The latest Greek phase of the European “omni-crisis” is far from over. However a much larger “exit” looms on the horizon: Britain is committed to a referendum on EU membership by the end of 2017. Although Britain is not a member of the Euro currency union, the loss of such a large member state would put the whole European project in question.

A large part of the Right, be they mainstream or Identitarian, will see this vote as a vital chance to strike a blow against the heart of darkness. A “No” to Europe, however, would truly be a blow not just against Britain but against all Europeans—regardless of which side of the Atlantic they reside on.

Although the anti-EU camp has not articulated a clear vision for an “independent” Britain, it is quite easy to deduce a general theme. The UK will be a free-wheeling libertarian island off the coast of a proto-Communist continental bloc—a Hong Kong of the North. British pirate-entrepreneurs will sail the high seas of international finance. The “Special Relationship” with America will be restored, as will free-trade relationships with the British Commonwealth. The Empire reborn—and now morally defensible in the 21st century!

This is Tory nostalgia masquerading as serious public policy. Naïve “free trade” deals have seen a complete hollowing out of the British economy over the past 30 years. Furthermore, the only reason that trade can exist in the current form is because of the worldwide pax americana—something which is already in retreat. The idea of a small and independent free-trade dynamo is impossible outside of this world order. Absent American hegemony, international trade goes back to the way it used to be carried out—at the point of a gun.

Irrespective of the move from a unipolar towards a multipolar world, Britain should have recognized by now that the coming multi-racial America will not likely have much wistful fondness for the “Special Relationship” between British cousins. (And Washington probably never cared about the British people that much in the first place). I can easily imagine the ambassador of some future independent Britain, fresh from his reading of Daniel Hannan’s Inventing Freedom: How the English-Speaking Peoples Made the Modern World, heading to the Harry S. Truman building, keen to outline his plans for the new free-trade Anglosphere-on-steroids to the Secretary of State (the president was too busy). Imagine his disappointment upon being greeted by an Hispanic, who barely speaks English and is in no mood to grant favors to some distant island filled with gringos.

As for the British Commonwealth, it is worth remembering that it no longer exists as such. It is now called the “Commonwealth of Nations”—all the non-British nations would not even tolerate the name of the old colonial nemesis. What hope then for a meaningful alliance?

This dream of an independent Britain could thus be easily dismissed as a fantasy, but it is, in fact, worse than that. It is not even an honest fantasy, it is born out of despair at Britain’s current dismal state combined with a refusal to deal with the real issues that have caused it—issues that affect all Europeans everywhere in the world. It is based on an appeal to the straitjacket of thought that has characterized European man since the early 17th century—the transcendent realm of universal values and laws.

A recent UKIP tweet readsa>: “UKIP believe in strong multi-ethnic society united by attachment to Britain and British identity, multiculturalism has worked against this.”[1]

Implicit in this statement is the claim that identity is a construct made up of “values.” Therefore, impose the right “values” (through, “culture”) and Third World migrants will be alchemically transformed into the equivalent of White Europeans.

The inverse Identitarian claim—that race logically precedes values and culture—suggests that the benefits of Western European civilization are dependent on factors outside of the universalist, ethical realm. Such a claim is rank heresy to the liberal mind. Its acceptance would destroy the whole basis of Enlightenment consciousness. For many people, that would be worse than death. Consider the Christian martyr in third-century Rome; he knows that the penalty for not worshipping the Roman pantheon is death, but to do such a thing would annihilate everything that defines his Identity. He can only escape death by sacrificing his reason for being. As the recent “cuckservative” meme has shown, today’s conservatives are in a position similar to these Christian martyrs (I imagine they’d appreciate the analogy). Even though Identitarians can demonstrate to them the imminent demise of their precious “values” as Whites become minorities across the West, they refuse to be converted.

For there to be any hope for our people, the “Gestalt” or shape of European consciousness must change. Decades of postwar deconstruction—and mass migration—have rendered concepts of purely national identity hollow, almost meaningless. However, this opens up a space for a new and explicitly European identity to form. In the words of Eric Zemmour, we must “deconstruct the deconstructers.”[2] Such an identity need not be akin to the existing bourgeois liberal one, to which the current ruling class pays lip service. It need not exist only in some transcendent realm of values. What was only implicit in the old system—race—must be made explicit.

