The Foundations of the White Nationalist Struggle: Natural Rights

On the Natural Rights
Of Nationalism
Word count: 5,303
Natural law is a controversial and misunderstood concept.

First of all, there is the unfortunate habit of using ‘law’ as an all-purpose word for referring indiscriminately to, among other things, an imposed rule (‘lex’), a rule validated by immemorial custom or practice and not invalidated by reason, a deduction from a description of some ‘ideal society’, an agreement among rational beings (‘ius’), and a condition of order. As a result, many people fail to distinguish between ‘law’ in the sense of a rule that ought to be obeyed or followed (as one would obey or follow a commander or a teacher) and ‘law’ in the sense of something that ought to be respected (as one would respect another person or, say, a thing of beauty). Understandable misgivings about ‘natural laws’—assuming these to be rules that we ought to follow because they supposedly are ‘given by’ or ‘found in’ nature—are then easily, but without warrant, extended to the notion of a natural order of things that we ought to respect.

But is this the whole story?

Part of the controversy surrounding the concept of natural law stems from the difficulty many have, in taking the word ‘natural’ seriously. Indeed, natural law theory often is derided for being ‘metaphysical’ or even wedded to a particular theology. However, the fact that some theories of natural law are metaphysical or theological does not mean that natural law is something metaphysical or theological. A theory of mice and men can be metaphysical but the metaphysics is in the theory, not in the mice and not in the men. Natural law theories are, but natural law is not, a product of the human mind, although human minds are essential elements of the natural law. While natural law theorists may learn from their predecessors, their object of study is the natural law, not ‘the literature’.

The possibility that, despite such philosophical debate, the observable signs of Natural Law is passe’ or, in the obverse, does not exist within both a racial construct nor, as well, within the racial-political construct of what many descendents of European forebears would ascribe to themselves, as adherents to White Nationalism, as defined by its tribal nomenclature and ethno-nationalist manifestation of a significant and manifestly organic body of persons which make up, as some have stated, a White tribe, replete with uniform codes of conduct (such as mores and financial institutions), modes of mechanization and governmental infrastructures which, if one cares to compare, differ very little, in the main, from one another. The abstract conclusions of difference and conflict come, perhaps, from a dis-jointed, or conflicted view, of the concept of ‘natural law’.

The philosophical debate, simple disagreements of observational form, such as comparing Plato and Aristotle, to St. Augustine or St. Thomas as opposing motifs in the grand panoply of Western man’s evolution, continues to this day; there was a time, not too far distant, that this rhetorical debate had, at least for a moment, become quieted, the debate and secular political posturing was coming to grips with a larger, greater vision: That the existence of our People and a future for White children was, in fact, a natural, self-expression of, as Nietzsche put it, “a will to Power,” which can be ascribed to an individual or, manifestly, in an organic body of persons, inhabiting a local valley or a modern Nation State. The natural recurring elements exist in both, that is, Life and Death, not necessarily in that order.

Those of us, today, who call ourselves White Nationalists, as well as those of yesteryear, already had conceived, or were ineluctably drawn, by an instinct, a desire or inner knowledge, as may be the case, to an organic similitude of the truism of ethnic-nationalism, that rudimentary and biological underpinning of Family, Nation and Culture. This momentum, this irascible and sometimes benign duality, which makes men, all men, subject to its laws and predispositions, as well as the creation of Slaves and, to others, Conquerors seems, nevertheless, to exist only in the receding gray-matter of shared experience, of hostile and warlike peoples who, at the outset, followed laws of their own, of their specie; the intractable and willful belief of their antecedents that, as a priori, their existence was unique, embryonic as it were, of something larger and less festooned with obligation and servitude to those whose foresight was dimming, as was their waking sight. Blind, blind to the ever-present discourse of freedom, land, group-governance and the notion that, in the main, a natural force within each man, declares his humanity.

This was his by right of natural law.

