Here we lay the foundations of a transitional society following a successful national-naturalist revolution, half-way between today and tomorrow. An elite fully aware of the natural laws discovered these past decades, regarding diet, love and the imperative of racial purification will set out to fundamentally change the fabric of society, gradually applying for the masses what its members tested on themselves.
This is the manifesto of the future national‑naturalist party.
We are revisionist or holocaust-denier and Hitler did nothing wrong, at least regards to
allegued mass-atrocities. As Hitler said:
The most precious possession you have in this world is your own people. And for this people, and for the sake of this people, we will struggle and fight
… The state is only a means to an end. Its end and its purpose is to preserve and promote a community of human beings who are physically as well as spiritually kindred. Above all, it must preserve the existence of the race.
Our nation is our race, the Nordic race, the apex of the evolution of the human form, spirituality and biologically, and by birth rate caretaker of the Earth. The role of the National-naturalist State is to dedicate the resource of its people to this people’s mental, physical and spiritual improvement, enabling the highest achievements in all areas of both science and culture. We embrace also the ideas of Teilhard de Chardin, the three-pronged socio-political approach to superhumanity:
From this there follows, as a first priority, a fundamental concern to ensure (by correct nutrition, by education, and by selection) an ever more advanced eugenics of the human zoological type on the surface of the earth. At the same time, however, and even more markedly, there must be an ever more intense effort directed towards discovery and vision, animated by the hope of our gradually, as one man, putting our hands on the deep-seated forces (physico-chemical, biological and psychic) which provide the impetus of evolution….There is no future for man, I repeat, without the neo-sense of the species.
We know the secrets to the ultimate revolution in the three areas of alimentation, education and eugenics all alike. The ultimate revolution in diet is
the return to the natural laws of alimentation, the return to raw food chosen by gustatory and smell instincts which has shown nearly all diseases save for clearly identified genetic diseases, anihilated. The ultimate revolution in education, which
will center around the free fulfillment of our natural erotic drive, to unlock the untapped well of intelligence and
extrasensory abilities laying dormant in our race.
The general revolution in eugenics de Chardin wished for1 can becomenow be a reality as the
laws of heredity and the true story of the
origin of our race as well what human beings have been revealed.
We refer to nationalism because an immense concentration of power and resource that only a well organized state could carry out, will be necessary to achieve those goals.
Only within a totalitarian collectivist society will the full might of our people be harnessed, in effect a form of total communism on the basis of erotic love, racism and deep ecology instead of parasite Jewish marxism.
We refer to naturalism, because our principles derive from science and experience and not on any particular tradition. We ask for a type of science free from prejudices, going beyond the materialistic and moralistic postulations modern academia is ridden with, in order to accept naked objective facts. A science that doesn’t bend its perception of nature in service of a preconceived morality or ideology, but one that creates ideology and morale straight from facts, in service of nature2.
The Nature we refer to is revealed through personal experiences along with an impartial, amoral observation of our closest primate cousins, to understand how human life should be and what might be wrong with us all, why it all went down the drain and how to fix the world. We wish to renovate national-socialism on the basis of primatology and a restoration of our original diet and paleolithic way of life, while keeping the part of modernity while ensuring military and industrial supremacy.
Before the end of this century, possibly before 2050, the natural resources of the world will be fully depleted while the global population (compounded by its industrial progress) will reach an absolute peak, and world wars most likely involving nuclear weapons will occur pitting all countries against all others, around racial and religious lines. We are now around eight billion people with no foreseeable (voluntary) slowing down, and considering the White race (in particular Nordics) is the only one even remotely interested in ecology and sustainable development without taking extreme measures, Europeans will die out and then the whole of humanity not long after.Mondial population throughout history
In a hundred years from now if not before, everything we grew to love: The great majority of wild animals, insects, plants, forests, will be no more, leaving a scarred planet as humans set into motion the biggest extinction event since that of the dinosaurs. Humanity in its current form is a plague on our planet. Non-white countries which gained access to the product of Western technology such as China, India and the Middle-East, while at the same time lacking our most basic ecological tendencies. They are all racial, ecological and ideological enemies of the first order.
I hate nationalism and its apparent regressions to the past. But I am very interested in the primacy it returns to the collective. Could a passion for ‘the race’ represent a first draft of the Spirit of the Earth? It is to this last one… that I have always given my faith.
We realize that ecology (universal interest) and national interest, when it comes to the superior races endowed with consciousness, is one and the same. The destiny of Life itself on the planet and that of our race are united. Their indefinite survivals in the future depend on each other’s.
The primary imperative of the State is to acquire absolute power on the geopolitic level in the long run to safeguard our survival at all cost. Any action: trade, temporary alliance and wars will be taken as we see fit. All resources must be spent on increasing national power and eliminate dangers.
In particular polluters like China Brazil and India, main responsible for unimaginable suffering and destruction, by the end of this century, should be exterminated, lest life as we know it ceases to be on this planet. The stronger we get on all levels (industrially, militarily, scientifically) the more leverage we have to enact its goals. Depending on the case and the forecast repercussions, countries will be convinced, bribed or subjugated by force to stop their ecological rampage.
But such wars should only be wagged in the moment when all others solutions have been attempted, at it will in all likelihood initiate the end times, the world war of unprecedented scale with no end beside the anihilation of the main extent powers. All other solutions must be explored to limit the damage, all ways of persuasion, alliances, bribing or economic warfare.