If all values, beliefs, and political systems are downstream of race, then we do not need to justify our existence through some reference to the world of ideas. It is ideas that must be justified with reference to whether or not they assist the flourishing of Europeans on earth. Instead of being metaphysical, this new consciousness, this new identity is explicitly historical. It recognizes both the Pagan and Christian ancestry as historical and, critically, recognizes that we are a people in transition from a consciousness that is justified by universalist values to a consciousness that requires no such justification.

If that all sounds “romantic” . . . then good! The Romantic Movement was born as a counter to the rationalistic universalism of the Enlightenment. In his book Romanticism Comes of Age, Owen Barfield lays out how the key to Goethe’s many insights lay in

a certain chastity of thought, a willingness not to go beyond a certain point. The blue of the sky, said Goethe, is the theory. To go further and weave a web of abstract ideas remote from anything we can perceive with our senses in order to “explain” this blue—that is to darken council. [3]

Is this not exactly the medicine that modern European man requires?

The question remains as to how such a change in consciousness can take place. The answer is: through crisis. Let us look at the EU. It has a population of over 500 million people. The White population percentage of the various nation-states ranges from the high 80s in the Euro core to the high 90s in the western and eastern peripheries[4]. The recent waves of non-White immigration across the Mediterranean and through Eastern Europe are already eliciting widespread demonstrations, incendiary attacks, and car bombings. Populist rightist parties are gaining ground across the union. Crisis—and this is happening with Whites still around 90 percent of the population.

Why is this happening in Europe and not in the U.S., where the White majority has been whittled down much further, to just over 60 percent? Primarily because a combination of geography, wealth, traditions such as the common law, and certain peculiarities of the U.S. constitution have insulated a large part of the citizenry from the effects of change. The densely populated nature of Europe, combined with a lack of constitutional protections, means it is much harder to ignore the effects of neo-liberal policies (of which mass immigration is the most obvious manifestation). The EU government apparatus, already a highly efficient tool for the imposition of continent-wide legislation on behalf of the various member states’ elites, is thus given a comparatively free reign.

And this is a good thing. Tracy B. Strong, in his Friedrich Nietzsche and the Politics of Transfiguration, quotes the master:

Just as with morality this transforming political change comes about through the search for justification. “The leveling process of European man is the great process which should not be checked: one should even accelerate it. . . . The leveled species requires, as soon as it is attained, justification. . .” Nationalism and such developments impede the need for justification by trying to maintain politics at a very low level.[5]

The required change in consciousness will only take place once Europeans feel the mature effects of Enlightenment values good and hard—spearheaded by rampant immigration. To hold back those effects is merely to prolong the agony.

The EU is at the centre of the historical forces shaping us as a people. Examples of a new consciousness are already appearing. Identitarian groups are cropping all over the European continent. The Pan-European youth movement, “Génération Identitaire,” is visible on the streets of many European cities. Ethnically conscious political parties such as the Danish People’s Party and Front National are gaining significant representation in national parliaments.

Such things are simply inconceivable in the Anglosphere, at least at the moment.

If such groups continue to gain power, then eventually the EU’s government machinery could be co-opted to forge a new, explicitly White European homeland. Such a homeland could be a catalyst for change globally.

A “Brexit” would be disastrous, precisely because it would mean a significant slowing of this leveling process, potentially even breaking up the EU and consequently imperiling the nascent awaking of White racial consciousness. The relaxation of pressure inherent in an EU breakup would allow for a return to the politics of petty nationalism. We would once again be talking about the possibility of making Sub-Saharan Africans and Syrian Muslims into good Italians and Swedes. This would be accompanied by the continued economic hollowing-out, moral degeneracy, and nihilistic despair that has come to define Western European nations. The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland would finally deserve the name by which it is increasingly referred to in the slurred speech of many of its zombie citizens—it would truly be the “Yu-Kay.” The time of decision is coming, and in the prophetic words attributed to General De Gaulle:

Yes, it is Europe, from the Atlantic to the Urals, it is all of Europe, that will decide the fate of the world.

  1. Twitter update, July 20, 2015, ↩︎
  2. Valeurs Actuelles, “Zemmour: ‘Je ne supporte pas qu’on me somme de m’excuser,’” ↩︎
  3. Owen Barfield, Romanticism Comes of Age, (London: Barfield Press UK, 2012), 45 ↩︎
  4. CIA World Factbook, ↩︎
  5. Tracy Strong, Friedrich Nietzsche and the Politics of Transformation (Champaign, University of Illinois Press, 1999 ), 211. ↩︎