INSTITUTE FOR HISTORICAL REVIEW Europe in Crisis: The End Result of Egalitarianism By Tomislav Sunic Text of address given by Dr. Sunic at an IHR meeting in Orange County, California, Sept. 20, 2014
In times of political and economic crises, such as those sweeping now over Europe and the USA, predictions about a pending catastrophe seem to be a cherished topic among scholars, especially those who portray themselves as conservatives, traditionalists or nationalists. The word which repeatedly comes up to our lips is “non-European immigration” and “financial crisis.” There is a visible sense of resignation among many Europeans and Americans. Strangely, although we all reject historical determinism and although we rightly associate it with the failed ideology of progress, we all tend unwillingly to adopt the same historical determinism albeit in a reversed fashion. We seriously think that the times of gloom and doom are our doorsteps. This is not the right approach. I will try to single out three factors which largely explain the causes of our decline. My talk is largely theoretical but I would not mind providing some statistics. 1. Let me start off with the criticism of European nationalism. Many nationalists and many conservatives in America often look up to the recent European nationalist revival as a possible guidance for America. This is wishful thinking. First the term “European identity” is lexical nonsense. Unlike white American identity there is no such thing as European white identity; it has never existed, other than among some theoreticians nursing the idea of a continental Euro-Asian homeland. It remains to be seen how dozens of different European ethnicities stretching from Spain to Russia, can ever construct common identity. Witness the ongoing military conflict between the pro-Russian forces and the Ukrainian forces in east Ukraine, with Russian nationalists and Ukrainian nationalists being on the front lines of the battle. Or in a softer version, we can look at Scotland’s or Catalonia’ move toward independence from the UK and Spain respectively. Despite living in the same geographic location, most Europeans continue to identify themselves first with their own ethnicity and never with their next door neighbors — who are often perceived as mortal enemies. European peoples often frame their identity on “ethnic nepotism,” whereby a crucial characteristic of each ethnic group in Europe is its genetic and cultural affiliation only with members of the same in-group. Such ethnic nepotism — so
1
frequent in Europe, can in no way foster the idea of an all-encompassing White identity. How can a common European identity as such ever be built? Ethnic nepotism and exclusivism are very pronounced in Eastern Europe, much more than in Western Europe and its results often turn ugly. For instance the national identity of a Polish nationalist is often accompanied by his strong anti- German feelings. One third of ethnic Hungarians — more than two million Hungarians — living in Slovakia, Serbia and Romania typically define their national identity through the resentment of the peoples among whom they live. Czech nationalists seldom like to discuss with their German counterparts the issue of the forcible deportation of 3 million ethnic Germans from Czechoslovakia after World War II. Despite some semblance of peace between Serbs and Croats, these two ethnically similar and neighboring peoples use two entirely different historical narratives and indulge in two completely different and mutually hostile and exclusive victimhoods. In short, Serbs and Croats, despite their remarkable ethnic and linguistic similarity, display two radically and mutually exclusive identities. For a Croatian nationalist it is difficult to be, “a good Croat” without describing himself first as an “anti-Serb. Consequently, it is no small wonder that interethnic, wars (like the one that raged between Croats and Serbs in the 90’s) are also the most violent ones, with each side vilifying, demonizing, and praying for the destruction of the other. Therefore, drawing some wishful thinking parallels between White Americans and White Europeans in a common homeland is a non-starter. Trying to organize some White panEuropean movement stretching from Santa Cruz in California to Novosibirsk in Russia is naïve to say the least, or still a long way off to say the best. Given that ethnic nationalism is a prime problem for all Europeans, how can we address a very serious problem of massive non-European immigration? The advantage of European Americans is their racial and linguistic unity stretching from Alaska to Arkansas. 2. Let us now address the second issue of non-European immigration and its unpredictable and often dangerous consequences. We tend to look at the consequences of non-European immigration, such as failed multiculturalism, the risings tide of multiethnic and multiracial suspicion and the rising interracial tensions in the USA and Europe. However, we seldom examine its root causes. We know the rough statistics though; one third of America is populated by residents of nonEuropean background; out of half a billion citizens now living the 28 states of the EU, about eight percent approximately 20 million, mostly Muslims, are of non- European background. Their numbers are growing every day. Capitalism shares a major portion of the blame for the rising interracial tensions and rising social disruptions both in America and Western Europe. It is in the interest of big business in Europe and the USA to import the army of cheap labor into Europe and America. As a result local capitalists cut down the wages of their own domestic workers and outsource national wealth to far away countries. Moreover, most immigrant workers, having lower IQ and little interest in historical or racial consciousness of their host countries, can better be manipulated than local workers by the new capitalist and global class. An American contractor, or German stockbroker or an French shareholder of a company in East Europe, could not care less where 2
his home is, and what the racial or ethnic profile of his workers is — as long as he makes profit. We should not feign surprise. The founding father of capitalism, Adam Smith wrote long time ago: “The merchant is not necessarily the citizen of any country.” In Europe, under the impact of the so-called “austerity” policies, the process of economic recession, if not depression, is taking place. Mass unemployment continues to grow, whereas the dismantling of public services leads to further reductions in social benefits, while diminishing the purchasing power of citizens. One quarter of the European population (120 million people) is threatened today by poverty. Outsourcing, layoffs, industrial relocations, job dismissals and the so-called “social restructuring” have become popular buzzwords in Europe. Why is the crisis being tolerated so passively? Everybody expects something to happen. But it won’t happen, because the dynamics of capitalism has now reached its logical historical limits. The capitalist crisis of the nineteenth century could be overcome because capital had not yet taken hold of the entire means of production. The crisis of the late twenties was overcome due to the Keynesian regulations, and because of the massive industrial output on the even and during WWII. The current crisis