First, natural law presupposes an account of nature that makes human freedom possible. The conflict, however, is that the mechanistic tendencies of modern natural science appear to call into question human freedom. Secondly, natural law presupposes a moral law rooted in nature. A duality, in this case, creates its own conflict. Nature can be, and usually is, distinguishable from what is the product of human deliberation and design. How, then, can we reconcile human freedom with obedience to a moral law? The solution to this difficulty lies in the distinction between the ultimate end, which is fixed by nature, and the means to the end, which is subject to human deliberation and choice. The natural desire for the ultimate end, which is encapsulated in the first principle of the natural law (i.e., “do good and avoid evil” 5), is the starting point of all moral reasoning. However, this raises a second difficulty, at least for Christian thinkers such as St. Thomas: If natural law is based upon our natural end, how can natural law be reconciled with a supernatural goal? If our ultimate end is eternal beatitude, is not the natural law vitiated by grace? The solution to this problem, for St. Thomas, seems to rest upon a distinction between a formal account of man’s ultimate end—one that is founded upon our natural desire for the good—and the concrete realization of this end which, as it turns out, is supernatural in character.

For Aquinas, the natural law includes, first, a concrete understanding of the supreme goal [of human life] and the subordinate goals that we must seek to be happy, and, second, a true understanding of the various means to this supreme goal and its integrated subordinate goals, that is, the means we need to adopt if happiness is to be truly realized.

It has been argued, that the fundamental structure of St. Thomas’s moral thinking and his understanding of the first principles of the natural law are based upon the philosophy of Aristotle.

While there are those opposed to those Thomists who seek to equate Thomism with Aristotelian philosophy, some see it as kind of anti-Aristotelianism that can be found among many Thomists. In the area of moral philosophy, this anti-Aristotelianism is exemplified by Jacques Maritain, who posits a split between Aristotle and St.Thomas regarding the nature of the human good. According to Maritain, since moral philosophy can only be practical if it guides us to our ultimate end, and since our ultimate end in the present order of divine providence is eternal beatitude, Aristotelian moral philosophy cannot serve as an adequate guide to the moral order. The problem here arises from Aristotle’s account of man’s ultimate end as a comprehensive good, one that leaves nothing to be desired. Since St. Thomas, guided by his Christian faith, gives an account of the comprehensive good that differs from Aristotle as, secular humanism (in its true form, as Logic), it seems that we must choose between two rival accounts of the human good. It is noted that, St. Thomas, based upon his reading of the Nicomachean Ethics, concluded that Aristotle did not believe that human happiness—the comprehensive human good that Aristotle articulates in his formal account— could be perfectly realized in this life. This paves the way for St. Thomas to subsume Aristotle’s account of the ultimate end into the Christian vision of the ultimate end, one that overcomes the vicissitudes of this life.

White Nationalists, however, do not base their reasoning upon the similtudes or differences of theology while, at the same time, acknowledging the vicissitudes of life as, perhaps, theology describes best.

Natural law, as Aristotle saw it, harkens to a more, shall we say, ethnonationalist point of view, presupposing a priori of racial existence, a natural law which, of itself, belongs to the natural product of the specie.

Aristotle observes:

He who thus considers things in their first growth and origin, whether a state or anything else, will obtain the clearest view of them. In the first place, there must be a union of those who cannot exist without each other; namely, of male and female, that the race may continue (and this is a union which is formed, not of deliberate purpose, but because, in common with other animals and with plants, mankind have a natural desire to leave behind them an image of themselves), and of natural ruler and subject, that both may be preserved. [emphasis added]2

In the view of White Nationalism, as both a social and political construct, Natural Law defines the corporate body as organism. David Eden Lane, a true White Nationalist who, by all accounts, gave his life in the service of our people, and whose legacy and acumen in the nuances of racial discourse led the vanguard of today’s ethnonationalism; yet, today, redacted from the eyes and ears of the common folk, yes, those very insignificant and sturdy folk whom are depended upon by those who foster their ideas and political agendas upon these very same folk, to extend in the real world, those very same aspirations and political realities, as if they were found, but yesterday. Unlike the Left, conservatives always leave their wounded in the field.

On natural law, as it embraces White Nationalism, Mr. Lane has this to say:

Until the white race realizes that there is only one source from which we can ascertain lasting truths, there will never be peace or stability on this earth. In the immutable Laws of Nature are the keys to life, order, and understanding. The words of men, even those which some consider “inspired” are subject to the translations, vocabulary, additions, subtractions, and distortions of fallible mortals. Therefore, every writing or influence, ancient or modern, must be strained through the test of conformity to Natural Law. The White Peoples of the earth must collectively understand that they are equally subject to the iron-hard Laws of Nature with every other creature of the Universe, or they will not secure peace, safety nor, even their existence. The world is in flames because Races, Sub-races, Nations, and Cultures are being forced to violate their own Nature-ordained instincts for self-preservation. Many men of good will, but little understanding, are struggling against symptomswhich, are the result of disobedience to Natural Law. As is the Nature of Man, most take narrow, provincial stances predicated on views formed by immediate environment, current circumstances, and conditioned dogma. This is encouraged by that powerful and ruthless Tribe which has controlled the affairs of the world for untold centuries by exploiting Man’s most base instincts. Conflict among and between the unenlightened serves as their mask and shield. A deeper understanding of the Fundamental Laws that govern the affairs of Men is necessary if we are to save civilization from its usurious executioners…

1. Any religion or teaching which denies the Natural Laws of the Universe is false.

2. Whatever People’s perception of God, or Gods, or the motive Force of the Universe might be, they can hardly deny that Nature’s Law is the work of, and therefore the intent of, that Force.

3. God and religion are distinct, separate and often conflicting concepts. Nature evidences the divine plan, for the natural world is the work of the force or the intelligence men call God. Religion is the creation of mortals, therefore predestined to fallibility. Religion may preserve or destroy a People, depending on the structure given by its progenitors, the motives of its agents and the vagaries of historical circumstances.

4. The truest form of prayer is communion with Nature. It is not vocal. Go to a lonely spot, if possible a mountaintop, on a clear, star-lit night, ponder the majesty and order of the infinite macrocosm. Then consider the intricacies of the equally infinite microcosm. Understand that you are on the one hand inconsequential beyond comprehension in the size of things, and on the other hand, you are potentially valuable beyond comprehension as a link in destiny’s chain. There you begin to understand how pride and self can coexist with respect and reverence. There we find harmony with Nature and with harmony comes strength, peace and certainty.

In a more practical, if not commonsensical way, this aphorism should contextualize the meaning of a ‘natural’ law, as law itself provides for both instruction and indoctrination of what is observable, Mr. Lane continues:

9. A proliferation of laws with the resultant loss of freedom is a sign of, and directly proportional to, spiritual sickness in a Nation.3
Moreover, to every facet of this discussion, be those ‘property rights’, ‘marriage’ , (as such in a contractual sense), or ‘economics’, as well as ‘art’ and ‘literature’, as the original “do good and avoid evil” reminds us, as both the latter elements define and refine the elemental persona of what will extend us, as a people, and remind us what will destroy and exterminate us, if we pass by the obvious good nature of experience.

The above, as noted, by David Lane, are not necessarily new or monumental discoveries; but they are part of the discourse and path of the modern White Nationalist as stated in his 88 Precepts. Unlike many a pontificating critic of brief and sublime observation and analysis, such succinct appraisals were all that was needed to establish a cursory discussion of what ‘natural law’ meant to men and women of the West, those who call themselves White Nationalists, in the not too distant past.

The challenges of quantifying the elements of ‘natural law’ are numerous, as is the wont of a specie which adores words and images; it will continue long after we are all gone. Moreover, to ascribe a definitive ledger of fixed laws is, itself, problematic, and constraints of this nature are arbitrary and capricious, if done without the acceptance or acknowledgment that time, that hoary mistress, will have something to say in the matter. But if one continues his search for what we, as a People, must needs be concerned with, that which would define ourselves as unique and quantifiable, the natural law of instinct, of reason, of civility, should be paramount in our minds.

In Rise of the West, a work which discusses many such issues as listed above, and more, has this to say:

Since the beginning of time, our morality has not changed; it is the technics by which our various epochs have molded themselves, which have molded us, changed us, as a people in the process… The division between dogma and morality changed the face of Western man for the unforeseeable future – whether for good or ill, it remains with us. The ‘consciousness’ of man was, forever, given back to him. He was to reform himself, and mold a new reality from the old; he saw it as the inevitable outcome of ‘infancy’ to ‘adulthood’. Constraints, as seen by the child are always bonds, chains which keep him in check, bound to his parents and authority which ever seeks to limit his aspirations. Children almost always hate, and are jealous of their parents – this is natural law. It is part and parcel of the very stages of maturity.4

As with all ruling authority, however, power and control, are factors that must, at all cost be maintained. This is natural law.

