Lately I’ve been examining the so called “Dark Enlightenment” (DE) movement. Since some pro-White/WN entitles are getting grouped with the DE, I thought I’d better investigate this phenomenon (especially considering the recent media coverage ). Here are my thoughts at this point. I have 3 major points.
1) First of all the term “Dark Enlightenment” is a contradiction. By definition enlightenment can’t be dark. By using the term “DE” you play into the enemy’s playbook. We are not the side that demands another group of people get force-assimilated out of existence. We’re not the ones looking to demonize the culture of others in order to weaken and destroy them. We’re not the ones advocating global government. We’re not the ones pumping a degenerate toxic culture into the minds of Western youth. We’re not demanding that certain political speech be made illegal. We’re not the ones advocating jail time for disagreeing with certain versions of historical events. We are the true champions of choice and freedom. We’re the advocates of true diversity. We also value community, beauty, and order.
Our enemies are the side of ugliness, forced diversity which leads to homogeneity, and disorder. They’re the ones who have to lie and force people to live according to their world view. They have to spend trillions of dollars pushing the anti-White narrative in the media and education systems. They have to over report White-on-non-white crime and under report non-white-on-White crime. They have to push the sex wage gap myth.
All we have to do is tell the truth. All we have to do is point out that “anti-racist is a code word for anti-White.” All we have to do is attack their “pretty lies.”
2) The word “Cathedral” as a label for the enemy is wrong. The Gothic cathedral is probably the greatest artistic-symbolic achievement of Western civilization. To call the enemies of the West “the Cathedral” is offensive. A better term would be “the regime.” An even better name is the Forces of Satanic Darkness. ”
These first 2 points I can live with if they prove effective. But my 3rd point relates more to ideology than terminology.
3) The DE movement is basically a right wing movement. Its major premises are as follows:
1. People are not equal. They never will be. We reject equality in all its forms.
2. Right is right and left is wrong.
3. Hierarchy is basically a good idea.
4. Traditional sex roles are basically a good idea.
5. Libertarianism is retarded.
6. Democracy is irredeemably flawed and we need to do away with it.(2)
I can agree with this list for the most part. While people are unequal they should be equal under the law. Traditional sex roles are preferable but if the greatest theoretical physicist in the nation is a woman, then she should be encouraged to do physics. Libertardianism is indeed retarded (enough said). Outright democracy is flawed, but at the local level democratic procedures are preferable.
My problem comes from the premise that “right is right and left is wrong.” There are certain policies and philosophies that come out of the left that are clearly superior to the right (workers’ rights, environmental protection, minimum wages, social welfare services for people and families in need, animal rights, etc.). If you mix this premise of “right is right” with the premise “hierarchy is basically a good idea” then you get a society that looks like Norman England where people get their hands chopped off for removing a dead branch from the lord’s forest. I envision a drone leaving a neo-Norman keep to drop munitions on someone who tampered with his embedded tracking microchip.
From reading DE blogs I do notice a strain of blatant elitism and disdain for the masses. At this point I haven’t detected what forces could be behind the DE movement but will now state that we should remain vigilant to the possibility of the Anglo-American (read “American” as the Eastern Establishment) elites using this movement as a vehicle to retain power. In other words, the Anglo-American elites may say
“OK, you don’t want multiculturalism, Judaics running loose, white genocide; you say you want your “traditional society,” that’s OK, we’ll give you that, we’ll also give you a hierarchical structure that is very “traditional” mwaaahahaa… remember, head man gets the first fruit….mwaahahaha.”
Then over time the Anglo-American elites will let some Judaics back into the country that will lead a revolution overthrowing some drunken monarch that is set up for the purpose of being overthrown, and then White genocide and the whole foul cycle will start over again. That’s why I suggest taking that which is “right from the right and that which is right from the left.”
You end forced diversity,neutralize out-of-control Judiacs, end White genocide, end cultural degeneracy, promote traditional values and culture; BUT also include the best aspects of the left (i.e. workers’ rights, environmental protection, minimum wages, certain social welfare services for people and families in real need, animal rights, etc). You promote local capabilities and let local people determine the needs of local folks. You build a society that promotes economic stability (through the policies from the left) and cultural/spiritual stability (through the policies of the right). You build a society that is very difficult to subvert because it makes almost all parties content.
But where does this disdain for the masses come from? And haven’t we seen this before? Does not the current batch of Western “leaders” refer to the masses as “goyim” and/or “profane?” I will admit that when I first became aware of the forces that make this world operate that I too could become disappointed at the masses inability to see this as well. But I now realize that this sight is a gift. This author does not have the gifts necessary to frame a house, read Sanskrit, tap dance, write software, or do heart surgery. The Almighty has seen fit to make my gifts that of sight and of joining-matters-aright (3) (4). A harmonious, well order society is one where everybody plays a role utilizing their gifts allotted to them by the Creator. A society run by a bunch of haughty aristocrats or boyars is not only morally wrong and unjust, but it provides an opening for the most parasitical factions to enter (as seen in the French and Bolshevik revolutions). The DE has some promising ideas and intelligent people pushing these ideas, but woe to any movement that would act as vehicle for the current globalist elites (5) to retain power.