Whatever Happened To Tribalism?
Suddenly the old grievances and differences between England and France for instance seem petty and insignificant in the face of the mutual struggles that we both face. There is a niggling suspicion in the back of my mind though that this apparent new found kinship between the various European nations, at least within nationalist circles, indicates a worrying development in a perculiar way. The European Union's plan to remove the old cultural rivalries and create a new federal superpower have in some ways being accelerated by European's recognition of the migrant horde as a common enemy. Perhaps in some ways this was an expected reaction and one that plays into the globalist's hand when we consider their end goal.
In effect, the culture across Europe now has already become very much uniform through the European Union, but also simply through modern online culture, interaction and the ease of travel available now between European nations. To my mind, this can only be a bad thing.
Paradoxically it could be that despite our attempts to save Europe, we're actually tightening the globalist's grip around our necks. Our cultures may well be connected historically, but I will concede to the left's argument that there is no such thing as a 'white' race. It is a good generalisation for describing someone who is broadly of European descent, but on its own it means relatively little. I would consider a Greek Cypriot 'white' under the broadest terms, but to consider them the same as an Icelandic native for example is ridiculous. 'White Nationalism' is something for Americans to push. Their culture is an amalgamation of various European traditions which has coalesced into a single entity, it makes sense for them to accept this fact and promote the protection of that new culture under the banner of 'white', but Europe is not America. If we were to embrace the idea of a totally uniform European ethnostate then we'd be better off being supportive of the European Union and push for its reform.
In truth the nationalist's view of our national identities, let alone a continent-wide one, are a relatively new phenomenon. For almost all of human history our loyalties lay with the local community we grew up in, engaged with on a daily basis and belonged to. You was not an British person, or even necessarily an Englishman. You were an Essexman, a Yorkshireman, a Scouser. National identities in days gone by had little meaning to folk who rarely left their home-town.
These days with multiculturalism and consumerism breeding so much mistrust and destroying meaningful human interaction, we as a species, let alone as Europeans, are struggling to find coping mechanisms to live in such dystopic, artificial environments. Add to this a toxic mix of gender and sexual identity crises and its no wonder the West in general is in a total nose-dive. Some never do find those coping mechanisms, which probably explains why eight-four British men take their lives each week.
Despite my rather strong dislike of multiculturalism and the effects its had on our society though, I have to admit that the problems in Britain at least, began way before Windrush docked and unloaded its exponential demographic cargo. The movement of the working class from the countryside to the cities and industrial centres during the Victorian period, the standardised national curriculum and the effects of the two World Wars had already begun the slow process of eroding communities into the civic 'British' mess that we're left with. I think its fair to say that the real identities and values of these isles are not defined by the state, but by individual communities, but as time goes on those communities are vanishing, being replaced.
In effect, the culture across Europe now has already become very much uniform through the European Union, but also simply through modern online culture, interaction and the ease of travel available now between European nations. To my mind, this can only be a bad thing.
Paradoxically it could be that despite our attempts to save Europe, we're actually tightening the globalist's grip around our necks. Our cultures may well be connected historically, but I will concede to the left's argument that there is no such thing as a 'white' race. It is a good generalisation for describing someone who is broadly of European descent, but on its own it means relatively little. I would consider a Greek Cypriot 'white' under the broadest terms, but to consider them the same as an Icelandic native for example is ridiculous. 'White Nationalism' is something for Americans to push. Their culture is an amalgamation of various European traditions which has coalesced into a single entity, it makes sense for them to accept this fact and promote the protection of that new culture under the banner of 'white', but Europe is not America. If we were to embrace the idea of a totally uniform European ethnostate then we'd be better off being supportive of the European Union and push for its reform.
In truth the nationalist's view of our national identities, let alone a continent-wide one, are a relatively new phenomenon. For almost all of human history our loyalties lay with the local community we grew up in, engaged with on a daily basis and belonged to. You was not an British person, or even necessarily an Englishman. You were an Essexman, a Yorkshireman, a Scouser. National identities in days gone by had little meaning to folk who rarely left their home-town.
These days with multiculturalism and consumerism breeding so much mistrust and destroying meaningful human interaction, we as a species, let alone as Europeans, are struggling to find coping mechanisms to live in such dystopic, artificial environments. Add to this a toxic mix of gender and sexual identity crises and its no wonder the West in general is in a total nose-dive. Some never do find those coping mechanisms, which probably explains why eight-four British men take their lives each week.