Only when the fate of the planet will be judged risking more by letting the status quo continue, than by risking a full-on war, must hostilities be initiated or encouraged.
But in all of this, it is our spiritual powers that will win all conflicts. Perceiving the future on whatever level, when it comes to war, is the ultimate weapon to end all wars. Predicting the location of the enemy’s moves and hidden nuclear launching pads might can limit collateral damages to the environment and good people to a minimal. That is why even on a practical level nothing matters more to avoid a second WW2 Axis debacle, than to resurrect the natural state in love.
The future national-socialist State will have an immense educational role in getting rid of centuries to millennia old thinking habits. The powers of the mind arise from the free expression of our love instincts under a balanced dietary system which the Neolithic catastrophe disrupted, with cooking then cereals.
Even then changing the minds without changing diet first is only selectively possible with adults: only children can be educated perfectly from a tender age. But metapsychoanalysis and visions witih cooked food is low-key impossible. Therefore the absolute most urgent inner political task is to revolutionize agricultural practices for everyone and start the mass production of genetically compatible raw food. It will undoubtedly reveal to be the most difficult taks ever eneavored in history, the most difficult social experiment on the widest scale ever attempted too.
Thus the State must take the form of a totalitarian empire ruled by an elite.
History proved that questioning cooked food is for most people the most difficult thing to do,
even when facing the certitude of death. That is why only the most collectivistic society can hope to succeed here.
We need an elite of men and women discarding their personal freedom for the glory of responsability, with the mental fortitude to share everything, their
bodies and
minds. Compulsory education, military training and tightly controlled sexuality will bring these individuals to the summit of human creativity, willpower and efficiency. Completely dedicated to the State, the Führer and our goals in recreating paradise on Earth by all means necessary, they will rule over the populations of the Empire.
In all likelihood the global popular acceptance Adolph Hitler and other inspired leaders have enjoyed will not come to pass: we consider a certainty, that when the time comes for the White race to rise once again, the current global political and economical status quo will be long gone already. The current world order, will have fallen, be it due to wars or food crisis due to population pressure.
As much as possible new members of the elite will be taken from the most promising children of said populations - also depending on available ressource, and taken as early as practically possible and be given a complete education
under natural laws. It is a fact that a people only as much change as it perceives the strength of its rulers, and can taste the advantage their iron fist provide. Ergo the bigger the elite, the highest the authority it can effectively project on the population, and so the fastest it can grow by enrolling both adults and children, accelerating the entire people’s conversion to the new society.
The Imperium must strive to push its borders further continuously for geopolitical and economical reasons (accessing resources, securing areas, putting a halt on environmental catastrophes) but only so much resource can be used in actively converting the populations, some racially better than others, or more immediately amenable to change. It entails that the Empire will consist in various territories of various rights proportional to their involvement and state of dietary first then psychosexual or cultural transformation.
In effect, our ideal society which the elite will emulate on small scale to then extend to every Nordic population through an accelerated integration of its children, will be a form of communism based not Jewish marxism but on the eugenic principle and the natural laws of love and diet.
The natural laws of human behaviors we mentioned are described in details in other articles, but can be easily deduced from an objective observation of the animal world:
Homosexual behavior has been observed in at least 51 species of nonhuman primates, including prosimians, monkeys, and apes. In many nonhuman primate species homosexual behavior occurs quite rarely whereas in an exceptional few such as Japanese macaques and bonobos, such interactions are a more common feature of the species’ sexual repertoire.
Studies showed both bonobos and chimpanzees to be mostly homosexual and pedophilic, prefering intimacy with older or younger individuals - often prepubescent juveniles - and devoting compared to us only a fraction of their time to reproductive activities. Incest has been observed among chimpanzees, proving that at minima, while not necessarily pursuing it,
they do not mind it. They and primitive cultures show our true instincts, to which we shall return.
In a sane world, the notion of consent would not exist. Being too self-evident to warrant a mention, as even dumb cats have no difficulty telling you if they want or don’t want to be caressed. It is not a matter of IQ or intelligence. Instincts exist to be expressed, and children of all ages have them, though obviously not necessarily those of grown-ups, as needs and abilities evolve with age. We are genetically wired to function harmoniously in groups, under raw food.
Infantilizing children leads to their intellectual underdevelopment and under-maturation, while empowering clearly under-developed adults and giving them the right to vote for policies and leaders is equally as dangerous as neglecting our youth. What should be done instead is to promote a meritocratic system, in which social privileges are earned according to intellectual prowess and social reputation.
We believe anyone who can be trusted to safely bear guns and understand the implications of life and death should have the right to have sex with anyone of their choosing. Those who can kill (and be asked to die) can fuck !
This means the socially approved age of independent choice would vary with social conditions, and hard times (like today’s Ukrainian war or all civil wars) create stronger people, lacking the luxury of pampering and spoiling their kids.
Experience shows how children quickly adapt to any life-or-death situation they’re put in, as struggle is simply our natural state as it is in animals: death is part of life and should never be hidden from sight, made clean as it is today.
