***
In the long run, both cultural Americanisation and our strategic / economic submission to the USA are but fleeting and benign ailments which can be rapidly cured and whose source is not to be found overseas, but right here, among the ‘Euro-mericans’. Our domestic invasion, decadence and sub-replacement fertility will turn out to be mortal maladies unless they are very quickly treated. And let no one claim, as all those sophists do, that the USA has conspired to trigger European depopulation, family reunification and the construction of mosques, or that suburban ‘youths’ are the agents, victims and products of cultural Americanism, when it is their ethno-religious Islamisation that is actually on the increase and their Americanisation on the decrease.
***
Europe must therefore struggle on two fronts, which are more or less interconnected, even if not entirely: on the one hand, it must fight against a specific domestic invader, as well as against the collaborators, who are as pro-immigration as they are Islamophilic and include the above-mentioned pseudo-Identitarians, while simultaneously opposing American imperialism on the other. The main question at hand concerns the manner in which these threats are hierarchised, a question that I believe I have already answered when rejecting the nonsense preached by all those devotees, idiots and blindmen.
Those who rely on their love of the Third World and their Islamophilia in their struggle against American imperialism are following a descending suicidal path; the mistake made by the Atlanticists, who are under the fallacious impression that the American ‘power’ will protect a mythical ‘Occident’ against the jihadi onslaught, is a very similar one. As for the politicians who claim to believe that American and European interests are one and the same and that Europe and America are actually two halves of a single superpower (which is the case of Blair, Madelin, Aznar, etc.), their lies are those of a vassal and a courtesan.
It is unfortunately obvious that the standpoint in which I identify the invading Third-World, Islam and the European collaborative faction as our principal foe and the NAI as our main adversary presupposes the ability to liberate oneself from the prejudice which prevents people from contemplating the fact that one could actually struggle on two fronts, in accordance with two different confrontational methods.
As in the case of all americanolatric Atlanticists and those overexcited and hysterical anti-Americanists, this pathological state, afflicting the most impoverished minds, compels people to define themselves according to others. One is never pro-European, but anti-American and anti-Zionistic and therefore pro-Palestinian, Islamophilic, a Third-Worldist, and so on. All these terms can of course be systematically reversed: pro-American, etc. In fact, the European civilisation and its peoples do not interest these gentlemen in any way, whatever faction they may belong to. Obsessive anti-Americanists, for instance, are never troubled by the economic war that the USA is waging against us; what worries them instead is the fate of the ‘unfortunate Iraqi people’, whose destiny is, with all due respect, as unimportant to me as that of the now extinct Indian tribes.
***
What is noticeable is that the most fervent Americanophiles and the most hateful anti-Americanists share the central trait of not being familiar with the USA. For what is America if not an ephemeral empire that lacks the necessary features to subsist in the course of history and become a ‘long-lasting’ people (Raymond Ruyer). The USA is governed by a strictly mercantile, and therefore short-lasting, power logic. Messianic justifications (embodied by a simplified form of Protestantism) will make no difference in this regard. This nation, or ‘enterprise-nation’, rather, resembles the ephemeral Spanish empire, which was equally founded on gold; the difference, however, is that America is rootless.
***
What are the USA’s strengths and weaknesses? The former ones are well-known: economic dynamism, a willingness to work and make efforts, pragmatism, entrepreneurial will, institutional stability, and a social and moral kind of conservatism that allows it to export its viral decadence to Europe without being afflicted by it, in addition to cementing the American society through the veneration of ‘law and order’. What is also worth mentioning is America’s appreciation of efficacy and its philosophy of achieving results, paired with the rejection of useless ideas and dogmatic speculation; its faith in techno-science and the necessity to make enormous investments; its neo-Keynesian and semi-protectionist economic system, which involves an inseparable association between statal planning and enterprise, since American ‘liberalism’ is merely an exportation product targeting the competitors that are meant to be disarmed; its massive financial investments into the field of research and development; the exceptional quality that typifies its universities, which absorb European and Asian elites; optimism and elitism; a clear conscience in all its endeavours; its sense of conquest and will to domination; its espousal of patriotism as a supreme value; and so on. These characteristics obviously horrify our European intellectuals, as well as the Leftists that inhabit the east coast and the Hollywoodian milieu, although they all abide by the iron logic that governs this type of society. This strength can be summarised as being a primal state of mind (which is not meant pejoratively in any way) rooted in self-contentment and ethno-centrism, through which America itself becomes the supreme value and all inclinations towards ‘repentance’, masochism and self-criticism are always overcome, unlike what is happening in Europe.
***
Nevertheless, America’s weaknesses outweigh its strengths. Its speculative, casino-like economy is fragile, burdened with considerable external deficits and financed through inconstant international savings; it is experiencing a rapid and profound ethnic modification which benefits Latino-Americans, who lack the Fausto-Promethean culture that stems from Northern Europe; the NAI has triggered a generalised, global wave of anti-Americanism; its volatile public opinion is prone to demoralisation at the slightest defeat and remains reluctant to make any sacrifice whatsoever; its global imperialism is both adventurous and costly; its militarism is devoid of military qualities; it strives for the oneiric goal of world domination without actually possessing the means to achieve this ambition; and so on. In short, what the Americans are doing is entering into a bridge contract that they will be unable to uphold.