Despite my rather strong dislike of multiculturalism and the effects its had on our society though, I have to admit that the problems in Britain at least, began way before Windrush docked and unloaded its exponential demographic cargo. The movement of the working class from the countryside to the cities and industrial centres during the Victorian period, the standardised national curriculum and the effects of the two World Wars had already begun the slow process of eroding communities into the civic 'British' mess that we're left with. I think its fair to say that the real identities and values of these isles are not defined by the state, but by individual communities, but as time goes on those communities are vanishing, being replaced.
The Cockeys And The Country Bumpkins
Ask someone to name a well known English community that exists, (or at least did exist within living memory,) and you're likely to hear the name Cockney. My Grandad was a true Cockney, born in ear-shot of the Bow Bells, so I do feel at least some belonging to old East End. But visit East London today and you're hard pressed to find a white face at all.
I often cite the fact that my Londoner family members left the capital to escape the migrant influx, fleeing like so many ex-Londoners to start a new life in what was then the leafy suburbs of Essex. The thing is, whilst we presume that England before the the nineteen-fifties was completely homogeneous, there still existed huge variations in the local cultures and language which sadly, like the Cockneys, have been dying out now for centuries.
Fast forward to 2017 and the leafy suburbs and furrowed fields of rural Essex have rapidly begun to resemble a London overspill. Overpopulation, over-development and over priced housing are quickly destroying any remaining agrarian charm that still existed around the Southend area that I grew up in. Recognising that in all likelihood the area I belong to is about to become yet another "diverse" concrete jungle, I began documenting my area's history last year before it end up gone forever - but that research has left me feeling even more depressed than I was previously.
I often forlorn the passing of the old London culture, but as I began over the last year or so to conduct local history research, something started becoming apparent. Not only did the social policies of the inter-war and post-war Britain put in motion the destruction of English or British cultures in the inner-cities, but the white flight that that "progress" created also destroyed the surrounding agrarian communities which in some cases had existed virtually unchanged for centuries.
It's hard to imagine today, but Essex was once far removed from the stereotype of white stilettos and fake tans. In days-gone-by it was instead known for its fruit farms, corn dollies and superstitious beliefs in witchcraft (which continued up until the early 20th century.) The dialect was also completely different to the "Estuary English" I am myself unfortunately afflicted with. The accent in these parts originally sounded almost West Country, and the language itself held on to some frankly bizarre localisms (my personal favourite is the word Hodmedod for snails as an example) and remnants of old English or proto-Germanic words until relatively recently.
I happened upon something which really made me think some weeks ago though, and is the main inspiration behind this article. Whilst rummaging through the Southend library I found a book entitled "Essex Survivals" written by Fred Roe in 1929, and in it he gives a personal account of his experiences with members of rural farming and coastal communities. Reading these stories today, they seem rather comical, but I think they highlight just how far removed our sense of community has sunk to today.
This passage highlights that decline perfectly:
This passage highlights that decline perfectly:
 |
| 'The Ship' Inn at Heybridge circa 1925. |
"...against the walls of the 'Ship' Inn, at the lock gates, were some forms, and here congregated the usual knot of gossipers from the adjoining cottages. The sunset was deepening into a succession of ravishing colours as a tall man strode up the incline and stopped in front of the merry-makers. I can see the man now, a well-built fellow of the labouring class, fustian clad, and with a ragged tawny moustache descending in Viking fashion over his lower jaw. His boots were white with dust from the roads, and slung over his shoulder was a rush satchel. A typical East Anglian, with not a bad face, and a tired manner.
Conversation instantly ceased, and the Heybridge group looked blankly at the new arrival.
'Evenin', mates, he ventured.
'Evenin',' came the very distant response.
'Warmer than ever,' continued the new-comer.
'That's so.'
'I be going up to Stubbing's,' volunteered the tall man.
'Ay.'
The man did not sit down, but leaned down on the stout stick he was carrying as though fatigued. Obviously he was not wanted. The sunset was on his face and I noticed his eyes were bright blue. There was a curiously pensive look about him, as if wishful for companionship. In another class of life he would have been a dreamer.
Not another word would the cronies vouchsafe but impenetrable monosyllables. The tall man finished his modest half-measure of ale, and bidding the others good night strode off towards Maldon through the light mist which was already rising from the canal.
'They seemed to treat that man pretty coolly,' I remarked to an onlooker.