Though we resent sadistic acts and excess violence as unsavory and contrary to our instincts, naturally gruesome acts like rotting corpses, explicit gore and skeletons are not traumatizing in the slightest. Children can understand death sooner than 14, probably from age 7. For practical purposes I expect European people to set the Age of Consent at 14. But relationships below that age should not always be criminalized: lack of legal consent would only transfer that right to parents or whoever the legal caretaker is.
Children are de facto the legal property of their parents, on which their very survival depends. They naturally bear (especially mothers) a right of life and death on them. This is a natural fact society can only mask, cowardly transferring that responsibility to a blind democratic mass or worse the heartless decision of unaccountable, equally anonymous bureaucrats, neither having any first-hand insight into the situation of the child and therefore the means to enact a fair judgment respectful of the greater good of all involved.
Without parents or children themselves complaining nor the public knowledge of physical coercion (or abusive parenting) taking place (in which special courts of law would intervene), the State should not need to legislate on what parents ought to do or accept.
National-naturalism considers it more important to rescue our complete physical, emotional and mental capacities, than economics, which is mostly a technical issue Nazi Germany handled as secondary compared to the ideological and racial strife, and is comparatively easy to solve.
Successful economies in history have always been mixed, even the highest merchant republic - if they were to thrive - would regulate business and manufactures heavily, to assure social harmony and the interest of the State, to secure the conditions for durable, sustainable economic growth. They understood very well that lasting gains require honesty and trust. A good capitalist can not be purely materialist or obsessed by money, as it would be the best way to lose it all.
The level of collectivism, be it centrally directed or down to various levels of local community has changed from period to period for a single country, or between cultures. Inspired countries have practiced all these and fare quite well3. The range of possible pro-genetic economic models are large, almost all-encompassing. Because the human factor, charisma, is paramount. This, plus some basic common sense ensured the success of all good regimes throughout time.
The
three main problems with soviet economy
were:
The brewing of individualism in people, progressively unwilling to work for a system rewarding them with neither human dignity or a significant purchasing power, nor even often basic necessities.
The overcentralization of planification, with no regard for communities or individuals, inducing a stiffling rigidity and no organic liaison with the local level.
The absence of respect for personality, due to the communist emphasis on egalitarianism.
The more complex and bureaucratic an institution the less efficient it is. But much of this complication came from an overarching central command, making no organizational sense. Administration should be decentralized as much as possible, instead of reflecting global social distrust and the compulsive need of a paranoid State to control its people.
But the innermost driving force of this historical failure was Soviet’s historical materialism. It’s Marxism or Judaism. No soul could be thought to exist hence no aspiration could be born from it, accelerating the rise of individualism or nihilism. As the cement to a lasting connection to a greater community is true love, notoriously absent from communist thought4.
The new world order should be based on nature, and everyone would integrate in it like bees as in a country-sized beehive. Which is not to say that the usual freedom of circulation, purchase and expression would disappear as in Stalinist regimes: a State whose public sector fails to provide all the goods expected from consummers, let alone cater for spiritual needs, should not attempt to substitute itself to the private sector lest people grow resentful, degenerate and beliefs in the ideals die. If communism demonstrated that socializing the means of production fails when enthusiasm lacks and the leadership has no soul, on the other hand National-socialism discovered that a sound people possessed by a true idea and unfettered by past ideologies, will naturally find a working balance between collectivism and liberalism fitting the circumstances and availability of resource. A people loving their Führer and trusting in the future, will work with morality and reflect this in its laws, whether as public servants, serfs, factory workers or industry tycoons5.
But command economies still suffer from this problem of people’s changing needs and wishes. It is true that predicting them, especially in the long term, has proved a daunting task at the very least, as individual desires seem intrinsically fickle. The reason behind this constant need for innovation and novelties, lies mostly behind an inner spiritual and erotic dissatisfaction. True spiritual nourishment increases social and cultural stability, leading not to stagnation but to equilibrium, a slow pace of change reflecting the real mutual adaptation of people and their environment throughout a time span of up to tens of millennia instead of being dictated by a neurotic psyche6. Social habits and needs should stem from blood. Socialization of people, and their gradual rise in intelligence and spiritual affinity will establish an uniformity of material culture, simplifying predictions and planification considerably.
Experience proved even in Germany the danger of concurrence as an organizing principle, especially in war times.
Yet war, physical or ideological, is the only state the national-naturalist State will ever now for the longest time, until its purpose - to conquiere the world and save it from subhumanity - has been achieved.
The most intuitive behavior for a tightly knit community, is to share strengths, instead of hoarding resources and information and backstab one another at the first occasion. We are not interested in an ethnostate united only against outsiders, but divided among ourselves. This is the Israeli model, not ours.
Primitive societies alike share everything within family groups or clans, and engage in barter with other tribes depending on affinities and extended family ties. Later on money appeared, and with it the possibility (or rather, the increased ease) of speculation, profiting. This, gaining more than you offered in exchange, is the root of evil in the capitalist system. Trade without speculation is possible, but still relates to a state of mind irreconcilable with loving your competitors, whose prosperity directly undermines yours. Competition, when associated with material gains, leads to resentment and is thus immoral7.
As Sturgeon said:
I told him, all the same, he could get a lot higher prices for the little he did trade. He just laughed a little and shook his head. You have to pay for what you get or it’s no good. If you Trade well, as you call it, you finish with more than you started with; you didn’t pay. That’s as unnatural as energy levels going from lesser to greater, it’s contrary to ecology and entropy. Then he said, You don’t understand that. I didn’t and I don’t.