For instance, if a unitarian system existed, without the basic tenets of ‘natural law’, what would be its boundaries? What glue, so to speak, would bind a system, such as envisioned by passionate men everywhere, that wish the best for their own people? If natural law is an absurdity, what then? To see what might happen, what did happen, when discounting the material as well as existential realities of what White Nationalists refer to as “natural law”, we might see an eternal opposition, as supplied by Marx or Hegel.

Pointing to the existence of natural law, drawing the reader into the paradigm of opposites, or tensions, one can not mistake this interdiction of ‘methods and operations’ within our own movement, let alone these manifestations of the real world around us, the author of Rise of The West remarks:

There is some merit to the allegations by some, that modern democracy has become the ‘new’ communism of the present age. The ‘egalitarianism’ of Karl Marx, for instance, or Lenin’s political dictums concerning ‘aristocracy’ and ‘monarchy’ included the ‘democratic’ ideal of the ‘masses’ which, taken to the extreme, ushered in the enslavement of the very mass the communists claimed to speak for. Laws of an extremely excessivenature ‘forced’ the mass to accept the ‘leveling’ of their society in the name of ‘progress’. No Hereditary, or Traditional institutions, were allowed to remain, since it was ‘through these selfsame institutions’ that the ‘people’ had been denied ‘choices’ of their own; to be sure, the decadence of the existing leadership was obvious, and cannot be discounted as reasons for such wide-spread discontent, but to replace the old with democracies of the mob, is to say that the only prescription necessary for an ailment is poison.The Dialectics of Hegel, [George Wilhelm Frederich Hegel, born 1770, Germany], itself a system of natural law, was essentially in opposition to the ‘marxist/lenninist’ doctrine but, nevertheless, was studied by the revolutionist of both the Menshevik party and the Bolsheviks in Russia were not the logical dynamics of ‘negation’ and ‘knowledge’. Hegel was fascinated by the works of Spinoza, Rousseau, Kant, and Goethe and by the revolution of France. Modern philosophy, culture, and society seemed to Hegel fraught with contradictions and tensions [the ‘struggle’ in ‘natural law’], such as those between the ‘subject’ and ‘object’ of knowledge, mind and nature, ‘self’ and ‘other’ [inner and outer man], freedom and authority, knowledge and faith, the Enlightenment and Romanticism. Hegel’s main philosophical project was to take these contradictions and tensions and interpret them as part of a comprehensive, evolving, rational unity that, in different contexts, he called “the absolute idea” or “absolute knowledge”.

According to Hegel, the main characteristic of this unity was that it evolved through and manifested itself in contradiction and negation. Contradiction and negation have a dynamic quality that at every point in each domain of reality – consciousness, history, philosophy, art, nature, society – leads to further development until a rational unity is reached that preserves the contradictions as phases and sub-parts of a larger, evolutionary whole. This whole is mental because it is the mind, which is able to comprehend all of these phases and sub-parts as steps in its own process of comprehension. It is rational because the same, underlying, logical, developmental order underlies every domain of reality and is ultimately the order of self-conscious rational thought, although only in the later stages of development does it come to full self-consciousness. The rational, self-conscious whole is not a thing or being that lies outside of other existing things or minds. Rather, it comes to completion only in the philosophical comprehension of individual existing human minds which, through their own understanding, bring this developmental process to an understanding of itself. 5

Natural Law, as defined by Locke and Hobbs is, theological in nature, as the sublime manifestations of ‘god’ transcend the mundane, finishing up with a convenient ‘end’, that cause which all else succumbs, unable to bear its light. These debates, in my mind, have little bearing upon that which White Nationalist thinkers and strategists predicate their rational approach to the tenets and consequences of natural law. What has bearing upon us, now, in the present? What rules, be they metaphysical or physical, do we follow?

Natural Law first, and foremost, remains rhetorical within White Nationalist circles, precisely because pro-active and militant reactions remain isolated and disparate, both in cause and effect. Militancy is in harmony with the needs and desires of fledgling race-cultures; it is also consonant with the natural law of organism, that it acknowledges a cycle of birth, life, and senility. This is observable, and continues in an ever-revolving cycle which, by Western experimentation, becomes quantitative and empirical. Natural law is the obvious; it is what is good for our people, it is what makes us, not united necessarily, but is that commonsense which allows us to mark each individual as belonging, each in turn, to that larger state of being, to that tribe and family, which survives or dies with each of us.

