Sunday, July 15, 2012

The Far Right on Breivik: Sebastian Ernst Ronin

One of the first Nationalists to discuss Breivik in an objective manner (while everyone else went into a frenzy trying to distance themselves as much as possible) was Sebastian Ernst Ronin, doing so in an article he published five days after 7/22. It's available below.

The Breivik Action: The First Archeofuturist Victory

Ronin is a Canadian who supports the creation of White Nations in North America. He appears to be a radical environmentalist who envisions a collapse of modern society when the oil supply runs out (frequently referred to as peak oil), which in turn would result in a return to a nationalist agricultural society. Like many on the right he views the multiracial society as unsustainable in the long run. He leads a political party called the Renaissance Vanguard which is an alliance of Environmentalist, Ethno Nationalists, and Secessionists.

It remains to be seen whether White Nations will be allowed to be created in North America, my best guess is that no, it will not be allowed. This doesn't mean that I believe resistance to be futile, just that it's not going to be as easy as taking over a state with a low population density and declaring your independence. From this perspective I have to agree with Ronin that a global economic collapse presents a window during which White Nations can be established without the risk of being instantly deconstructed.

I however disagree that when oil runs out society will collapse, I predict an economic boom as society will go into panic mode and switch to electric transportation rapidly, all the required technology is there. Electric engines are cheaper to run than gasoline engines, and they run for decades without needing much maintenance, unlike gasoline engines which break down constantly and are expensive to repair. The only downside is that recharging batteries takes a while, meaning shorter travel distances, meaning long distance trade and travel will become more expensive, something which many will see as a plus. When faced with the choice between nuclear power and poverty the population will demand nuclear power. I'm not an expert on the matter, but a total collapse in the near future seems highly unlikely.

It's unfortunately the rule, rather than the exception, that leaders of the far right make poor strategical decisions. I agree with Breivik that if nothing happens until 2083 there is little hope left for the European race. This being the case it seems an awfully risky gamble to tell your followers to sit idly by in wait for a global collapse that might never happen, and that's putting it kindly. The same goes for democratic anti-immigration parties, they waste a lot of time and effort on a democratic solution without the slightest possibility of achieving a democratic majority.

Some people argue that we should beat Blacks and Muslims at their own game by making a lot of babies, but if you view the problem from a hereditarian perspective you'll quickly realize that Whites with the highest birthrates are those with below average intelligence. It's pointless to beat the enemy by becoming the enemy, which we will eventually as the average White IQ will drop down to 85 in about 300 years at the current rate of genetic decline.

All this being said the hypothetical creation a White Nation and it's subsequent deconstruction by NATO forces will radicalize thousands. We should not forget that Anders Behring Breivik cited the deconstruction of Nationalist Serbia as a milestone in his radicalization process. There's of course nothing wrong with being prepared for the worst as having weapons, ammunition, and food for a year is ideal when the civil war goes into the second stage.

Another important thing to note is that Marxism vehemently opposes population control, while many radical environmentalists believe population control to be a crucial element of a realistic green platform. In what I call the 'numbers game' it's possible to draw radical environmentalists away from the left as the deportation of all non-Europeans would cut the European population in half by the end of the century. Ronin's National Environmentalist views are likely to attract people that otherwise would be hard to reach, especially considering his rejection of Nazism.

Keep in mind that declining birthrates are only a problem in a multiracial society, with South Africa being the prime example of a nation where Europeans once had a majority, but now live under Cultural Marxist rule after allowing Africans to out-breed them until they made up less than 10% of the population.

In his article, The First Archeofuturist Victory, Ronin views 7/22 as an action predicted in Guillaume Faye's Archeofuturism. Faye is a French intellectual who is part of the European New Right, a political ideology that is virtually identical to the ideology described in 2083. The Knights Templar is of course almost entirely Breivik's creation, though the New Right supports the concept of a Christian cultural heritage.

Ronin argues that 7/22 forced everyone on the far right to show their hand and either support or oppose Breivik. As no significant political party supported Breivik it didn't make much of an impact in that regard, besides, Breivik insists that political parties should reject violence to stay out of trouble and focus on spreading the message. That being said I have to applaud Ronin's courage for being one of few who refuse to bow down to political correctness when it comes to Anders Behring Breivik.

One area where a line has clearly been drawn in the sand is the Internet where the owner of Stormfront (Christian, National Socialist, anti-Semitic) has denounced Breivik, censoring and banning supporters, while the owner of the Vanguard News Network Forum (Atheist, National Socialist, anti-Semitic) is openly supporting Breivik. In this regard 7/22 was unique because it created a clear rift in the far right between the militant and non-militant factions.

Ronin also notes that the bar has been raised for the thousands of keyboard warriors that roam the Internet. Where burning down a mosque was considered radical and revolutionary in the past it's considerably more difficult to impress anyone post 7/22. In addition he points out that Breivik's attack on the Cultural Marxist elites will leave a lasting impression on the European psyche about betrayal from the top. Ronin also praises Breivik for bringing attention to the Islamization and deconstruction of Europe.

Ronin views 7/22 as a significant tremor in the political cultural landscape, though almost a year after the Oslo bombing and Utoya massacre everything has returned back to normal, meaning the West is still in the process of committing collective suicide. This however doesn't mean that thousands aren't eagerly waiting for the next bomb to go off, the metaphorical heart beat that shows that the resistance is alive, that the European race will not be destroyed without putting up a fight.

In conclusion Ronin states that our remaining options are victory or genocide. This seems to be another major milestone in the radicalization process, the realization that our genocide is imminent, providing a counter balance to the fear of political correctness that clearly tipped the scale in the case of Commander Breivik.


  1. It only makes sense for environmentalists to support strong nationalist, isolationist governments.
    All greenies should be:
    -Extremely hardline on vertical immigration - each time we allow a 3rd worlder into our nations we are elevating him to the status of a 1st world consumer and polluter
    -Extremely harline on foreign aid - misguided aid policies are causing the 3rd world population explosion. The only foreign aid I support is to help provide these nations birth control and abortions. I should form an NGO.
    -Ethnonationalist, in the recognition of the indigenous population as part of the regional ecosystem.

    A nationalist government that is accountable to its people by virtue of blood and history, and rejects global capitalism is best able to safeguard the environment for future generations.

  2. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    1. Worst case scenario the electricity demand will double, but keep in mind that people can use a lot less energy if they have to. Nuclear power plants are an option.

      Assuming people will have two or more batteries they can charge the spare one during the day, possibly using solar panels to do so. This approach won't tax the grid.

      Nuclear power plants and re-roofing of millions of homes is an option in the total war scenario you envision.

      The biggest problem I envision is the ability of a multicultural society to create a total war mentality.

    2. It will more than double. Personal transportation is only a fraction of energy use.
      We are entirely reliant on international trade, and it will take a massive hit. Have we got electric airplanes, trains and transport ships?
      How will millions of homes be set up for solar power for example, when acquiring the materials becomes exponentially more expensive?

    3. People will ride bicycles, mopeds, or a bus if they have to.

      In a total war scenario fuel can be rationed to critical parts of the economy, meaning that costs won't explode because demand will be kept within reasonable limits.

      Half the economy is non critical, and if redeployed we can be oil independent in a matter of years.

  3. Interesting article. I do not think the REAL signifigance of AAB will become clear in our lifetime.


Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.