Within a family, socialism is the most natural model. Our State is the racial family, hence citizens should collaborate, to meet a given production volume/quality. This was incidentally the principle of medieval corporations: competition had a place though, but a competition over quality, emulation in its most beautiful form: the collective interest of the workers (including the apprentices) and the very difficulty of becoming a master function testified of their skills. Far from a free for all, thanks to an enormous wealth stored collectively institutions ensured a decent living for a decent work, as a well as a mandatory wellfare system before nation-states existed.
On the other hand the unregulated pursuit of one’s own selfish interest brought about to the general dumbing down of products in the back of consumers, the eternal incentive to skim a few bucks on security measures and workers’ legitimate income, programmed obsolescence.
The only way to once again promote durable products lasting centuries, using costly materials and fair working conditions, is heavy State intervention, directly or in a manner delegated to authorities, the self-government of trusted craftsmen and craftswomen, working hands in hands with the central authority. Such social bodies would educate producers and subsidize their investment in better materials and machines. They would provide both the human and financiary capital, to elevate producers to the level of contributing himself to said body, through dues and his accumulated experiences.
Public supervision of all the production process and absence of real competition will lower prices without the fear for unforeseen and capricious economic conjectures threatening producers. Because individual economic actors know very little about all others in free market societies, especially about competitors, under capitalism making predictions and sound investments for the future is a needlessly impossible guesswork, leaving behind many small companies and independent workers behind if not on the street, while the control of production will allow for efficient long-term allocation of resources (both human and material).
The patent system is the most perfect and worst example of the capitalistic mindset. Inventions and methods hoarded for profit and out of distrust for each other, instead of freely shared in order for all to learn the lessons of each other’s efforts ! The aptest analogy in biology would be cancerous cells characterized by their theft of common resources and refusal to communicate normally with others.
The invisible hand of the market would naturally cause unknowing consumers to seek the cheapest products, all too eager to rationalize their choice, while producers will seek to make the most of the smallest investment, at the price of quality. Creating a pressure on all producers toward lowering the norm save for losing its market share, and quickly consumers can not find good products anymore. Hence for an accelerated uniformization of food quality and degree of ecological compliance the State needs in all matters of production norms5.
Free markets also suppose that buyers make rational choices and information on the market be freely available. This couldn’t be further from the truth. Sellers do not want to spill the beans on their dirty secrets, nor divulgate commercial or industrial secrets to their competitors. It also supposes buyers can understand the finer technical qualities and inner working of their products, instead they only know grossly what it is supposed, based on advertizement. Yet this expert knowledge would be necessary to impact the market’s future evolution in a sense aligned with producers’ interests. Many technical markets such as computers or programming languages, would have followed very different paths in their international standards or industrial deployment norms. In order to cause the adoption of sound standards and architectures benefit everyone and future growth, under current conditions millions of consumers would have to become experts to pressure the market in the right direction.
With erotic energy, we discover material necessity and hardships are not the only drives impulsing creativity and hard work, nor the best. Such a belief demonstrates a fundamental materialistic misconception. Absence of information is never an enticement to innovate, on the contrary it leads to trying the same obvious dead-ends again and again.
Hence Information and all sorts of digital property should always be free and open.Good ol’ tireless landa !
The need to revolutionize the food production sector provides a solution to the inflated tertiary sector and consumer culture, by conveniently shifting a large part of the workforce to the primary sector. This should suffice to absorb more than the majority of the population workforce for the first generations, even motivating further demographic growth. Along with military defense (as well as energy production for strategic purpose), putting most people back to growing whole forests to revitalize agricultural lands might very well become the main occupation and source of wealth creation.
The end of programmed obsolescence shall bring back high-quality utilities and equipment, such as cars lasting 50 years and being easy to repair.
The adoption of cultivation of cereals has lowered our intelligence: modern agriculture only amplified this trend. A single man plowing a desolate field with his tractor to produce a monoculture crop, itself used to make degenerate processed foods to feed the equally degenerate masses, eroding the overall genetic quality of humanity generation by generation.
Human nutrition must be varied and free from processing as the one of our ape cousins, and the only type of cultivation that aligns with our nutritional needs would be an agriculture that isn’t based on plowing the fields to sow soil eroding monocrops, but a type of agriculture based on the cultivation of foods that we are adapted to eating,
such as various fruit trees and vegetables instead of legumes.
It will also foster a culture of self-sufficiency and local resilience (a strategic value of paramount importance in case of war or any situation of stretching resource). Each family will partake in the growing of victory gardens like those from WW2 as a social duty, except on a much bigger scale.
Quickly enough, these robust products will cause markets to dwindle so that a green capitalism based on perpetual growth doesn’t make any sense in the end: the only model or philosophy matching a modern but non-consumerist society at equilibrium (past the transition period) is essentially a command economy wherein main social investment not conducive to profits (or which no company of sane size could tackle anyways) are decided beforehand, while small details are sorted out on an as-needed basis, locally.
The industrial production sector itself needs revitalization. The fact much of it was outsourced to the third world is to play a positive role, giving us the opportunity to practically start anew.
We will build a thoroughly planned-out structure for our national industries in which we will incentivize those needs considered crucial for national security and social well-being, such as various tools needed for craftsmen, computational power, mechanization and automation, necessary consumer items, and most importantly the defense sector which should be the driving force behind the entire society.
