Peasant Revolts

With the election of Donald Trump to US president, there had been some hope that, although not a perfect candidate, he would be able to stem the decline and dispossession of white Americans. There was hope that if those on the traditionalist and nativist right lent Trump their support, such groups could become clients to power and have their grievances and concerns considered by those in authority. I do not believe that anyone on the actual right saw Trump as amenable to their political and cultural goals, but that his rule could once again hold off decline and further persecution from state and cultural institutions. After all, those of us on the right cannot expect someone of our persuasion to take power, since properly understood, our views are antithetical to Constitutional conceptions of liberty and equality. Although gradual reform is possible, and someday America may become “rightest”, pushing too hard too quickly can only serve to firstly embolden and empower our enemies, but also breed an instability that will not benefit those who actually live through such a transitional period. Massive upheaval and revolution are not desirable, as the cost in human life would be great. One cannot be a nationalist and then eagerly endanger the nation by doing damage to the systems that currently sustain that nation. Even though some may argue that such a calamity would be eugenic, even the harsh reality is that even in perfect Darwinian circumstances, survival is often dictated by random chance and not adaptability. As someone who wants to see my nation survive, I do not wish to see avoidable hardships thrust upon them, especially if we are seeing events (slowly) shift in our favour.

Elon Musk was the cause of great online controversy over the Christmas holidays. He stated that the United States requires a reform of the H-1B Visa program to incentivize the immigration of high-skilled workers from countries such as India. He went on to say that American (i.e. white) workers were too stupid and difficult to educate, and that America needs Indians if it is to retain its position as a global economic powerhouse. Of course, Musk’s statements are problematic for a number of reasons. Many white Americans with tech backgrounds have been unable to find work because corporations are incentivized to hire non-white candidates due to DEI policies, as well as the fact that a foreign worker can work essentially as a slave because their residency is tied to their job and employer. We see examples of executives decrying the laziness of white employees (which in some cases does exist), and celebrating how foreigners are willing to work overtime and weekends, but this is a situation where due to their residency status the foreigner is forced into a position whereby they can be exploited to a degree that a native white employee would not tolerate. The use of foreign workers also depresses wages and keeps them artificially low sector wide. Instead of linking pay to inflation and economic outlook, by using foreign workers a company is able to keep wages stagnant by importing workers from an alien economic reality instead of limiting themselves to the economic situation domestically. Hiring foreigners, but particularly Indians, is not good for the broader American economy, as Indians have been known to falsify credentials,¹ are often times not adequately familiar with the requirements of their job,² and are racially nepotistic.³ From a cultural standpoint, Indians are broadly speaking incapable of conducting themselves in accordance with Western/Christian morality and ethics. This was not some long held prejudicial view I had failed to reform, but from the comments of an Indian man who spoke of his difficulties living in the United Kingdom. His lecture to the Property and Freedom Society can be found here.⁴ Ultimately, as odious as Islam is, given the state of the Indian people when afforded the freedom to live in accordance to what they deem as normal, Islam is a marked improvement.

Ultimately, without proper restraints, big business and those who head them will always be globalist. Elon Musk does not strike me as ideologically globalistic, and if pressed probably believes his policy proposals are in the best interests of the Unite States, but again he is conceiving the United State’s interests in economic terms, not in regards to the nation. Musk seeks to preserve the US as an economic entity and state, not a nation with a defined people and culture. If the state is to retain the monopoly of power, the power of the corporations needs to be domesticated and subordinated. Multinational corporations need to be localized, meaning that they enter into an agreement with the state which affords the corporation all the protection and rights granted to a citizen, but require the loyalty from the corporation. In using America as an example, a corporation would be forced to be headquartered and retain its capital in the United States, and conduct itself according to American law wherever its products or services were offered. In this schema, a social media company would be forced to align its policies in accordance to the American conceptions of free speech, and if this conception was not shared internationally, the company would be forced to withdraw from those markets. However, with the state backing them, tariffs and other punitive actions could be taken by the state to preserve the interests of the corporation. If a corporation wished to be unrestrained, it could leave American custodianship, become an international corporation and be treated to whatever reprisal or action the US deemed necessary to their economic interests.

Elon Musk was only ever tangentially on the right. His purchase of Twitter was beneficial to the right, and his opinions on transgenderism are more or less correct, but he is not a nationalist or traditionalist. In one respect, the content of his posts were not surprising, but his dismissal and disdain for white Americans (many of which supported Trump and him) was. On X we saw what could be likened to a “peasants’ revolt”. A mass of angry people impenitently lashing out at one who tolerates but is not beholden to them. The right needs to stop idolizing men, but especially men who do not even claim to hold their views. Trump and Musk do not share our goals and only tangibly share our interests. Some have said we should not “bite the hand that feeds us”, and in one respect I do believe that we should be grateful to Musk for what he has done with X, but Musk is not the power we are trying to become a client for. If the right wants influence, it must align itself with power and although Musk is powerful, ultimately he represents a faction we are in competition with. Lashing out at Musk accomplishes nothing because he never claimed to represent our interests and thus was never someone we should have pedestalized. Yes, one can be angry with him and make angry posts, but this firstly accomplishes nothing, and secondly only solidifies him in his beliefs. America is going through a political transition and an apparent circulation of elites. There are opportunities here, but all expectations should be tempered and we should make the best of what we can until the political situation is so degraded that we, or our descendants, are able to institute the changes we actually need.

1https://www.vice.com/en/article/fake-degrees-school-dropouts-unqualified-doctors-india-has-a-problem-of-quacks/

2https://www.brightworkresearch.com/canada-fast-growing-problem-with-indian-it/#The_Effect_of_Indian_IT_on_Canadian_IT_Workers

3https://www.livemint.com/companies/news/this-firm-hired-1-000-employees-in-india-after-ceo-fired-900-staffers-over-zoom-11644902990570.html

4