Those of you who are more familiar with the German philosopher Fredrich Nietzsche may be wondering why an ethnonationalist like myself is blogging about him. It seems common knowledge that Nietzsche was against nationalism, so why do I bother to bring him up?
Update 2/19/2017 I wrote this a while back and may disagree with it to a certain extent.
The answer to this question is that Nietzsche lived in a time of his country’s history when what one might call the “mainstream conservatism” of his day, Christianity, was rapidly losing authority, especially in intellectual circles. This is somewhat like the dilemma which conservatives faced in the US after the legalization of same-sex marriage by the Supreme Court. There was a real sense for conservatives that “God is dead! We have killed him” in the same anxious way that some Germans would have felt at the time of Nietzsche. Hence Christian conservatism as a political movement has largely given way to neoconservative and quasi-libertarian “cuckservatives” in the GOP, while those wishing to continue a genuinely conservative movement are part of “neoreactionary” or “alt-right” circles.
The defining difference between the neoreaction and past conservative movements is, of course, that the neoreaction accepts that “God is dead”; the goal of the neoreaction is not centered around trying to revive a nearly dead Christian culture which once existed in Western Europe and North America.(disputed ideological territory) Rather, it is open to a wide range of inegalitarian viewpoints ranging from anarcho-capitalism to ethnonationalism, and yes, at times Christian theonomy.
I think that the decline of Christian culture has actually been somewhat of a gift which the Left unintentionally handed to the Right. Now that Christianity is fading, so will the moralistic impetus behind Marxism and other strict egalitarian movements. It has also allowed some conservatives to dig deeper into the past and find the true moral basis of conservatism in Pre-Christian, native European values, which were replaced by the egalitarian values (slave morality) of Christianity.
Nietzsche perhaps viewed the world in a similar way. Revolutionary movements had been sweeping Europe for nearly century. Democracy was rising , aristocracy was fading. Christianity was fading as well. But he saw liberal and socialist movements for what they were: manifestations of Christian morality removed from the Christian religion. Christianity, as he rightly saw it was inherently iconoclastic; it seemed to value nothing of beauty (particularly when the Bible is taken literally, as in some Protestant churches), and was determined to see everything as ugly and bad. If you have any doubt about this conclusion you can read about the Christianization of Rome at the blog Europa Soberana, though you must use google translate to read the articles if you don’t know Spanish (link to articles).
One exception, Tolkien, while a Christian, overcame this iconoclastic impulse and from Pre-Christian myths and legends created in his mind beautiful beings with superhuman powers such as elves, Valar, and Maiar, but to this day we can see the correlation between the US being one of the most fervently Christian religious countries in the West while seeming to value personal heath and real physical beauty very little – obesity is practically an epidemic here.
But we must not only accuse the foolish fundamentalist Christians of the Bible Belt for adopting Christian slave morality and making the world ugly and bad: the far Left seems to have done an equally good job.
Iconoclasm is an inherent tendency of the Left – to destroy beauty out of envy – it has existed in the Left from the days of Moses all the way down to the murderers of Hypatia, the Christian Emperor Theodosius, John Calvin, Oliver Cromwell, the French revolutionaries, Marx, Lenin, Stalin, and modern Social Justice Warriors. The Far Left and the Christian Right are both part of one and the same movement which is based in what Nietzsche called slave morality- a morality based on resentment of a master. It despises the strong, beautiful, and healthy, and exalts the suffering, weak, stupid etc.. It tries to bring everyone down to the level of the slave, hence creating dogmatic egalitarianism.This is extremely important to understand. And yes, there are sane, normal people do understand this.
While Nietzsche did not like ethnonationalism, it may be impossible for some people in the present Western World to even conceive of ethnonationalism being permissible without undergoing a Nietzschean transvaluation of values.
My personal experience, having been raised in a liberal Christian household has been somewhat like that of Theoden before he is healed by Gandalf in The Two Towers. I was very reluctant to apostatize and grasp master morality, to engage in self-creation of values, but once I did, it gave me a new sense of empowerment, similar to what Theoden felt after he was healed by Gandalf and grasped his sword for the first time since being under Sauraman’s evil spell.