Until now devaluations and inflation have been devised centrally (be it in the US, UK, or Brussels) to please capitalist interests of share-holders and bankers and ensure their continuous profiteering at the detriment of workers. We promote the opposite, the adoption of the National-Socialist financial system and money based on the work of a high-trust productive society. The more trust in one’s own intelligence and skills, the more luxury a Völk can allow itself, confidence in its capacity to compensate with more work or more production later on.
The unavoidable isolation of a renewed racist ethno-State, will find its solution in the formation of separate economic zones on the basis of barter and bilateral recognition of economic needs and values of national goods, between like-minded countries of similar lifestyle and capacities. As a good explanation of these mechanisms, we defer to an excellent book8.
Germany could regulate volume and value of money - corresponding fairly accurately to our heart changing on the fly the amount of blood (with water) and its concentration in diverse nutrients - until the people had been socialized and its lifestyle streamlined, simplified enough, to permit the direct control of more and more of the economy by local authorities, with people ultimately concentrated in garden-cities or otherwise self-sufficient self-sustaining units in harmony with their environment, while maintaining an adequately high level of technology, up to every community’s liking. This type of national autarky will lead to much humbler individual needs and desires, as we get much more conscious of our actions and habits.
From the 1880s to the 1920s, the debate had been raging as to the place of technology or technological progress (which back then were assimilated mostly to industrialization), in a racially and culturally sound people. Left and right leaning groups argued, the Romanticism Left and Völkisch Right appealing to nature or tradition more or less interchangeably (a conundrum we touched upon, interchangeably, scientific materialist (marxists and socialists at large) considering industries and science as the symptom and sine qua non condition for social progress, against an old traditional society made inevitably unjust by its backwardness, while fascists of the Italian kind worshiped progress as a
new vista of opportunities for human passions.
Several questions stand as obvious for any movement boasting of the least ecological leaning:
What sort of industrialization should be pursued ?
How to balance its requirement with the perhaps unavoidable pollution issues ?
Similarly, what kinds of energy sources ? We on the other hand, knowing about the very origin of civilizations,
auto-domestication and the calamity it brought about, take these questions to a whole new level of potency and implication.
We need science to repair the Earth on a global scale, and apply geoengineering on a massive scale. What hope is there to live in space, or bring life to other planets if we can’t improve our own? Science and techniques will need a new different turn in their developments, under the State’s direction.
But avoiding the dependency on technology on an individual level is crucial to liberate our potential, a concern figuring heavily in
how we conceive education. Without the need to improve upon pain of death, nothing will change. Artificial hardships must come back, forcing anyone regardless of age, to summon the strengths they possess deep inside. We must imagine a life in which whenever speed is not paramount (in military or strategic endeavors typically), power and high material power is earned through efforts, and devices made to prop up the natural strengths of the human body. As per the Butlerian Jihad, the human mind must not deteriorate through reliance on intelligent machines, also known as computers.
There’s a lesson in that, too. What do such machines really do? They increase the number of things we can do without thinking. Things we do without thinking — there’s the real danger. Look at how long you walked across this desert without thinking about your face mask.
You could have warned me!
And increased your dependency.
Frank Herbert in God-Emperor of Dune
Computers should amplify the mind, but using them to reduce efforts and stop working already led to complacency and feeble-mindedness. It applies to material technology too: for tasks not conducive to progress in their scope (such as individuals fetching fruits in the tree), to introduce high technology in them is disruptive and degenerative. We shall keep technology on as much as it expands the individual mind: no more clutch, no more mental calculation spared to the average folk, no more easy life.
A key notion, is that modern comfort as we usually mean it, has nothing to do with pleasantness. Having to run between two points, eventually taking a bit more time, does not degrade the quality of life but enhance it tremendously. In a great many number of cases, modern societies have become less economically speaking in fulfilling the same or equivalent tasks: social inertia has made those tasks a lot more complicated, and robust, smart (relatively) low-tech solutions to old problems. Nearly all problems societies know, have been around for a very long time already indeed, and needs have been met with for equally as long, as soon as possible. Otherwise, solutions evolve slowly.
On the contrary, new sudden problems seemingly requiring technological solutions are nearly always not resulting from social needs but as byproduct, side-effects of technology. The useless consumer society and hyper-industrialization have created cheap knock-out products of stupidly low quality, it brought us programmed obsolescence, an untold level of pollution absolutely unimaginable for previous generations, the near total loss of the whole Amazonian forest, and a bit closer to us, frequent traffic jams which see ever more powerful cars actually being slower than velocycles. While making everyone sick.
We need adequate levels of technology to meet needs, and first and foremost address the social root of each issue by changing habits: less material needs (or less technological ways to go about them) make for less work, liberating (whenever the estimated all-around trade-off is a net positive) productive power for more important tasks. Our cavemen ancestors had few needs but extreme comfort, pleasure and fulfilling lives.
As we strayed away from nature, we created all the problems and neuroticism successive social institutional and cultural innovations respectively try to solve or were engendered by. Hence, technology, albeit unnatural as far as the normal process of evolution is concerned as it is (arguably) is not evil nor bad per se, it is the consequence of the biblical
Fall, and will be required to recreate the Eden Earth used to be. The most pressing step toward that, being getting total unsurpassed military power to neutralize the enemies of our race and the planet as a whole.
