The other day I posted an article called ‘Go East Young Man!’ about the value of European-Preservationists emigrating to Hungary and Poland and the rest of the Visegrad Nations.
There were some very insightful comments after it, and they especially pointed towards the question of Western European countries, and the question of resistance within them.
Therefore with this post I want to build on the last article and subsequent discussion, and that very important issue.
The question at hand is this: what is the ‘best practices’ path for those in Western European countries seeking to fight their Islamization and destruction?
Turchin has written about two things in particular that are significant to me. They are his ‘Fathers and Sons Theory’ and his analysis of ‘Asabiya’. It is the latter that I want to briefly touch on here.
I will let Turchin himself define it for us, using two extracts from his book War and Peace and War.
Different groups have different degrees of cooperation among their members, and therefore different degrees of cohesiveness and solidarity. Following the fourteenth-century Arab thinker Ibn Khaldun, I call this property of groups asabiya. Asabiya refers to the capacity of a social group for concerted collective action. Asabiya is a dynamic quantity: it can increase of decrease with time. Like many theoretical constructs, such as force in Newtonian physics, the capacity for collective action cannot be observed directly, but it can be measured from observable consequences.
The concept of collective solidarity, or asabiya in Arabic, was Ibn Khaldun’s most important contribution to our understanding of human history. The theory is described in his monumental The Muqaddimah: An Introduction to History. Asabiya of a group is the ability of its members to stick together, to cooperate; it allows a group to protect itself against the enemies, and to impose its will on others. A group with high asabiya will generally win when pitched against a group with of lesser asabiya. Moreover, “royal authority and general dynastic power are attained only through a group and asabiya. This is because aggressive and defensive strength is obtained only through … mutual affection and willingness to fight and die for each other.” In other words a state can be organized only around a core group with high asabiya. By acting in a solidary fashion, the members of the core group impose their collective will on other consituents of the state and thus prevent the state from falling apart.
Everyone reading this will immediately be able to think of groups throughout history with high or low levels of asabiya. The Japanese in WWII had high asabiya, the Russians in the Afghanistan war had moderate asabiya that quickly deteriorated to low asabiya as the war dragged on. Alexander the Great’s Macedonians had high asabiya whereas King Darius’s Persions had low asabiya.
Low Asabiya Today
What is also immediately apparent when one starts thinking about it is that modern liberal democracy could almost be called the (literal) political application of low asabiya. In modern Europe and North America and even Japan, Cultural-Marxism/Negationism has built up individuality and skepticism as the ultimate virtues, and things like obedience, orderliness, and masculine honor have become demonized. Beyond that, degeneracy and mass-immigration both- in different ways- dilute any surviving remnants of what could be called ‘shared honor’, and the societies in question ultimately become atomized, as nations, races, tribes, communities, and even families are broken down by the relentless power of “the nothing”– the unstoppable power to destruct inherent in the fusion of multinational corporatism and left-wing progressivism.
High Asabiya Today
Those groups and nations that DO have high asabiya today are the ones that are thriving though. We see this notably with the Muslims in Europe. As I wrote in my first book, it was impossible not to develop a grudging respect for the Muslims I encountered there. They would not allow any slight to occur against their collective ‘in-group’ without seeking to avenge it. They would never sacrifice the honor of their family or tribe (say, by letting their sister become a prostitute) out of some misplaced ideas about ‘individualism’. They cared about their ancestors and about their descendants rather than just their own temporal ‘bliss’. While I viewed their culture in many ways as sinister, I could not help but admire their ‘collective tactical-masculine virtue’ – or, in other words, asabiya.
We see the same thing within the West, where Russia and Poland and Hungary are on far better tracks than Sweden, Germany, and Canada. We also see it in Israel. While many prominent Israeli thinkers, politicians, and writers constantly encourage and push Europe in the opposite direction (even sponsoring and funding mass-Muslim immigration, among other things), within their own nation asabiya and collective identity, collective spirit, and collective defense is pushed mercilessly.