Do we have a ‘natural right’ to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness? In the abstract, no. However, as sentient beings, living now, today, yes, we do. We have natural rights, common to each of us as White Nationalists, as the prism of Race and solidarity are unfamiliar to the majority of deracinated individuals who share, however unpleasant or cumbersome at times this, affinity. Still, the natural law of toleration and acceptance reminds us more of our similarities than our dissimilarities, and manifests itself time and time again, a law which is natural to our specie – it is called, Loyalty. It is a law, for to break it, brings many emotional and intellectual challenges, which may, or may not, have consequences unforeseen by either party; it is unseen, yet felt implicitly and demonstrably, time and time again.

Natural Law, in large part, is a matter of influence.

What designs an individual or group embodies, is a matter for the Fates to decide; outside of this, it is the interdiction of an idea, a motive, which empowers the agent of change. Dialectically, it is a matter of vision, of that capacity of a Seer, which sees the elements of Natural Law, and follows a rigid set of extensions, or laws, by which to achieve certain ends. Thomas Edward Lawrence was such an individual.

In the Seven Pillars of Wisdom, T.E. Lawrence seemed to embody the natural law of the specie, insofar as he visualized an outcome, influenced its particular parts, and sat astride a Revolutionary and historical phenomenon which, by all accounts, resonates to this day.

Is natural law a law of the specie? Does racial instinct define the parameters of this natural law? And what of Politics; does it measure itself by the confines of natural law, or any law?

Influence, by its very nature seems, at the outset, to be intangible, marginal, and less than attainable in most of our lives. By its very nature, however, influence is governed by laws, just as any other dynamic, and must needs be quantified for our present discussion, as well as for future implementation. Below, you will find a set of ‘laws’, as seen by T.E. Lawrence which, by extension, are ‘natural laws’, whereby influence may become tangible:

Lawrence’s Pillars of Wisdom

1. You do not need to be in a position of power. You need only be in a position to influence those in power. Few are in the prior and fewer are those who are not in the latter.2. Find the Prophet. This is the person whom you will influence to make your vision a reality.3. Keep your agenda a secret from those who would undermine it.4. Share your agenda with those whom you trust. This will allow you to drum up support when the time is right.5. Focus your vision by giving it a goal. Give your vision a “Damascus.”6. Do not seek permission to influence those in power.7. Seize the opportunities to influence events as they come your way.6

To the modern White Nationalist, the existential debates of a continuum of debates, lessens with time, as the element of time itself, becomes ever more a distraction in the real-time actions of the present. The status of god-given rights, or the rights of man, that which is carved out and maintained by force, that primitive law of survival, are good fodder for armchair discussions and late-night dissertations, but do not disclose the ‘end’ of the matter; only the man of vision, with the ability to harness that natural law which, with time, may happen to manifest itself in that end most worthy for our people, will matter.

The issue of natural law, as far as White Nationalism is concerned, is not about economics, but about blood; the affirmation of those instinctual constructs which constitute an organic body, itself part of a natural law relying, almost entirely, upon the unseen, upon those natural and inevitable ‘natural laws’ which define our Struggle. We must, in any event, ‘do good and avoid evil’ which tolerates no compromise in this Life or Death struggle.

The preceding considerations, questions, analogies, propositions, and possibilities have been presented in the hope that the people of the West, including this America, will realize, and become aware of this rising, this ascendancy of Culture over that of civilization, the macrocosm of the institutionalized common man. For, in all reality, this rising has happened already. The waking ascendancy of real politics, its essence, is manifest in our daily happenings, in our hustle and bustle, these little, but so essential, human elements, of our very lives. This is the same essence of ages past. It is the essence of need, desire, and will-to-power of all citizens of humanity – it is organic – its Life animates in all our outward forms; it ignites our imagination and stirs deep waters in the memories of our past. It belongs to struggle, that which all organisms are formed in the crucible of contest and survival. This essence will be, is being marked, by the very struggle between the race-cultures of the World. It truly has brought the compulsion to great politics.

Politics is the great technic of Nature. Nature divides the mediocre from those with merit; from those that are skilled and unskilled. It establishes supremacy of the one, over the other – this can be the individual or institution – this natural law ever is, and will be: the one will survive, and one will die. This is Nature’s Law. Politics is, or should be, the greatest of compulsions to emulate, where possible, the rhythms and currents by which nature seeks ever to instruct and guide. The examples are myriad; as students, in this great experiment, we have the ability to seek instruction through the records of the past; we can receive instruction from the various individuals who have had many years bestowed upon them; and finally we have the instruction of common sense, which we utilize on a daily basis. Nature is a part of us, and if we but listen, and recognize that low soft whisper of intelligent reasoning, we shall see our path, clear, and undeniable.

