There’s this idea
that goes around in rightist circles occasionally that the United States should
balkanize, because there’s too much cultural and racial diversity to fit in a
democracy, and also that it’s obvious how American power is currently ruining
the world. The idea is that if the U.S. broke up and retreated from its
foreign entanglements, everything would ultimately end up better off, as the
resultant nations would be more culturally homogeneous and able to focus on
their internal affairs.
It’s easy enough to
see why someone might think that; diversity actually is incompatible with
democracy, and America’s foreign policy actually is ruining the world and
ourselves, and a retreat and breakup might seem to offer immediate relief from
those problems. So, it’s common enough to see this idea in discussions of the
problem of America’s future.
But the
balkanization meme, and many other visions for America’s geopolitical future,
like going back to something more akin to isolationism, miss major facts about
the state of the geopolitical game-board and are thus ultimately unrealistic
and dangerous.
So, let’s go over
five important basic facts that must inform a smarter approach to coming up
with ideas for long-term geopolitical strategy:
1. America Has A Global Empire
The days have passed
from when near-isolationism was a live possibility. Relative peace and
prosperity in the West are secured by U.S. nuclear and military supremacy,
the U.S.-dollar based financial and international trade system, the U.S.
intelligence agencies, the U.S. elite education monopoly, U.S.-controlled
“liberal democratic” system, and so on. These systems are broken and
destructive, but they fill a vacuum and secure an empire.
If the empire were
surrendered, there would be a period of geopolitical chaos as players jockey
for new positions, falling material prosperity in the West would result in
civil unrest, and ultimately, China and Russia would take advantage of the
chaos to fill the vacuum and become our new world overlords. It would take a
long time and possibly some big wars to get back to stability, and the outcome
would probably be worse than what we have now.
For analogy,
consider what happened after World War II when the British Empire collapsed.
The third world wasn’t liberated; it was eaten up by the international empires
of Moscow and Washington. Lots of genocide, dysgenics, civil war, and mass
immigration resulted.
Same thing with the
collapse of the USSR. It was not a happy age of nationalism, but mostly eaten
up by the EU, in addition to some nasty proxy civil wars in Yugoslavia and
Chechnya. It’s less well known, but the collapse also triggered an immigration
wave, and so lots of Serbs and Bosnians now live in Germany and Sweden. Russia
itself was pillaged and crashed in living standards and fertility rates. This
was uncontrolled, so perhaps not the best example, but an imperial retreat has
never been done cleanly.
In our case, if the
U.S. pulled out of the middle east, Russia would move in and make
alliances with Turkey and Iran for resources and access to warm water ports and
naval bases. Saudi Arabia would fall, having no power that isn’t enabled by
U.S. protection, and the Russians would end up in control of an absolutely
enormous amount of oil. This would throw off the balance of power in a
very severe way and result in huge economic and political consequences for
America. We would be unlikely to navigate such a transition successfully.
So, the U.S. has an
empire, and as broken as it is, it holds on to that empire for good
reason.
2. The Global Powers Are China, Russia, And
America.
There are only three
serious world powers: China, Russia, and “the International Community,” i.e.
America. All the other apparently sovereign powers, Israel, Iran, India,
France, etc., have to play in the great powers’ sandbox, and so are dominated
by them in one way or another. Only the great powers have all the ingredients
of sovereignty.
America has economic, diplomatic,
cultural, and military supremacy, and enough nukes to wipe everyone else off
the map. Most of the world takes direction from America and goes along with
America’s geopolitical agenda, even to their own detriment. But America is
declining in all of those dimensions. If current trends continue, America will
lose her position as global hegemon, which will involve a messy re-positioning.
Russia is in a dark
spot in many ways, but is adequately self-sufficient in the important areas of
intellectual culture, economy, and military. Russia has enough nukes to wipe
anyone else off the map, on par with America. Mutually Assured Destruction
isn’t really assured, but it’s plausible enough that all-out war with Russia is
best treated as unwinnable. Russia is getting stronger over time and
reasserting its own sphere of influence, as the cabal of KGB men around Putin
solidify the state and rebuild from the failure of communism.