Israel is also relevant because it is surrounded on all sides by hostile Arab nations. This brings up Turchin’s concept of ‘meta-ethnic frontiers’ and their relationship to asabiya. Basically, Turchin says that groups who live on such frontiers- where one collective group borders another (often enemy) group- are far more likely to develop into high-asabiya cultures that have large impacts upon the world.
What This Means For Europe
If asabiya is the key to nations or tribes or other groups surviving, then it follows that is what we must somehow find in Europe.
If the modern liberal West has all but destroyed its nations’ asabiya however, how do we do that?
As jracekl wisely stated in his comment on the last article, we cannot collectively fight our enemies from Hungary and Poland. Those groups either sacrificing Western Europe or taking over Western Europe are (thankfully) not in Poland and Hungary yet. While Eastern Europe will play an important role as the host of Preservationist Westerners like Nick Griffin and others, and while their governments will hopefully still serve as a political vanguard opposing Islamization on the international stage, it is of course impossible to save any part of France/England/Sweden from Budapest or Prague.
Yet on the other hand, large cities and regions of Western Europe are already all but gone. Our other wise commenter Philip articulated this himself. We already know that in places like Rotterdam and Malmo 60-80% of newborns are Muslim. In large cosmopolitan cities like Hamburg and Paris many of the native Europeans live in rich enclaves, and often through naivete or brainwashing possess zero regard for their people’s survival. Asabiya can not be grown in these places.
It follows that there is a zero percent chance politicians will come to power in these areas to help things- these areas are, in the short and medium term- lost. They have already been sacrificed and colonized.
Yet in most of these countries there are still more rural states and provences where the population is more homogeneous. In some of them- such as Northern Sweden or rural Austria- it is likely that the native inhabitants lead more traditional lifestyles where they still hunt and fish and rely on their neighbors.
These are the areas where the asabiya can still bounce back. These are the areas that can still save themselves.
For this to happen though they need 1) political leaders who are aware of the path that will follow should immigration commence there, and 2) militias who are able to defend these regional borders if and when their leaders secede.
In 3-10 years time, when things have gotten progressively worse, these are the regions that will make the decisions that will affect the maps of Europe for many decades to come. They can give in, accept the creeping tide of immigration and multiculturalism, and die, or they can follow the model that the Visegrad nations are blazing in refusing to commit suicide by EU dictat.
For this to happen though their populations must see a bounce back in asabiya. That will only come through the work of people like us, who dedicate our time and money and abilities and social capital to persuasion and resistance. I am guessing that all of us who traverse these pages, and the tens of thousands of other young Millenial Preservationists like us, are all working toward such goals, and steadily increasing the leverage with which we effect such change.
To sum up both this post and the previous one, my foremost hope is that we (the collective we reading this and reading things like it across the web) are able to all do our utmost to positively effect the situation in Europe.
The exact path we each take will of course depend on our own circumstances.
It could lead us to Eastern Europe, and Preservationist lands like Poland and Hungary, just like Nick Griffin. There is much that can be done from such lands, and they should hopefully afford such individuals safety and security as they fight on in various ways.
It could also lead us to or keep us in Western Europe itself. In Western Europe I think there is little that can be done for the large metropolitan areas. I also think there is little that can be done on the national political stage, as the recent defeats of Geert Wilders and Norbert Hofer show. Indeed I wager we will be lucky if national politics don’t go even more in our enemies’ favor over the next couple years, as Muslim immigrants (and Turkish Prime Ministers!) command more and more political power.
Therefore in Western Europe I think our best case scenario is that as things continue to escalate and fall apart, the anarchy and existential danger catalyzes the rural, still more homogeneous corners of nations like Sweden and Germany to coalesce into stronger-asabiya sub-nations. This should hopefully also result from the metapolitical project of Identitarianism itself, and all the unbelievably talented individuals working in this vein we possess.
Ideally we will see these provinces secede, and become strong breakaway states within Western Europe, backed up by Preservationist nations like Hungary and Poland. These states will lie on the meta-ethnic frontiers of a newly Balkanized Europe, in the ruins of the civilization that was destroyed by Progressivism.
These meta-ethnic frontiers will then engender even higher asabiya as a result, and be filled with strong, selfless European citizens, focused wholly on reconquest and vengeance.