Then we will be free to live as pleases our inborn sense of aesthetics, either in spaceships, caverns or trees, or trees in spaceships.
In the meanwhile, some
precise guidelines
can be issued:
We must achieve fully circular economies,
Reliance on non-renewable (fossil or otherwise) energy by definition are not sustainable, especially if the resource hasn’t been fully appropriated.
All waste must be reintegrated.
Industrial waste must be processed to remove toxicity and provide either energy to be used locally, raw materials to other activities, or become safe enough to be given back to the soil, feeding plants and animals. For this reason nuclear energy needs to be curtailed until nuclear waste has found a lasting solution not requiring constant human surveillance.
But most importantly the moral and economical issue with nuclear power is the very high technicity involved, that is not efficient: the lower the tech level, the long infrastructures last, Roman roads and aqueducts and medieval houses being prime instances. Complex things, tend to break down faster, are subject to entropy: nature goes from higher to lower energy levels, it applies to human energy and institutions as well. Heavier, sturdier materials, however expensive to build, create old material cultures putting to shame anything modern aiming at doing similar things.
We should build in stones, create new pyramids of earth brick composite carbon and stainless materials for the millennia to come, invent mechanisms still functioning after centuries of non-maintenance. Houses warming or cooling using natural energies and isolation, mass heat storage, solid foundations still worthy of inhabiting when all the people who built it and their descendants will be long dead.
We must develop human (or animal) power using modern materials, and when not possible (or unpractical) seek to do away with any construction. We must learn to limit technology to the barest minimum compatible with a pleasant daily life, and learn to rely once again on human powers - one oneself and each other.
…
the free play of the forces which, through reciprocal education, will produce a higher type, until finally the best portion of mankind will possess the earth and will be free to work in spheres which lie not only within, but without th limits of that earth. We all feel that in the distant future man may be faced with problems which can be solved only by a superior race of human beings, which is master over all the other peoples and has at its disposal the means and resources of the whole world.
Hitler in Mein Kampf
Lovecraft’s bestiary is full of such species which while highly intelligent or hyper-intelligent (encompassing the whole of human knowledge in a few weeks or less), do not rely on a tech level one would think fitting for such minds. Because they usually do not have to, save for the limited occasions of fighting with equally advanced races, in those cases fusion drives, directed-energy particle beams or mass destruction are par for the course. In stories, this peculiar situation often makes their home base overall fairly primitive (though highly practical and durable) for human eyes. I am not saying Neanderthals had a science akin to ours. But they did not have to face Star-Spawns either. And the lifespan of sapient humanity is fairly short compared to geological timescales, an unnoticeable instant.
Trevize said, Listen to me again. Just outside the Galaxy are the Magellanic Clouds, where no human ship has ever penetrated. Beyond that are other small galaxies, and not very far away is the giant Andromeda Galaxy, larger than our own. Beyond that are galaxies by the billions. Hyperspatially, the Galaxy is a point—and so is all the Universe. We have not visited any other galaxy, and, as far as we know, no intelligent species from another galaxy has ever visited us—but that state of affairs may end someday. And if the invaders come, they are bound to find ways of turning some human beings against other human beings. We have so long had only ourselves to fight that we are used to such internecine quarrels. An invader that finds us divided against ourselves will dominate us all, or destroy us all. The only true defense is to produce Galaxia, which cannot be turned against itself and which can meet invaders with maximum power. Bliss said, The picture you paint is a frightening one. Will we have time to form Galaxia? Trevize looked up, as though to penetrate the thick layer of moonrock that separated him from the surface and from space; as though to force himself to see those far distant galaxies, moving slowly through unimaginable vistas of space. He said, In all human history, no other intelligence has impinged on us, to our knowledge. This need only continues a few more centuries, perhaps little more than one ten thousandth of the time civilization has already existed, and we will be safe. After all, and here Trevize felt a sudden twinge of trouble, which he forced himself to disregard, it is not as though we had the enemy already here and among us.
Isaac Asimov in Foundation and Earth
Obvious menaces truly deserving of cosmic dread do not require much stretch of the imagination: asteroids provide plenty, and many could wipe us out like the dinosaurs before, or set back civilization and the collective human history for ten thousands years,
as it probably happened once.. Asteroids do come on a regular basis, maybe not today, nor in ten years, nor a century perhaps, but they do, and did. Derailing or disintegrating them from orbit is actually beyond our current capacity.
Even our ability to detect them, recently appeared more illusory than we thought. Only the entire resource of the species and planet, can have a hope to fight against the unknown, uncaring forces of outer space, or hope to muster the required energies without blowing ourselves up for good in the process.The Andromeda Galaxy
We ignore completely most of the Universe, which is for all intent and purpose infinitely vast and infinitely old beyond our comprehension. What awaits us might be good, or bad, beneficient or malignent, and it does not need sentience to wipe out life on Earth as cosmic impacts nearly did several times.
We need new dreams, a new aspiration, a new age of exploration, which space, the untamed parts of the planet such the bottomless pits of the ocean’s trenches or its yet 95% unexplored immensities, will provide. The world must become this mysterious, infinite place it used to be, uppon which to sharpen the human spirit and push its limits ever further.
