web analytics
Egalitarianism Kali Yuga Liberalism


Kurwenal who had not commented in this blog for a while, has just posted three insightful comments diagnosing Western malaise. This one deserves promotion to article entry:
A particular animating force, the Jewish-Christian spirit, has been travelling and ever moulding the outlook, the discourse, and values that today inform Western consciousness. The defining character of this spirit is egalitarianism. It has expressed an egalitarian will, an egalitarian mentality—instinctive at the beginning, but increasingly conscious of itself until, in our own times, it has become fully aware of its aspirations and final goals.

Western civilisation is condemned because the egalitarian utopia that has inspired it for the last two thousand years is in contradiction with the demands of modern society. Enthralled by this utopia, European man can no longer assume control of the world’s destiny, or be the creator of a new future.

Ashamed of a past which over time has given it undisputed superiority, the egalitarian West now wants the “end of history.” It desires a return to the static stage of mammalian happiness: to an Edenic pre-human past.

Egalitarianism has passed through different phases: mythical, ideological, and synthetic. It entered history (Phase One) in the garments of the Christian myth—“There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus” (Galatians 3:28)—and, as with any other myth, without explaining itself in either its discourse or in its actions, sensing its internal dialectics still as unity and harmony. Then (Phase Two) the “contradictions” began to be felt and rationalised: first on a religious level, when the theologies of the Reformation and Counter-Reformation became “ideologies” and the dialectical contraries took social and political shape—becoming “parties.” In this second phase, egalitarian consciousness becomes deeper, re-conceiving the idea of “equality of souls before God” as “equality of men as citizens before their institutions.” This has come to be called “the revolutionary era,” since its manifestations were sometimes, though not always, violent. Liberalism—in its Anglo-Saxon and French modalities—started here.

Goethe was wont to say that ideas, taken to their ultimate consequences, become absurd. Egalitarianism was indeed pursued to its ultimate consequences: the aspiration and will of attaining “equality of men before Nature itself.” This Third Phase may be characterised as “theoretical,” since it claimed to merge—”rationally” and “ecumenically” in a superior synthesis—the ideologies that derived from the myth. It started in an embryonic manner with Hegelianism; then came a first political-philosophical manifestation: Marxism.

In the synthetic phase in which we currently find ourselves, the dialectics of egalitarianism are felt as an obstacle to achieving a global ecumene. Hence the constant presence of terms like “internationalism,” “cosmopolitism,” and “multiculturalism”—and the establishment of “political correctness” as the only legitimate discourse.

With hindsight, Marxism-Leninism may be considered a “deviation” from the main current of the egalitarian tendency, since it tried to “force” or “anticipate” the natural evolution of egalitarianism towards a final synthesis. It was not until the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989, and the peaceful ending of the Cold War—when Communism became reabsorbed into the common egalitarian matrix (partly because the objectives pursued by Marxism in the Eastern bloc had already been attained in the West)—that the final and true “recovered unity” of the egalitarian tendency took shape.

Its consecration may be observed today in the unanimous acceptance of the doctrine of human rights and its expansion through liberal-capitalistic or socialist-Third Worldist globalisation—a project of planetary homogenisation which seeks to progress till the conclusive exit of humankind from history.

19 replies on “Egalitarianism”

The idea of human equality existed prior to Christianity. Ancient Greek philosopher Plato for example, believed in political equality of men and women. And Aristotle for example, believed in idea of equality of free citizens. Alexander the Great believed in the equality of different tribes and ethnicities in his complex empire.

Egalitarianism as a word was invented in the 18th century Enlightenment. And back then, John Locke understood equality not as equality of race, but as equality of British persons in rights. Also, some philosophers such as Jean Jacques Rousseau wanted to create a society where there would not be any class inequality. Yet, Rousseau did not admire christianity, but he had a strange admiration for the “noble savage” which supposedly was the more noble and equal human being in existence. Many enlightenment philosophers despised the Catholic Church. Modern-day racial egalitarianism is an invention of the Cultural Marxist Frankfurt School of the 1920s. The decline of white european civilization is a much more recent phenomenon than you might think. There are statistics and evidence to prove that.

I think you have not answered my observation in another thread that the history of “Latin” (Mestizo) America proves that the mess started before the 20th century, and let’s no talk about the mongrelised Byzantine Empire: where equality of the races (not of creeds) was taken for granted to the point of genuine Latin obliteration.