Let us now highlight further sources of weakness that are even more crucial than the previous ones, since they relate to America’s domestic situation: the absence of a genuine and profound ‘national culture’, which has, instead, been replaced by a way of life and an entertainment culture that prevent the US from defining its own identity (by attempting to Americanise the world, America is actually losing its identity); and the slow implosion and disaggregation afflicting the ancient North-American ‘civilisational unity’, a process that no amount of dollars, no global currency and no Stars and Stripes patriotism could ever durably cement.
What all of this means is that the global American ‘empire’ rests upon a specific bedrock, namely the USA itself, whose domestic homogeneity is ridden with cracks. It is quite possible that by 2030, southern American states (whose population will comprise a Latino majority) will have embraced secession. As for me, I predict that they actually will.
And unlike Europe, which is being invaded by the Third World and Islam, America is not endowed with age-old territorial enrooting and thus lacks any means to engage in fierce resistance. ‘Their home is not their own’, which means that they would perhaps not have sufficient mental strength to conduct a Reconquista should they find themselves on the edge of a precipice. America’s fundamental structural weakness lies in the fact that its patriotism is factitious. It belongs to the mercantile and emotional-speculative sphere and bears no relevance to a long-term memory, because Americans do not have any tangible homeland of their own. In the short term, this rootlessness is indeed a strength, but becomes a handicap in the long run, since no person would readily defend and die for a material homeland, which the USA undoubtedly is.
***
Americans are useful idiots, in the sense that they exacerbate global tensions while striving to appease them, hasten crises while trying to avoid them, cause civilisational clashes while attempting to bring an end to History in a manner that advantages them, and fuel the Islamic fire while seeking to extinguish it. As a result of their cowboy-like diplomacy, they are akin to bulls in a china shop. This is partly due to the fact that the major political decision-makers in the American government are never selected among genuine elites.
Faced with American militarism and the resulting impression of America’s invincibility, hysterically anti-American Europeans are struck with powerlessness and thus consider Islamic terrorism to be the sole means of countering and injuring the Giant; such is the unique response that the weak can have when confronted with someone stronger. They thus carry out a psychological and pathological transfer towards Islam, which, from their perspective, represents the only way for one to impede America’s imperialistic omnipotence.
Psychological schemes, simplistic reflexes and pre-defined reactions thus take hold of their minds, soothing their resentments and frustrations: ‘The USA is a materialistic and technological giga-power that abuses and humiliates us; let thus then ally ourselves to Islam, its spirituality, its ‘anti-modern’ civilisational counter-plan and its simplistic resistance tools, including justified terrorism, the vengeful weapon wielded by the poor and exploited’. These are the thoughts that lurk in the unconscious of all those who espouse OHAA.
This consolatory reasoning, which follows the Marxist logic of resentment, enables a simultaneous unification of traditionalists, Trotskyites, neo-Leftists and many others, as part of an unexpected convergence of impotent individuals in the framework of a desperado-like response. Let us call Islam to our aid in our struggle against Robocop and Mac World and place ourselves under the Prophet’s protective scimitar. Allah’s sabre will prevail over those bombers!
Their choice stems from a masochistic self-renouncement process, as well as from an alarming mixture of blindness and ignorance; the belief that harbouring rapidly growing Islamised masses on our soil is somehow preferable to an American presence (indeed, certain individuals go as far as to switch between idiocy and treason and wish for Europe’s Islamisation, whether implicitly or explicitly) will not reduce the American chokehold on our continent by a single inch, but actually add another domination effort to it, namely that of Third World colonists, a development which can only please Washington.
***
This USA is undoubtedly an ephemeral, yet formidable entity, a highly original and historically unprecedented structure which one must be careful not to despise. Its very existence is exclusively and simultaneously rooted in a sort of extension, projection and rejection of Europe. In the eyes of future historians, North America shall thus remain a kind of biopolitical monster.
America is neither a people nor a nation, nor even an empire, but a sort of chimera which has taken on the attributes of an imperial republic and extends across a new territory that has been seized and taken from its original occupants. Of course, in no way is this the case with China, Europe, India and the like. In the USA, the mercantile aspect has absorbed the sovereign and military functions as part of a successful fusion, which has never been entirely true of other major world powers. The US is the only country in the world whose political leaders are simultaneously involved in the military industry, business matters and electoral manoeuvres and whose elections are entirely determined by industrial sponsors. It is a country with a single function, a plutocratic entity in the purest possible form (no pejorative connotations intended).
The 21st century shall be an age of civilisational clashes, or rather a century marked by ethno-civilisational conflicts that may transcend any strictly continental and geostrategic logic. Alongside, or perhaps beyond, the very notion of an ethnocentric Euro-Siberia (a European-Russian merger that I am personally wishing for), I find myself wondering whether, in harmony with our current era and the century that now lies ahead, the massive and global reunification of all peoples of European descent will not end up being a conceivable accomplishment. In the world that is about to emerge, will ethnography not be destined to replace geopolitics? This concept is what I have christened ‘Septentrion’.