Finally, despite the need for a united government and an incredible concentration of human resources, as well as the furthering of science by all means possible, we strongly believe that mystery in life and culture should persist lest life become monotonous and culture degenerates. Just as the pain of loss or risk of bad choices makes the value of trust. We do not want a perfect but bland paradise.
We need new forms of life and outlooks in line with the extended awareness and innate wisdom psychic abilities endow. We must strike a balance between maximum collective efficiency toward national goals, and the freedom needed for individuals to fulfill their own destiny. The only freedom society must destroy is that of undermining nature, human nature or the environment. Cooking and racemixing must disappear from the face of the Earth.
When humanity will be completely free and subhumans (racial as well as ideological) no longer threatening its survival, we will be free to unlock our potential to the fullest and roam the planet. Free to explore life in subterranean cities, out in the Arctic wilderness, on flying zepelins or jovian ring habitats, sheltered from economic concerns thanks to the post-scarcity civilization population control and automation will bring about, in this new Age for Mankind.
We must recognize…the vital importance of a collective quest of discovery and invention no longer inspired solely by a vague delight in knowledge and power, but by the duty and the clearly-defined hope of gaining control (and so making use) of the fundamental driving forces of evolution. And with this, the urgent need for a generalized eugenics (racial no less than individual) directed, beyond all concern with economic or nutritional problems, towards a biological maturing of the human type and of the biosphere.
We are not against traditions nor against them, as they crystallize both people’s unadulterated instincts and degenerate tendencies in any particular century: the correct attitude in this new century, is to conserve the good elements and burn away the rest. ↩︎
On one extreme Venice derived its wealth from international business and private initiatives, while the Inca Empire, on the other hand, relied on agricultural production controlled and directed by central authorities, through governmental agents - deemed of an excellent moral standing and incorruptibility by the Conquistadors, fact worthy of mention - dispatched everywhere. If Gammal Abdel Nasser was an assumed socialist, Pinochet was very liberal, widely successful and inventing his own model of State, minarchism. ↩︎
In Mao’s China, love was outright labeled as bourgeois and Lenin deemed erotic affection a loss of energy that should rather be spent in working. ↩︎
The unavoidable concentration of capital is an historical inevitability apparent in our societies for a century already, effectively eliminating competition in most industry branches beside the most minute and superficial (often artistic) details, while the inner parts get produced by a limited few companies often owned by the same shareholders. In these integrated branches technically speaking the difference between capitalism and socialism all but disappeared: The only question that remains, is what are these fortunes invested for ?: the interest of the community, or the profit of a few ? Workers whose condition never improve, do not care if these fews hail from the entrepreneurial bourgeoisie, or the soviet nomenklatura.
This is Socialism - not such trifles as the private possession of the means of production. Of what importance is that if I range men firmly within a discipline they cannot escape ? Let them then own land or factories as much as they please. Decisive factor is that the State, through the party, is supreme over them, regardless whether they are owners or workers. All that, you see, is unessential. Our Socialism goes far deeper. It does not alter external conditions ; no, it establishes the relation of the individual to the State, the national community. It does this with the help of one party, or perhaps I should say of one order.
I could not help remarking that this seemed a novel and harsh doctrine.
Quite true, Hitler replied, and not everyone was capable of understanding it.
For this reason, he had felt it necessary to popularize his ideas by means of the diagram. Then doubtless he would not approve, I suggested, of the kind of state landlordship, or state ownership of the means of production, the dream of some of the most ardent social and economic workers of the party ? Hitler again registered impatience.
Why bother with such half-measures when I have far more important matters in hand, such as the people themselves ? he exclaimed. The masses always cling to extremes. After all, what is meant by nationalization, by socialization ? What has been changed by the fact that a factory is now owned by the State instead of by a Mr. Smith ? But once directors and employees alike have been subjected to a universal discipline, there will be a new order for which all expressions used hitherto will be quite inadequate.
I replied that I was beginning to understand what new and tremendous perspectives this opened.
The day of individual happiness has passed, instead, we shall feel collective happiness. Can there be any greater happiness than a National meeting in which speakers and audience feel the happiness of sharing ? Only the early Christian communities could have felt it with equal intensity. They, too, sacrificed their personal happiness for the higher happiness of the community. If we feel and experience this great era thus, Hitler concluded, then we shall not be disturbed by details and individual failures. We shall know then that every road leads us forward, no matter how much it seems to go in another direction. And above all, we shall then maintain our passionate desire to revolutionize the world to an extent unparalleled in history. It gives us also a special, secret pleasure to see how the people about us are unaware of what is really happening to them. They gaze fascinated at one or two familiar superficialities, such as possessions and income and rank and other outworn conceptions. As long as these are kept intact, they are quite satisfied. But in the meantime they have entered a new relationship and a powerful social force has caught them up. They themselves are changed. What are ownership and income to that? Why do we need trouble to socialize banks and factories ? We socialize human beings.
I concede that she
[ - Nature - ]
reaches that state cruelly, at times, and wastefully and all the rest. But she has a way of coming up with the pragmatic solution, the one that works. To build in a pressure which tends to standardize and purify a successful stage, and to call in the exogene, the infusion of fresh blood, only once in several generations—that seems to me most reasonable.
