On Restoration

James Fraser and Prince Charles Edward Stuart in Outlander

I have been watching small bits of the television series Outlander, which is mostly centered around the Jacobite rebellion of 1745, and it reminded me of a recurring fundamental theme of the neoreaction which I have perhaps insufficiently addressed. What we are trying to achieve is similar to what these Jacobites attempted, a restoration of the old order of society which was destroyed by the Whigs/liberals. At heart, I am a restorationist, and I am an ethnic nationalist. Though I am not a neo-Jacobite (I do feel it is a very romantic cause), I am certainly a restorationist of something much older, more permanent, and more general than Catholic monarchy; the tripartite aristocratic system of Indo-European societies. This, of course, includes monarchy and lower levels of aristocracy which all fall into the second function/estate. It also includes a first estate of priests (which can be Christians, pagans, or simply moral philosophers), and a third estate of free workers and merchants.

Aragorn/Elessar, Tolkien’s symbol of restoration

The fact that I favor this system is why I could never consider myself Alt-Right or a National Socialist; neither system is on the true right; they are incomplete, and really only responses to temporary problems.

Perhaps I am biased towards aristocracy because I myself have multiple lines of ancestry which were at one time aristocratic, including my paternal lineage which is most likely of Norman origin based on surname analysis (correction: my paternal lineage may not be Norman, based on Y-chromosome analysis), but I also recognize that democracy gives unfair advantage towards people of lower IQ who would use it to elect a simple wealth-redistributionist, and thus has some dysgenic effects. Democracy also creates a virtue signalling playground, and thus selects for the genetics of individuals who like to attract attention in such ways.

I think, borrowing from very early European monarchical systems among the Celts and Germans, that a monarch should, under necessary circumstances, be elected (probably by other aristocrats) from a royal family, so as to avoid being stuck with a mentally incompetent ruler who just happens to be heir to the throne.

Who would have the political power of an aristocrat? Possibly as in very early Germanic society, all land-owning men could be counted, who are ultimately vassals of the king. See these articles on the Germanic aristocratic order (12 (see section on law), 3).

As for what ideology each monarchy has; religious traditionalism, ethnic nationalism, or multiethnic capitalism; it must ultimately differ between different states. One single ideology (religious, ethnic, or otherwise) will not fit with each and every group of people for both cultural and biological reasons (which are usually intertwined with each other). It is essential we understand this when trying to advance the concept of an aristocratic form of governance to the normies.

 

Advertisements

4 thoughts on “On Restoration

  1. “but I also recognize that democracy gives unfair advantage towards people of lower IQ who would use it to elect a simple wealth-redistributionist, and thus has some dysgenic effects. Democracy also creates a virtue signalling playground, and thus selects for the genetics of individuals who like to attract attention in such ways.”

    hi five brother.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. “the tripartite aristocratic system of Indo-European societies. This, of course, includes monarchy and lower levels of aristocracy which all fall into the second function/estate. It also includes a first estate of priests (which can be Christians, pagans, or simply moral philosophers), and a third estate of free workers and merchants.”

    This kind of order actually existed during the Catholic Middle Age in Europe. You have the king at the top, then the clergy and aristocrats / knights, and then the working people and merchants. The Catholic Church did not eliminate the kind of order, it simply accepted it and put it to good use.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Yes, I agree and understand that. I think what began to topple the order was the growing power of the third estate/merchant class around the North Sea during the middle ages; my opinion on this is influenced by the book The Edge of the World: A Cultural History of the North Sea and the Transformation of Europe by Michael Pye. In my opinion, the large cosmopolitan merchant class in Eastern England and the Netherlands is probably what made these areas fertile ground for Calvinism and other radical protestant sects during the reformation.

      Liked by 1 person

  3. Cutting-edge thinking, and very succinctly and accessibly stated. Among the most serious defects of modern society is the effort to force-fit all of the different types of Man into the same mould and produce a citizenry made up of people who are exactly the same. Unfortunately, as you say, the point is lost on the National Socialists and much of the alt-Right, whose obsession with race as *they* understand the concept is itself but an expression of the wider homogenizing tendency. I think we may need to return to the earlier sense of the term, “race”, in which the various castes and Estates of society were considered races in their own right, even if they all superficially looked the same. The ancient Aryans, for example, considered intermarriage between the castes to be every bit as much a form of miscegenation as inter-racial marriage.

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s