'Like as not,' was the reply; 'whoy, he's a foreigner.'
'A foreigner,' I queried; 'he looked British enough.'
'That may be, but he's a foreigner.'
'He seemed a decent sort of fellow.'
'Very like, but a foreigner. And we don't hold with suchlike. He comes from Goldhanger.'
Goldhanger being some four or five miles away.
Conversation instantly ceased, and the Heybridge group looked blankly at the new arrival.
'Evenin', mates, he ventured.
'Evenin',' came the very distant response.
'Warmer than ever,' continued the new-comer.
'That's so.'
'I be going up to Stubbing's,' volunteered the tall man.
'Ay.'
The man did not sit down, but leaned down on the stout stick he was carrying as though fatigued. Obviously he was not wanted. The sunset was on his face and I noticed his eyes were bright blue. There was a curiously pensive look about him, as if wishful for companionship. In another class of life he would have been a dreamer.
Not another word would the cronies vouchsafe but impenetrable monosyllables. The tall man finished his modest half-measure of ale, and bidding the others good night strode off towards Maldon through the light mist which was already rising from the canal.
'They seemed to treat that man pretty coolly,' I remarked to an onlooker.
'Like as not,' was the reply; 'whoy, he's a foreigner.'
'A foreigner,' I queried; 'he looked British enough.'
'That may be, but he's a foreigner.'
'He seemed a decent sort of fellow.'
'Very like, but a foreigner. And we don't hold with suchlike. He comes from Goldhanger.'
Goldhanger being some four or five miles away.
The unwelcome intruder having departed, conversation and laughter recommenced."
It seems remarkable that just a hundred years ago the local communities in England were still so small and cohesive that they would consider the next village along from them foreign. Today, nobody knows or even cares to know their next door neighbours any more, and there seems a real feeling of indifference and apathy regarding the lack of immediate local identity, but that sense of belonging is, or at least was, an integral part of what makes us human. Missing the "us and them" component in our lives may well be why so many people in this age are rendered nothing more than semi-suicidal mass-consumers.
It would seem this situation is yet another string to multiculturalism's bow. The current situation disenfranchises and isolates individuals, and with us all being forced by law to consider everyone, regardless of background, part of our immediate community, it destroys any chance of organic groups forming on their own. Our current model for society is great for increasing economic output of a nation because it effectively demoralises its people to the point where the pursuit of material goods is all its people has left. Over ruling our inate desire to create an 'us' is perhaps the greatest reason why today we're seeing so many different political or identity problems in the West - like transgenderism or feminism, etc. In a stable environment where you're only having to deal with a few hundred people who you know fairly well - you wouldn't need to create a false identity, because you already have one in your local group.
It would seem this situation is yet another string to multiculturalism's bow. The current situation disenfranchises and isolates individuals, and with us all being forced by law to consider everyone, regardless of background, part of our immediate community, it destroys any chance of organic groups forming on their own. Our current model for society is great for increasing economic output of a nation because it effectively demoralises its people to the point where the pursuit of material goods is all its people has left. Over ruling our inate desire to create an 'us' is perhaps the greatest reason why today we're seeing so many different political or identity problems in the West - like transgenderism or feminism, etc. In a stable environment where you're only having to deal with a few hundred people who you know fairly well - you wouldn't need to create a false identity, because you already have one in your local group.
I'm not suggesting that we start ignoring people who happen to live in the next town or village, but what I do think is that it's rather important for us to get back some sort of local cohesion, whether that be at a Parish level or a slightly wider area. The trouble is that for many, overpopulation or diversity prevents that from being a feasible option. Ideally for us all to be much happier we need to somehow return ourselves to smaller, semi-agrarian communities - but that requires some sweeping social and political changes, not to mention ruthless population reduction.
Of course it's important to remember that the mindset a hundred years ago, as it is today, is very much dependent on a perception of geography. Whilst trains and trams had begun to improve transport links for main towns and cities by the early twentieth century, most rural communities were still relying predominately on horse and cart. It seems strange to us today, but most villagers hardly ever left the town or village that they were born in. Another interesting account from Fred Roe's book, describes in some detail what the rural folk considered far-off travelling at that time:
"There was a picturesque old hand who pottered about the inn doing odd jobs, and after receiving several small tips for allowing me to sketch his rugged face 'Owd Charley' opened himself up to me. 'Yes, you're a foreigner here, sure, but you're no' a bad 'un,' he sagely observed.