More so, Charli said, than what we’ve always done, when you look at it that way. Every generation a new exogene, the blood keeps churning up, each new organism full of pressures which haven’t had a chance with the environment.
I suppose, said Vorhidin, you could argue that the incest taboo is responsible for the restlessness that pulled mankind out of the caves, but that’s a little too simplistic for me. I’d have preferred a mankind that moved a little more slowly, a little more certainly, and never fell back.
Trade has been thought as such for 1500 years under the guidance of the Catholic Church, though the idea is far older. I just mean this Institution did indeed hold considerable sway on cultural perceptions and not always for the worst, as its weakening led to the advent of materialism and the Industrial Revolution, and an untold suffering and dehumanization on a scale never seen before in Europe. ↩︎
For the men of the Axis, the Universe is too vast and too diverse, the Nation is too small: it is necessary to divide the world into autonomous vital spaces, grouping peoples of the same race, of the same civilization, having complementary productions: and direct their enterprises according to plans periodically established by the public authorities for the improvement of the lot of the greatest number. To establish this, the good public imagines that the boss proceeds in the following way:
He adds up:
The cost of raw materials to be processed
The wages
The consumption of the machines, their wear and tear and the interest on the money they cost him:
The selling expenses: transport. brokerage. discounts.
The general expenses: administration, rents, taxes. insurance etc.
The total gives the cost price. He adds a certain percentage for his personal expenses, his profit and his risks. Then he divides the total by the number of units produced (of shoes, for example). And he writes the quotient on the object indicated. This is the selling price he will ask the buyer. This is how things should reasonably be; and it is quite certain that if this method were always observed, wages would never be compressed and there would be no social or economic crises. Unfortunately, in the system of competition which is the one of the neoliberal economy which governs us, one proceeds exactly in the opposite direction.
The selling price is fixed first by the brokers on the national market, without any intervention of the producers, without any consideration of the cost price, by the simple law of supply and demand. If the buyers are the most numerous, the prices rise and all the elements of the cost price are easily covered. But if the sellers prevail, the producer is obliged to lower his selling prices, and if the fall is accentuated and prolonged, he is obliged to compress the elements of his cost price. Starting from the selling price. He then proceeds, not by addition, but by subtraction.
From the total sum he has received from his customers, he deducts:
The cost of the raw materials he has purchased and whose invoices he cannot change;
The distribution costs: transport, brokerage, distribution costs: transport, brokerage, discounts, etc., over which he has no control,
The interest and amortization of the sums that he has devoted to the purchase of his machines and various installations:
They represent expenses made a long time ago and on which he can no longer return;
The general expenses of the company: general administration The general expenses of the company: general administration, rent, taxes, insurance, which he can only slightly modify. In short, there are only two items that can be easily reduced:
The profits that he allocates to himself or that he shares with his shareholders (it is understandable that he does not willingly resign himself to reducing them, at least as far as he is concerned);
And finally the wages of his workers: he will therefore reduce the price of the hour worked. Then, if this is insufficient, the number of working hours (short-time working). And finally the number of workers employed (total unemployment).
In short, in the so-called liberated economy based on the law of supply and demand, it is the selling price that determines the cost price, whereas in good logic it should be exactly the opposite. Since the New Reich abandoned gold payments
[ - today the reliance on global finance and tacit convertibility in dollars - ]
, it no longer had to take into account price fluctuations on the international markets when setting its domestic prices. It took advantage of this, as we have seen, to quickly raise wages by 20 percent. And since the worker could not (because of rationing) increase his consumption, he used this surplus to pay contributions (compulsory or voluntary) for social insurance, pensions, paid vacations, leisure, sports, etc. Thus was instituted in Germany what could be called the full wage, covering not only the vital needs of the worker but also the performance bonuses and all the risks of work (accidents, illness, old age, unemployment, leisure, etc.). All these charges were incorporated into the wage, which was itself introduced entirely by way of addition into the cost price, which was no longer compressible, since it was removed from international competition because of the abandonment of the rule of gold.
For nine years, the Reichsbank, freed from the metal cover, has been able to increase or reduce the circulation of its banknotes at will: a dangerous privilege which, if left to the arbitrariness of power, could quickly lead to inflation and ruin. But the government of the New Reich has three manometers at its disposal to regulate its action, constantly adjusted by the services of the Conjecture:
The curve of the amount of bills issued by the Reichsbank;
The curve of the wages and salaries (consumption) established each week by the Ministry of Labor, and regularly completed by those of the global incomes of the country;
The curve of the cost of life
If the cost of living increases, it is because the purchasing power of the public exceeds the quantities of the objects produced; by reducing the volume of bills in circulation, the volume of purchases decreases: prices tend to fall and the cost of living also decreases.
If, as a result, the curve falls below the normal level, the Reichsbank increases the circulation of its banknotes; the purchasing power of the masses rises and the cost of living goes up. By a continuous game of trial and error, by a series of incestuous variations in both directions. The Reichsbank can thus adjust (indirectly) the whole of production to the whole of consumption. Thus, empirically, the Reichsmark has been given a constant value and a fixed ratio between wages and prices, which is the first condition for social peace.
Francis Delaisi in La révolution européenne
Despite the decades that passed since these events, this analysis of liberalism hasn’t aged significantly. Purchasing power (directly through wages or indirectly through inflation) massively suffers unfair competition from third-world countries like China. ↩︎