China is a bit of a
wildcard. They are economically very strong and getting stronger, have enough
nukes for deterrence, though not enough to win all out war, have a huge
advantage in terms of sheer numbers, and are starting to throw their weight
around diplomatically, but they have a lot of deep cultural and political
problems that may hold them back and disqualify them from being acceptable
world overlords. If the U.S. and Russia don’t get better organized together in
the next few decades, China will win by default, which is not a good outcome.
Each of these three
is powerful enough to be fully sovereign and play the world supremacy game.
None of them are in full alliance. Various secondary powers seem to be able to
achieve some level of internal or regional sovereignty, but none can act at the
level of world power. The vast majority of countries are simply indirectly-run
vassals of America.
3. America’s Empire Is Internally Divided
America’s empire is
politically divided into the Red Empire and the Blue Empire, and America is
made weak by this division and the constant struggles between them.
The Red Empire is
the empire of military bases. The Joint Chiefs of Staff, the
“military-industrial complex”, the NSA, the FBI, the Amerikaners, and the
Republican Party. The Red Empire is generally ideologically conservative,
meaning that they don’t have any real ideology, they are just opposed to
whatever madness the progressives have thought up.
The Blue Empire is
the empire of consulates. The State Department, the “International Community”,
the “Non-Government” Organizations, the CIA, the permanent bureaucratic
government, the Ivy League, the mainstream media, the international elite, Wall
Street, the urban liberals and non-whites, and the Democratic Party. The Blue
Empire is ideologically progressive, every year thinking up new ways to
overturn sane tradition to generate more power for their allies.
These sub-empires
are loose alliances and for the most part haven’t been self-aware, formed on
the basis of operational and ideological alignment, though elements within each
have probably been self-aware for decades. They are not monolithic political
parties, though the Blue Empire is closer to that, and they are trending that
way over time, even recently becoming publicly self-aware.
Much of the conflict
that goes on in the world can be seen as proxy wars between the Red and Blue
empires. One hand doesn’t know what the other is doing, and when it does, it
doesn’t like it. For example, Blue Empire covertly supports ISIS, besides its
usual “moderate rebel” antics, for the group’s role in destabilizing the Middle
East and keeping down anything that might be Russia-aligned or independent.
Meanwhile, Red Empire opposes Islamic terrorism and occasionally slips
intelligence reports to allies it knows will leak them to the Russians, so that
the Russians can more effectively oppose the terrorists. The Iraq occupation
had the Red Empire military operation hobbled at every step by Blue Empire
lawyers and NGOs. Trump ran on a new Red Empire-friendly platform and was hence
supported by it where possible, while Blue Empire institutions threw all their
resources against him.
Blue Empire is
fanatically opposed to Russia. Red Empire just wants peace and good relations
with a mostly contained Russia. In the Cold War, when Russia represented
communism and was much more internationally aggressive, the polarities were
different.
This division and
internal conflict, which goes quite deep and quite far back, keeps America and
the West much weaker than we ought to be, and is in our estimation very closely
related to the primary causes of our general social problems.
4. America’s Empire Is Built On Insane
Principles
When the leader of
some imperial territory or vassal acts against U.S. interests, or even just
gets strong enough that they might, U.S. assets stir up “popular movements”,
“moderate rebels”, and “refugee” crises, or subvert their internal operation
with NGOs, diplomats, and “grassroots” activism. Or, if that isn’t working, in
case we have all forgotten 2003, the U.S. military directly invades in the name
of “human rights” and “democracy”, neither of which need to ever materialize
for this to work. One way or another, the leader in question ends up deposed.
The occasional
genocide, mass rape, persecution of Christians and actual moderate minorities,
enormous expense, damage to civilization, loss of historic sites, damage to our
reputation, loss of the cultural and material produce that order would bring,
destabilization of regions and populations that later need to be bailed out at
our own material and demographic expense, and hostile mass-migration into the
lands of our own people, which are the byproducts of this indirect form of
rule, are overlooked as necessary collateral damage, unfortunate random
happenstance, or, when the victim is of our own white race, even celebrated.
Why does this
happen? Why are we, good people most of us, caught up in an evil empire? It’s
easy enough to blame traitors and Jews and the devil, but the problem goes
deeper.