is a structural crisis, spearheaded by the empowerment of financial markets over the real economy and plagued in addition by widespread public debt. One of its direct results is the yielding of political power to the banking sectors such as Goldman Sachs and Lehman Brothers. But neither can the banking sectors solve the problem. Financial bubbles, state credit and money printing, that is to say, the creation of fictitious money-capital, can no longer solve the inherent contradictions of capitalism. In the absence of real growth, and regardless whether one moves toward an uncontrollable inflation or toward a general public default payment, the current solvency crisis is here to stay. Big business and international financial lobbies possess all necessary means to be listened to, either by their governments or by the Commission in Brussels, and are, generally speaking, both in favor of immigration and Europe’s enlargement. Enlargement of the EU facilitates the migration of cheap labor. Furthermore, immigration is in full accordance with the very spirit of capitalism, which aims at the erasure of borders (“laissez faire, laissez passer “). “The flip side of foreign immigration is price dumping, “low cost” labor market and “low-skilled” workers who function as “jack of all trades not just in the service sector but also in sectors previously reserved for the locals .” Big business has reached its hand to the far-left, the former aiming at dismantling the welfare state, considered to be too costly, the latter killing off the nation-state considered to be too archaic.” It should not come as a surprise that there is an emerging Holy Alliance between the capitalist Merchant and the leftist Commissar, between Big Business and the Left. The Left favors mass immigration because immigrants, in its eyes, represent now the substitute symbol of the failed old Marxian proletariat. If we look at the profile of all European politicians in Brussels but also of those sitting in the White House we can observe that all of them are former either implicit or explicit sympathizers of Marxism who have now recycled themselves into advocates of free market, while retaining their Marxist lifestyles and their leftist mores in other fields of human endeavor, such as culture.
3
Big business, still run by the White oligarchy in Europe and America, followed by the endorsement of racial and interethnic mixing by the multicultural Left, only gives further moral boost to millions and millions of would be non-European immigrants to dream about coming to our shores. For the time being, neither physically nor logistically are domestic Third World immigrants in a position to convert their resentments against Whites into a large scale conflict. The word “multiculturalism” works miracles for them. It is a handy code word for tolerance and the ideology of human rights. My first conclusion is: If we were to solve successfully non- European immigration and its consequences resulting in hatred and civil wars, we must first demystify the capitalist mystique. Foreign immigration will stop as soon as immigrants realized that that permanent economic progress is just another illusion. I will not now talk about the need for state protectionism and the removal of the economy of usury and the fight against interest slavery’ which constitute the main pillars of the System. It is a typical mindset among Liberal free marketers, just like among former communists to argue that there are no alternatives to their systems. Yes there are alternatives, such as Distributism, the nationalization of the banking sectors, etc. 3. The third factor we may want to look at is the negative role of the Christian ecumenism. Non-European immigrants know well that they can thrive best in the guilt-ridden postChristian Europe and America, two continents deeply paralyzed by self-hate and the alleged evils of the legacy of colonialism, slavery and fascism. Ironically, feelings of self-hate are unknown among non-Europeans and non-Christians and such feelings are totally dismissed, if not ridiculed, by the rulers of the countries where immigrants come from. But let us be honest. Christianity is a Universalist religion just like the global gospel of global capitalism. When one listens to Catholic cardinal O’Malley who claims that immigrants are the future of the Church, one does not need to read Marx or listen to the Leftist advocates of multiculturalism. These guilt feelings manifesting themselves in excessive pro-Jewish, pro-Third-World, selfhating rituals and mimicry have paralyzing and debilitating effects for Whites. Such a schizophrenic mindset is a founding pillar of the official identity of the modern System. In conclusion let me state the following: On a day- to- day political level we are witnessing the implementation of “governance” — a sort of financial authoritarianism both in Europe and America set up by Big Business. There is not much difference between the structure of the EU and USA, other than the form they use differently. Their substance is virtually the same. The money equivalent of world financial markets is ten times that of the world GDP — which only shows the extent of the markets’ disconnection from real economy. At a moment when the credit system becomes a central feature of capital, the vicious circle begins. However, stopping loans could result in a widespread collapse of the banking system. It is precisely by raising this specter of chaos that banks in the EU and USA deviously succeed in being constantly bailed out by their respective states.
4
The wide-spread of use of loans, which means lending money at interest, has been the key tool in the expansion of capitalism and in the development of consumer society after WWII. We are witnessing now a big return to the system of usury. Usurious processes can be spotted in the way financial markets and banks snap up real assets of indebted states and seize their goods in accordance with a debt whose principal is made up of a mountain of virtual money that will never be paid off. Shareholders and creditors are the Shylocks of our times. In conclusion let me state the following: We must discard the ideology of progress which is inherent to both capitalism and communism. When one wishes to have more goods, one will never have enough of it. That is the reason why ancient European religions continuously warned against the passion for money: Such as in the Gullweig myth in the Norse mythology, or in the old Greek The Myth of Midas. All these were the consequences of the lust for money (the “Rheingold Curse“). What late communist commissars had failed to achieve with physical terror, the present-day liberal “super class” of the System is achieving with its own substitute ideology of “multiculturalism.” The constant influx of non-Europeans has already caused the impoverishment of the European gene pool and can be comparable to a soft self-induced suicide of White peoples. The only functional type of dissent against the System is the sovereign racial individual, or the nonconformist with strong racial and cultural awareness, regardless whether he resides in California, Croatia, Chile, or Bavaria. I will end with my own quote as I often do: Only a man with the longest racial and cultural memory has a chance of survival. http://www.ihr.org/other/europeincrisis2014_sunic, 18.11.2015.
5