He told me his age and with great pride, adding with emphasis, 'I've been a traveller in my time.'
'That is interesting,' I remarked; 'the folks round here don't seem to travel about much.'
'No, not they,' replied 'Owd Charley'. 'Why, Mrs ----- is getting on for eighty an' she's never been to Brentwood. No, nor even to Ingatestone either. But I've been a traveller, I have.'
'Have you crossed over to France?'
'That is interesting,' I remarked; 'the folks round here don't seem to travel about much.'
'No, not they,' replied 'Owd Charley'. 'Why, Mrs ----- is getting on for eighty an' she's never been to Brentwood. No, nor even to Ingatestone either. But I've been a traveller, I have.'
'Have you crossed over to France?'
'France! No,' - the old man spat contemptuously into a ditch,--' but I've been as far as Suffolk, I have. Twice I've been to Suffolk.
I pondered upon the vastness of such an enterprise. The nearest point of Suffolk is close to thirty miles distant. 'Owd Charley' took my silence for admiration..."
It seems laughable today, but they were realistically looking at a two or three day journey to travel thirty or so miles by foot or by some slow moving old nag. To our modern perspectives which are used to the idea of mass transit, three days in our modern world and you can fly around the whole planet with nothing more than a credit card and a flight booking app.
Yes, the modern age has brought with it tremendous luxuries that even mere decades ago were considered to be the preserve of royalty. But luxuries are just that. They are a treat, a perk. The unfortunate thing is that in opening up our world to all these luxuries, we have at the same time made our planet smaller and destroyed what is most important; our communities and our sense of belonging. It's not enough to consider yourself a "citizen of the world". It's an empty phrase, an implicit sign that somebody is as hollow and rootless as the next zombie.
The point I'm trying to make is a simple one, albeit verging on revolutionary given the state of affairs;
Europe, along with the rest of the world as a whole, has lost so much of its original culture and actual true diversity in terms of folk traditions, language or genetic makeup and it is a terrible shame. Part of this has been caused by multiculturalism, but that itself is simply a single facet within globalism which brings with it its own agenda to strip bare this world into a boring, uniform borg-like collective. We must recognise in Europe the extensive damage that has been done to us all so far, and work together to try and preserve all that we have left in the name of true diversity - and not the newspeak version that it has been replaced by.
Most of the nationalist or pro-European movements today (because of the sheer scale of the issues Europe faces today) seem to want to unite around the idea of saving Europe as a single unified entity against the threats that we all face. Whilst on one level I agree with this sentiment wholeheartedly, there is perhaps an even greater layer to this struggle that few in nationalist circles ever address. Our tools as human beings never evolved to give a damn about people outside of our own 'tribe', and by tribe in this sense, I specifically refer to the theory in psychology called Dunbar's number that puts a limit on the number of other people you are able to have decent relationships with at any given time. Perhaps this is why in Anglo-Saxon England, people were divided into "hundreds" where one hundred free-men (and their families) were expected to act as a cohesive unit and deal with internal social issues (such as crime) themselves within their own communities without need of outside mentoring.
My argument would be that the apathy Europe seems to be stuck in at the moment is not due our people not feeling "European" enough. As time has gone by I'm sure even those of us in Britain who voted for Brexit have felt more and more kinship with our continental brethren, but I strongly suspect that the rampant apathy across Europe has been caused by the complete lack of local identity, rather than a large continental or even national one. I sadly suspect that until our people are able to network in real life and actually gain a sense of belonging to those closest around them, apathy even among those who are "red-pilled" will continue to be a major hurdle in our fight to save Western civilisation.
To my mind, without a weak sense of local community in England, do you really think that Muslim paedophile gangs would have gotten away with a slap wrist, or ended up being ignored by the police for over a decade? Would cohesive local communities allow the building of refugee centres in their towns? If people knew that the immediate community had their backs, even when the State was threatening them with prosecution for 'hate' or 'thought crimes', none of these issues would be happening without considerable local backlash. Meanwhile, as much as I too am guilty of this, most of us "red pilled" folk are far too busy chatting to people hundreds of miles away over the internet, pacified by the act of talking about how bad things are and how bad we feel - instead of actually acting constructively.
