes to mind, but one wonders how long Michiganders will accept their marriage to Detroit or New Yorkers their bondage to the Big Apple — as in both cases the state’s citizens are deprived of financial resources in order to fund the inefficiencies and corruption of the large cities.
In conclusion, we will see a combination of ethnic, racial, political, and economic forces fragment the Nation into subordinate parts. This process will manifest itself even at the personal level as individuals will be forced to circumvent the ever-expanding constraints and burdens imposed by our overarching bureaucracy simply to survive.
A Quick Comment on Europe. McCullough makes reference to Europe in his proposal, where he states that “non-white states cannot be tolerated on European soil.” In practice this is no longer an option. One cannot envision a time in the near future when a European people will have the intestinal fortitude to expel large numbers of un-assimilated aliens. These populations are already coalescing — notably in France and in the Netherlands — where there exist today suburbs where the police dare not show their faces. This process will continue with the growth and solidification of these ethnic enclaves, the continued exclusion of Whites from them, and the never-ending pandering and excuse-making from the politicians who should by rights be decorating the ends of ropes throughout the Western world.
The Turning Point. At what point in this process of dissolution and displacement will Whites become self-aware and willing to act in their own, explicit self-interest, whether ethnic, racial, religious, nationalistic, or otherwise? This transition from the current, paralytic state to one of renewed vigor shall likely begin on a piecemeal basis and may occur so gradually as to be more evolutionary than revolutionary. The first signs of vigor will be in countries or regions where solidarity on some basis still exists and the ruling classes are not dominated (or not entirely dominated) by aliens and their agents and proxies. Other populations may need to go through extensive and painful periods of deprivation before they develop the presence of mind, the anger, and the desperation that will drive them to act.
Reconquista, Round II. Having painted a picture of a patchwork world, where even the formerly homogenous states of Europe will be fractured into smaller political entities with racial, ethnic, and religious foundations, one should be forgiven for asking what grounds for optimism exist. Here one must recall the aforementioned implications of time as a continuum. That such alien entities as Muslim states in Europe and mestizo states and Negro Bantustans in the current United States shall exist in the near term does not imply that they can or should exist in the long term. One can envision the Germans eventually ridding Germania of New Turkey, or the Dutch reclaiming their lovely little country from Islam as they once reclaimed it from the sea. Certainly similar processes can consolidate and compress Black-dominated regions of the United States or apply relentless pressure on a border with Aztlan.
The vision illustrated by this essay is not particularly cheerful. It essentially proposes that the collapse of the civilizational model defined generically by the Christian world, that was itself born among the ruins of the Roman Empire, is inevitable and approaching its conclusion. It also posits that there is nothing that can be done to reverse this and that efforts towards such ends are futile. Nevertheless, from the rubble of this civilization can arise another; growing anew from the same roots.Our charge today is to prepare the ground for this transformation.
Developing ways to shake White populations from their stupor and motivate them to act — or at least provide an environment conducive to activists acting on their behalf — should be a primary focus of our movement today.
It is essential that we come to accept that European manis in a state of retreat in all theatres and that we work to stabilize our situation to minimize losses, geographical and otherwise; that we develop an effective vision of the field of battle and of the forces that will be arrayed against us, including enemies, allies, and neutral parties; that we develop a vision that defines the future and energizes our populations; that we prepare ourselves for the inevitable turning points; and that we gain and hold the initiative as the transitions from retreat to advance take place.