Nature, herself, is not lineal but, rather, rhythmic, flowing as a tree in the wind, bending with the changes in the continuing evolution of the cycle of life. The presentation of this work is in keeping with this cycle. This concept alludes to times and places; to happenings we see passing in the twinkling of an eye – the lineal lacks the subtle rhythm and continuity of the organic growth inherent in the real world that surrounds us; this, the orderly cycle of nature.

The cycle of birth, life, and senility accompany each and every great civilization, not the least of which has been ours – that great family of Indo-Europeans which founded and, still maintains, the greatest living history and working Culture yet experienced on this planet terra. Modern historians however, over the past seventy-five years, have concerned themselves only with this traditional ‘school room’ variety of lineal history, circumscribing the root cause and effect of actions and events that affect civilizations as it affects the individual. Distortion is the inevitable result of failing to address history as a living, breathing, manifestation of life: Culture itself, becomes ambiguous.

The lineal portrayal of history leaves our vision of the past distorted, ambiguous. These many, and diverse pictures, delivered in sequence, numbered, dated, and clouded by time, leaves us confused; the simple enormity of historical data simply boggles the mind. These clouded perceptions have been handed down to us by well intentioned authors of history but, limited by design and the seemingly chaotic, unpredictable value of chance, have delivered to us only half the product. For the most part, these authors have failed to recreate, for the most part, such events and situations that would take into account the very essence of the Age and Civilization of which they study. With the few exceptions of Spengler, Yockey, Adams, and Gibbons there has been little or no attempts at this recreation of history that would define our Western Culture, that is, the Race, if we say this a million times over, that is the creative force behind all that we know; it is the organism which pumps the blood into the body to continue life. Without this understanding, History, and all its various forms of philosophy, ethics, and the ancient value placed upon the present, and its reporting, would be a dead thing, it becomes, as with all dead sciences, simply a ‘specialization of content’.

Visions and perceptions of our life seen, albeit dimly, have surpassed our wildest imaginations while confounding, at times, our most able scholars. These men search, they study, they become redundant with historical fact, dates, and actions mimicked by those before them. The living organism of the race-culture defies their assaults, precisely because they fail to acknowledge the very nature of organic life: a root, a purpose, a people. Too what do we owe the living reminder of the past – to the monuments, the living literary achievements, the art? This, all this, was left to us by a People. Our People! To the Fathers and Mothers who created us, we, you and I, are but their extension; we represent their lives, their presence, in our own destiny. In the coming and going, each of us tell of that small, yet significant story; the seed for our children. This people have their manifestations of God, of Life, of Religion, and a definite vision of the world – it is our distinctive volksgeist – that was made manifest by, and for the race-culture. This was their creation. It was intended, as a matter of course, to be seen and utilized by their children, their Posterity; it was to prepare and perpetuate their kind in a progressive setting – both in the present and the future. It was to carry on the life cycle of the Original birth. This, a living history that will outlast time itself. The visions of our ancient life survive as history to us – it is the continuation of the present presence of our past. Only through an understanding of Life, and its organic application, can history have any true significance to us who, at this moment, are but the living history of our tomorrow.

This, is Natural Law.

© 2010

_________________
1.A maxim, nevertheless, ascribed to a randomly codified religious construct, defining an arbitrary natural law, such as doing good for the tribe as opposed to damaging it, as the latter would deprive an individual or group of the bounty which, if maintained, would thereby accumulate to those afterwards, and so on. This is “reap what you sow” plagiarism of institutional natural law.
2. Politics – Book I, part I
3. 88 Precepts – David Eden Lane
4. Rise of The West – pg. 88
5. Ibid, pg.88
6. Seven Pillars of Wisdom, T.E. Lawrence, emph.

Advertisements

One thought on “The Foundations of the White Nationalist Struggle: Natural Rights

  1. This is really fascinating, You are an excessively skilled blogger. I’ve joined your rss feed and sit up for in search of extra of your wonderful post. Also, I’ve shared your web site in my social networks!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s