Why the Left Betrayed Us

It will surprise many to learn that it was in response to our betrayal by the Right.

The rich and powerful have always exploited the rest of society, which they created the STATE to facilitate and legitimise, by deceitfully and self-deceivingly equating it with our NATION.

They, and those who identified with them for the rewards to be had, were the original Right. While the original Left were those who pressed them to show more humanity towards the people they exploited.

As the “nation state” took more definite form, there were calls for the rich and powerful to treat their compatriots as members of the same nation, to share with them, instead of exploiting them as a human resource.

This was the original idea behind “socialism”: that members of the same nation should share with each other, rather than exploit each other. Only the rich and powerful weren’t interested. All they wanted to do was preserve their power, wealth and privileges, and go on exploiting their fellow countrymen.

Many on the Left were well-intentioned in wanting to create a more equal society, but some (now the majority) misused the moral high ground they claimed for their own personal advantage, serving the STATE for the rewards to be had, rather than their PEOPLE, thus making them no better than the rich and powerful (and more despised because of their hypocrisy).

Others on the Left, reacted to the indifference of the Right to national identity and solidarity (except when they needed loyal soldiers to fight their wars), with a form of collective self-harming, promoting the destruction of their own nation through mass immigration of unrelated peoples and the creation of a multi-ethnic, as opposed to national society.

Thus, we are being betrayed by the Left and the Right, because both fail to recognise and show solidarity with their NATION. But since most people make the mistake of identifying with the STATE as their NATION, and politically with either the Left or the Right, it is a form of national self-denial and self-betrayal.

Only united can we stand and survive, as a PEOPLE and a NATION, but we are utterly divided (not even knowing who our people or nation are) and in free fall. It’s just that on a historical scale, things take time, and blinded by our own individual, narrow and short-sighted self-interests, we don’t even notice it.

It seems it will be left to those who replace us (another, hopefully, better breed of Briton) to recognise and study our fall and demise, and hopefully learn from our mistakes.

Conservative Statism

It’s generally assumed that statism is a characteristic of the political Left, which the Tory Right is opposed to, but in fact, both the Left and the Right are committed to the STATE and, in their own rather different ways, each as statist as the other, much as in the past the aristocracy and clergy, who cooperated in creating the state in the first place, were.

The difference between the Left and the Right is that the former wants a big state, the latter a small state; only the perverted Darwinian nature and purpose of the state remains the same in both cases, which is to facilitate “society’s” self-exploitation to the advantage of power, wealth, privilege and, of course, talent.

Both sides, Left and Right (in the past, aristocracy and clergy) deny this, of course, each claiming, on the contrary, to SERVE society, which to some extend they do, through the STATE, which we ALL depend on; but as a shepherd serves his flock, which isn’t primarily for the flock’s sake, but for his and/or his employer’s own sake, for the meat and wool the flock provides and can be exchanged at market for MONEY, i.e. POWER.

It’s important to realise that most individuals on both sides of the political divide sincerely believe that they are not exploiting society, but either behaving neutrally or contributing positively to it; the clergy (or liberal left), for example, by administering to the poor and disadvantage, the aristocracy (or Right), through their contributions to business, government and/or charities.

In reality, there’s a lot more to it than that, of course, with things being incomprehensibly complicated, confused and contradictory. However, if one takes a human-evolutionary, i.e. Darwinian, view of the situation, thereby distancing ourselves, with all our dependences and prejudices, at least to some extent, from it, one can begin to understand it.

Over millions of years of evolution, human emotions and behaviour patterns evolved in response to two interdigitating and interacting, but very different environments: one intra-tribal the other extra-tribal. Then, with the advent of civilisation, along came the STATE, which conflated and confounded them, playing the role of our tribe (and intra-tribal environment) on the one hand, while, on the other, also facilitating society’s self-exploitation as an extra-tribal environment. THIS is where all the confusion and contradictions, present in our own society, come from, most of which we simply ignore or rationalise. This is why one moment we see the STATE as our friend and the next as our enemy.

The extent to which we interpret and rationalise the situation (whether particular or general) to suit our own preconceived ideas and advantage cannot be overemphasised. The problem is, it is extremely difficult to see in ourselves, although a lot easier to see in others we disagree with.

It’s difficult to see how we can hope to be objective at all. Certainly, we can never be entirely objective, but I think that by cultivating awareness and understanding, from a Darwinian perspective, of just how subjective and rationalising we are (all of us), we can achieve at least a degree of objectivity.

Statist Capitalism or Multi-Nationalist Socialism?

This is written in response to the misconceived hostility towards “socialism” prevalent on this website, and to the Left’s hostility towards “nationalism”.

Superficially, viewed from the Right, “socialism” may seem responsible for most of society’s woes, just as viewed from the Left, “nationalism” does – or did, until the state succeeded in equating the natural ethnic basis of nationhood with “racism”.

Socialism and nationalism were the most powerful motivating ideas prior to ww2, because deeply rooted in man’s inherent social (socialism) and tribal (nationalism) nature. But being so powerful, both were misappropriated by the STATE or statists, who misused them to their own power-political advantage, whereby giving both the extremely bad names they now have.

The Nazis, being supreme propagandists, went the whole hog in calling themselves “national socialists”, the appeal of which, as a concept, to basic human instincts was doubly profound. This the Nazis abused to an insanely criminal extent, resulting in the concept of “national socialism” being dragged into the abyss along with their evil selves, where it remains to this day, no one daring to go even near it for fear of all its terrible associations.

Which is not just a shame, but a tragedy (representing perhaps Hitler’s ultimate victory over us), the concepts of both nationalism (from nation) and socialism (from social responsibility and solidarity) being vitally important for any healthy, just, humane and sustainable human society, and you can’t have one without the other.

We urgently need to recover the CONCEPT of “national socialism” from the abyss into which the Nazis dragged it, cleanse it of its evil associations and re-examine it. And since much of Nazi nastiness revolved around its mono-nationalistic self-centredness, at the expense of others, I suggest we alter the name to “Multi-National Socialism”.

Another misconception on the Right is that free-market capitalism is anti-statist. It’s not. It just wants a small, non-interventionist state, rather than a large interventionist one. Capitalism needs the state to maintain law and order amongst the work force (the human resources” it exploits) and enforce property rights to the advantage of power, wealth, privilege and “talent”.

The primary purpose of the STATE, clearly visible from a human-evolutionary, i.e. Darwinian, perspective, is to facilitate “society’s” self-exploitation, which the political Left and Right merely take different approaches to. Both look to the STATE to serve their own particular (social, political, financial, ideological, or whatever) advantage.

I envisage Multi-National Socialism as a grass-roots-democratic alternative to the statism of both the Left and the Right.

How to proceed? By organising OURSELVES, peacefully and grass-roots-democratically, into TRIBES and NATIONS of our OWN creation and choosing, which will cooperate with each other (without the imposed statist pretence of single pseudo-nationhood) in creating alternatives to the oppressive state institutions and non-sustainable, unjust and inhumane capitalist-consumer economy we currently all depend on.

I know how fanciful this all sounds, for which there are understandable psychological reasons. It is very difficult for our brains to imagine anything that is not an extension of existing experience, especially when it is materially and emotionally so dependent on the status quo. It wants to maintain the environment which supports it and gives it an advantage over others, and is thus terrified of truly radical change, even though without it we are doomed.