The root of the
problem is the principles by which the empire is administered. To start with,
we don’t call it an empire, we call it “the international community”, composed
not of vassals, provinces, states, territories, colonies, and protectorates,
but of “sovereign” “democratic” “nations”.
In other words, we
don’t even have language to talk coherently about the empire, which means it’s
hard to think about it; we can’t issue orders to our “sovereign” subordinates,
have no widely understood imperial authority, and can’t extract straightforward
imperial tax, but still have to administer an empire. So, American foreign
policy grabs the next-best mechanisms available to it: rebel groups, NGOs,
subversion, “human rights” and associated leverage and inconsistencies,
petrodollar shenanigans, exports of easily subverted democracy, weaponized
mass-migration, and so on.
The worldview
attempting to govern the empire and build coherent sub-states fails, because it
doesn’t dare recognize what it is actually doing, and doesn’t dare use the
“enemy” methods of effective statecraft that actually work. Instead of clear
rights and duties of imperial provinces, states governed by clear chains of
command and authority, and open negotiation for tribute and protection, we are
forced to use destructive, clandestine methods to govern our empire, which in
turn create the evilness of the empire.
Obviously, the
people in charge of it are the bearers and purveyors of this destructive
ideology, but they are not senselessly evil; there is a twisted logic to it all
that is generated from the deep structure of modern political thought.
Replacing the elite would be insufficient to fix our problems without a new
imperial and political ideology. Any replacement elites, though they might go
in with the best of intentions, would have the same incentives and would
develop the same characteristics and ideology, if the formal structure of the
thing stayed the same.
If we had a
different imperial ideology, it would be possible to allow the components of
the empire a much greater degree of peace and leeway to do what is right, while
simultaneously exerting more efficient and fine-grained control over those
aspects for which it is in our interest to do so. And we would no longer have
to bear the negative by-products of a destructive and evil imperial operating
system.
5. Business As Usual Means We’re In
Trouble
America’s imperial mode and internal
divisions are unsustainable:
o Both our imperial mode and
our internal conflicts are hollowing us out economically, demographically, and
socially. See for example: politicized mass immigration, deindustrialization,
divisive anti-white, anti-Christian anti-male, and anti-traditional domestic
propaganda and subversion by Blue Empire are generated by the structure of the
system. These things will be the end of us unless something changes first.
o We have no way to seriously
oppose a belligerent China or Russia besides subversion, escalating hostility,
and nuclear brinkmanship. If things were different, and we had an economically,
demographically, and morally stronger empire, we would have a much stronger
negotiating position, and many more options to deal with our neighbors.
o Our internal conflicts lead
to Putin’s famous comment, “America is no longer agreement-capable”. To be
clear “not agreement capable” is a fancy technical term for “not capable of the
rational deescalation needed for nuclear peace”, because what one part of our
government agrees to might get ignored by another, or torn up once the other
party gets in after four years.
o We lack the central
strength and coherence to re-industrialize the rest of our empire as economic
negotiating leverage. Right now, we can’t easily threaten China with cutting
off trade, because that would be a domestic disaster, as our wealth is based
increasingly on imports from China. This hollowing out of our industrial core
originates from a combination of internal conflict, and weak government that
can’t act as a unit.
o With a weak empire, we
can’t impose or enforce treaties to deal with global issues like global
pollution, out-of-control African population growth, dangerous transformative
technologies like genetic engineering and artificial intelligence, nuclear
proliferation, or any other grand problems.
If things continue as they are, we’ll be
in a bad spot. Business as usual is unacceptable, but we already knew that.
More importantly, any strategy for getting us out of business as usual has to
take into account the above basic points of our geopolitical situation. But
what does a realistic new geopolitical vision for America look like?
Our vision is a Restoration at home in
America to rebuild the unity and strength of America along traditional
reactionary lines. Then to formalize the American empire as a true empire, so
that it may be governed efficiently and responsibly. With that in hand, use our
resulting much stronger negotiating position and newfound philosophical
commonality with Christian and reactionary Russia to negotiate a tight
alliance. Together with our Russian brothers, negotiate an honored but
subordinate position for China and all other sub-civilizations and nations,
forming the unified Empire of Man before going on to conquer the stars.
But that’s out of the scope of this post.
We will revisit it in the future.