Islam may already be showing us the way. Despite claiming to be ‘universal’, this religion is also a civilisation. Objectively, implicitly yet palpably, it presents and sees itself as the banner of both coloured peoples and the South in the face of the White populations of Northern origin, which is true even in the case of Black Americans. Yes, I am schematising, caricaturising and simplifying, indeed, indeed; but is this trait completely inaccurate?
I therefore predict that, in the course of the 21st century, the great divide shall not oppose the USA to the rest of the world, but rather Septentrion to the entire planet. This opposition will take place in a climate of continual clashes between major ethnic and civilisational blocs (or Empires, perhaps?) and involve economic, cultural and military competition between them.
Annexes (Part I)
Various Informative Elements
The Chinese Challenge
China is positioning its pawns against the USA. On August 19th 2003, WorldnetDaily conducted an (internet) investigation into Chinese espionage on American soil, an espionage that is said to implicate more than 3,000 businesses located in the US. This is the main source of worry for FBI director Robert Mueller. The spies are believed to comprise students, tourists, permanent residents and businessmen. Allegedly, this situation concerns Canada as well, account taken of its own Chinese immigrant rate. In one of its inquiries (20/08/2003), The Asian Pacific Post confirmed the fact that Chinese espionage has been focusing on the USA since 1998, with military and technological targets harnessing special attention. Overwhelmed by its struggle against ‘terrorism’, the CIA seems to lack the necessary means to devote itself to the problem…
***
With regard to China, some economists have furthermore highlighted the following facts, which are completely astonishing: it is widely known that a number of southern developing countries use their savings to finance the developed countries located in the North, which may appear to be unfair and abnormal, but is actually entirely logical. Indeed, the (wealthy) investors of poor countries prefer to invest their funds in developed economies rather than their own national economy, simply because the resulting investment returns thus enjoy a much greater degree of safety. For instance, the IMF has revealed that in 2002, the USA absorbed 75.5 % of all global savings, which totalled 528 billion dollars! When I say global ‘savings’, I am not referring to hedge funds, but to those that had been locked-in for more than a year.
It so happens that China has been showing great interest in the USA. The overall value of the American treasury bonds which it purchases on a yearly basis exceeds the total sum of foreign investments made on its own soil! China thus acts as America’s creditor. This global financial influx into the USA enables the latter to finance its enormous commercial deficit. It is obviously a rather risky situation from America’s perspective, as it finds itself in a delicate state of capitalistic dependence. And yet, if global capital flows are centred around the USA more than on emerging countries (despite the fact that the latter’s development potential is truly significant), the reason is that the American economy is unrivalled in its ability to lead this capital to fruition, thanks to its productivity, efficacy and organisation. Why are there so few international investors in African and Arabian countries? Simply because they do not feel that they can rely on such countries and are reluctant to risk losing their capital or having it stagnate, which is an understandable position. Capital profitability is the golden rule of competitive economics, which is founded upon a kind of economic ‘Darwinism’ in which the less competent fail to attract investors, i.e. loaners. No Arabian billionaire Sheikh would enjoy placing his fortune into the hands of a ‘sibling country’, out of sheer love for his brethren; he would defi
nitely prefer, instead, to invest his money in Great Britain or the USA.
Let us, however, return to the topic of China. Economist Pierre Robin explains (in Le Figaro économie, 11/09/2003):
What American businesses strive for is not so much to increase their own exportations as to delocalise their production by investing in foreign countries, especially in China, which will, in return, export its products to the USA (among others). When one calculates the global amount stemming from these movements, it is the Chinese that actually finance both American consumers and the US federal budget. This also applies to the American military sphere: the US military budget, totalling 379 billion dollars in 2003, is, in fact, entirely covered through foreign credit.
The presence of such American indebtment, particularly to the Chinese superpower candidate, proves that the USA is somehow a ‘credit-based empire’. It also demonstrates that Washington could never allow itself to espouse a warmongering or even authoritarian policy towards China, a country that has the fearsome means of exerting pressure through the suspension of all investment loans.
***
The notion that global US economic prevalence is coming to an end (especially due to China’s influence) has been developed by economist William R. Hawkins (TradeAlert.org, 18/04/2003), in a study entitled China Surges Economically While America Falters. His view is that the USA will find itself unable to maintain its current military capacity as a result of insufficient funding. He explains that the American economy lives off the credit granted by the rest of the world, especially Asian countries, which are delighted with their creditor status. China is gradually becoming the world’s foremost manufacturer of products ranging from textiles to the engineering industry and is going to unfurl itself across western markets. Hawkins has adopted the nowadays quite renowned theories advocated by professor Robert S. Ross (Boston college) regarding the efficiency of China’s new ‘socialist market economy’ model. Ross states:
A Global Coup Page 23