Racial mixing always occurred in colonies of European powers. Race mixing in the XIX and XVIII century was culturally discouraged in European homelands, but was often allowed in the colonies. That is why Latin America was mongrelized. Think about it. Spain itself was overwhelmingly white european from 1492 (expulsion of jews, arabs and berbers from Spain) until about the 1990s. A certain Spanish nationalist intellectual named Enrique Ravello in the London New Right Forum proved that Spain and Portugal themselves were completely white for over 4 centuries. But Ravello said that once white men came to colonies … they often engaged in race mixing. Primarily, because the white women did not come along with them. And them men got lonely and bored. Also, race mixing in colonies was even encouraged by colonial governments because the mixed population was thought to be more loyal to colonial empires than pure blacks or pure indians. Not only Spain and Portugal had mulattos and mestizos in their colonies in Latin America, but also Britain and France had their share of race mixed populations in their colonies in the Caribbean and in Africa sometimes. But this mixing was done not in name of egalitarianism, but in name of strengthening the colonial empires themselves. Which were the source of natural resources, sugar, exotic fruits and crops for the growing European economy. Also, mulattoes and mestizos were not seen as equal to white settlers. They had an in-between status. In the Caribbean for the example, race-mixed people had to show by law physical respect to white officers and officials. There were laws restricting their power and privileges. Prior to XX century, almost all race mixed people lived in colonies or in former colonies of great European powers. I think it is just important to separate racial attitudes in European homelands from the colonies. A colony and a homeland are two different environments.

The Portuguese polluted their blood beyond repair inside the peninsula, especially in Lisbon. Have you missed the article in this site “Portugal and the one-drop rule”?

A certain Spanish nationalist intellectual named Enrique Ravello in the London New Right Forum proved that…

I watched that speech. This guy was so deluded that it just takes one eye to see that he himself is not even white. Have you missed my post “Are Spaniards Aryans?” or at least this comment in the thread about how Spanish actors look?

Many Spaniards are non-whites. You don’t even seem to know the definition of “white” according to this site (see abstract at “Gens alba…”).

Almost no one in the XIX century thought that the white man is somehow equal to the black man, the asian man, an indian or the mestizo or the mulatto. There was a law written by Napoleon, which banned interracial marriage in France and denied entry to Metropolitan France to non-white or race mixed populations. But interracial marriage was only allowed in French colonies.

What matters are the deeds: both the Eastern Roman Empire (Christian) and the huge Spanish Empire with Portugal (also Xtian) polluted their blood.

By their fruits ye shall know them…

What a marvelous comment, and in the same spirit as Hitler’s Table talk. It only took him a few brief paragraphs to say what would have taken me entire walls of texts.

I’m really grateful for such clarity. I wrote this comment down, amongst many other great ones, in my little blue diary. It’s going to take me a while to fully digest this profound thought.

From Amazon Books:

Our destiny hangs between two options: either to complete the triumph of the egalitarian conception of the world, which will bring about the end of history, or to promote a historical regeneration. Nietzsche prophesied that the Earth will eventually belong to either the last man or to the superman. There are no other alternatives.

Either Europe gets a 4th Reich, which means an improved 3rd Reich (this time with two consuls like Sparta and Republican Rome to avoid military blunders like Operation Barbarossa) or real whites become extinct, which means handing Europe on a silver plate to the Muslims (and the rest to China).

Murka, France, the UK and Russia should burn in the process. The more I become familiar with WN the more I see that, unlike Pierce, the WN conception is flawed: WNsts in Murka won’t give up capitalism, Christianity, rock music, etc. Jef Costello once said that, with the exception of Johnson, all Counter Current members he knew have used illicit drugs. The same with other dissipative factors. I wonder how many WNsts actually know that what the Nazis called degenerate music is noxious for the Aryan spirit?

Going through the overman ways implies rejecting all sort of degeneracy. In difficult times we need hypermorality, a High Sparrow with inquisitorial powers. This won’t happen among the racially conscious WNsts, not even after the dollar crashes. They have not completely healed from the symptoms of the narcosis that currently afflicts all whites. We need something else. We need a new version of NS. We need amalgamating our psyches with the spirit of some of the characters in Pierce’s novels. Everything else is charlatanry.

“The defining character of this spirit is egalitarianism.”


“The constitution of 1795, like its predecessors, has been drawn up for Man. Now, there is no such thing in the world as Man. In the course of my life, I have seen Frenchmen, Italians, Russians, etc.; I am even aware, thanks to Montesquieu, that one can be a Persian. But, as for Man, I declare that I have never met him in my life. If he exists, I certainly have no knowledge of him.”

Joseph de Maistre

“It is well known that in this world
there are three orders, set in unity:
these are laboratores, oratores, bellatores [those who pray, fight, and work.”


A defining aspect of the French Revolution was egalitarianism.

That’s true, but Constantinople was a continuation of the Roman Empire that had already given citizenship to non-whites long before Christianity came upon the scene.

Historically, the problem is empire, or at least that is a significant problem. Anytime Whites develop an empire — or any race for that matter — there is tendency for it to engender cosmopolitanism, mercurial values, and the inevitable race-mixing. We see this after the conquests of Alexander, and during the rise of the Roman empire, and even in non-white empires, like the Arab (Saracens), Mongol, and Ottoman. The Aristotlean polis, not the Alexandrian empire, is the political vision for a sustainable White future.

Comments are closed.