In my last post I received the following question from ImmigrationFacts:
Hi Mark. Two great talks. I hope the first video comes backs soon.
Just thinking: should different social groups be appealed to with different forms of nationalism?
'Groups' can refer to categories such as:
- age: boomers vs X-Z
- traditional voting patterns: Conservative LNP, Liberal LNP (+ teal-greens), ALP Catholic/Conservative Right, ALP Red-Greens
- region: rural vs urban vs inner-city
For example:
- Boomers (#notallboomers) are receptive to reactionary (Hanson) and civic nationalism (Abbott, Dutton). Fewer boomers are receptive to economic nationalism (Anning, Katter), but mileage varies by region (i.e. popular among 'agrarian socialist' in rural areas)
- Younger generations are more open to ethnic nationalism because they are facing the brunt of the attacks on their identity. Civic nationalism is passe for many youth, as they've never known the homogeneity which once accompanied it.
- Obviously, some forms of nationalism appeal to different habitual voter groups. e.g. Nationals like economic nationalism, whereas Civic Nats for inner-city Left-Liberals and Left-ALP.
- Liberal nationalism may be popular among our intellectuals (Sydney/Melbourne trads) and we should try to increase it among intellectual and political class
etc. These are quick generalizations and suggestions, but what do you think more broadly about 'targeting nationalisms'?
That's quite a nice summary there!
First of all I think that you are correct, here are the three guidelines you should follow.
1. Target your message to your audience.
2. Make sure you remain loyal to your own values
4. Help the audience see further than they might have on their own.
Lets say that you are meeting some Boomers, as you point out most are civic patriots, values are more important then ethnicity.
1. Find the topic that they care about
2. Remember to keep your own views, you may be open or hidden about them, but don't blow in the breeze like a politician.
3. Leave your audience with more information then they started with. For example "South Sudanese make up .14% of Victoria's population but commit 0.7% of the crime. That's five times their share of the population. If they made up 10% of the population that would mean that they would be committing 50% of the crime!"
Those figures are correct and current.
Your aim is to lay eggs so that those eggs might hatch.
One point I disagree with is "Liberal Nationalism". Liberalism is not the answer to our problems, it's the cause of our problems. We should never encourage Liberalism!
Upon Hope Blog - A Traditional Conservative Future
Another Article You Might Like?
The Individual Versus Individualism
Thanks Mark. I like the idea of leaving a seed (bit of info or subtle idea) as you have mentioned.
ReplyDeleteI find ethnonationalism most attractive, but not the larpy/edgy/ironic/4chan 'alt-right' kind, more the traditional Australian ethnonationalism. The challenge to promote this is for white/European people to actually see themselves as a distinct ethnic group with unique and legitimate interests and heritage. I don't think 'enough' Boomers can be won over to this nationalism in time, but it's pretty much the only nationalism relevant to the youngest age groups. I believe that pointing out anti-white prejudice is the quickest way to redpill someone and have them to rediscover their natural in-group preference. It's a pity we don't have something like the ADL to point out anti-white discrimination to us. I think we're going to need such an organisation in the future.
I think Frank referred to 'Liberal Nationalism' in his video. If I remember correctly, he found the term itself problematic but had some interesting takes on the idea around nationhood, ethnicity and homogeneity. Though I won't use the term any longer because it's misleading with its connotations, and tbh only something I just heard of.