So my (not so) revolutionary solution to the problem in Europe in the face of globalism and multiculturalism is recognising that whilst internet networking is great and all, it is by no means a substitute for creating real local communities. We should be campaigning relentlessly on our own local issues and attempting to gain local support by any means necessary. We should be campaigning for indigenous status from our own individual nations. Petition your locals to object to anti-white policies in our own areas. Work with locals on reporting migrant crime, and make sure police deal with those problems that are raised. Visit local government meetings, and do your own research into possible corruption therein. There are hundreds of things that we could all do locally that would mean something more than the constant circlejerking we're all guilty of on social media.
Essex Survivals written by Fred Roe, published in 1929 by Methuen.
It seems laughable today, but they were realistically looking at a two or three day journey to travel thirty or so miles by foot or by some slow moving old nag. To our modern perspectives which are used to the idea of mass transit, three days in our modern world and you can fly around the whole planet with nothing more than a credit card and a flight booking app.
Yes, the modern age has brought with it tremendous luxuries that even mere decades ago were considered to be the preserve of royalty. But luxuries are just that. They are a treat, a perk. The unfortunate thing is that in opening up our world to all these luxuries, we have at the same time made our planet smaller and destroyed what is most important; our communities and our sense of belonging. It's not enough to consider yourself a "citizen of the world". It's an empty phrase, an implicit sign that somebody is as hollow and rootless as the next zombie.
The point I'm trying to make is a simple one, albeit verging on revolutionary given the state of affairs;
Europe, along with the rest of the world as a whole, has lost so much of its original culture and actual true diversity in terms of folk traditions, language or genetic makeup and it is a terrible shame. Part of this has been caused by multiculturalism, but that itself is simply a single facet within globalism which brings with it its own agenda to strip bare this world into a boring, uniform borg-like collective. We must recognise in Europe the extensive damage that has been done to us all so far, and work together to try and preserve all that we have left in the name of true diversity - and not the newspeak version that it has been replaced by.
Most of the nationalist or pro-European movements today (because of the sheer scale of the issues Europe faces today) seem to want to unite around the idea of saving Europe as a single unified entity against the threats that we all face. Whilst on one level I agree with this sentiment wholeheartedly, there is perhaps an even greater layer to this struggle that few in nationalist circles ever address. Our tools as human beings never evolved to give a damn about people outside of our own 'tribe', and by tribe in this sense, I specifically refer to the theory in psychology called Dunbar's number that puts a limit on the number of other people you are able to have decent relationships with at any given time. Perhaps this is why in Anglo-Saxon England, people were divided into "hundreds" where one hundred free-men (and their families) were expected to act as a cohesive unit and deal with internal social issues (such as crime) themselves within their own communities without need of outside mentoring.
My argument would be that the apathy Europe seems to be stuck in at the moment is not due our people not feeling "European" enough. As time has gone by I'm sure even those of us in Britain who voted for Brexit have felt more and more kinship with our continental brethren, but I strongly suspect that the rampant apathy across Europe has been caused by the complete lack of local identity, rather than a large continental or even national one. I sadly suspect that until our people are able to network in real life and actually gain a sense of belonging to those closest around them, apathy even among those who are "red-pilled" will continue to be a major hurdle in our fight to save Western civilisation.
To my mind, without a weak sense of local community in England, do you really think that Muslim paedophile gangs would have gotten away with a slap wrist, or ended up being ignored by the police for over a decade? Would cohesive local communities allow the building of refugee centres in their towns? If people knew that the immediate community had their backs, even when the State was threatening them with prosecution for 'hate' or 'thought crimes', none of these issues would be happening without considerable local backlash. Meanwhile, as much as I too am guilty of this, most of us "red pilled" folk are far too busy chatting to people hundreds of miles away over the internet, pacified by the act of talking about how bad things are and how bad we feel - instead of actually acting constructively.
So my (not so) revolutionary solution to the problem in Europe in the face of globalism and multiculturalism is recognising that whilst internet networking is great and all, it is by no means a substitute for creating real local communities. We should be campaigning relentlessly on our own local issues and attempting to gain local support by any means necessary. We should be campaigning for indigenous status from our own individual nations. Petition your locals to object to anti-white policies in our own areas. Work with locals on reporting migrant crime, and make sure police deal with those problems that are raised. Visit local government meetings, and do your own research into possible corruption therein. There are hundreds of things that we could all do locally that would mean something more than the constant circlejerking we're all guilty of on social media.
Book Reference:
Essex Survivals written by Fred Roe, published in 1929 by Methuen.
Comments
Post a Comment