The Folk-Community
And the Family
The importance of Family cannot be stressed enough in the overview of folk-nationalism, inasmuch as such value has no comparison outside of nature and its immutable laws. This may, at first blush, seem a somewhat outdated or little understood position, and certainly it has been dissected, experimented with, twisted, rearranged, and packaged as ‘family’. The differing aspects of marriage is, as is natural, a developmental item of discourse and study, yet the abiding truth is that family, as a unit, is far and above the detractors spurious attacks. Ironically, a majority of ethnic whites, seem to think that it is acceptable to ‘go along’ with the crowd, to accept the yearly invocations of ‘educated’ persons who exhort the masses to ‘reassess’ the traditional ways of the West as callous, restrictive, racist, myopic and dozens of assorted descriptions which evoke even more suspicion and uncertainty when looking at our accepted mores and common technics.
The role, which has occurred naturally, and for long duration, of Mother, as well as Father, has become the point of numerous debates, arguments, and social experimentation’s. Most verbal debate has resulted in nothing but bad feelings, and polarization between Man and Woman. Social experiments, by mostly ethnically jewish* thinkers, have abounded for at least 50-60 years, starting with “family values” and “education”. We have all seen a transvaluation of values in this country – some like it – The folk-nationalist, does not. It is alien in thought and design, and is most apparently harmful to us and our children. Moreover, the assault by which we, as well as our children are discomfited, has been praised not by the common man and woman, but by the so-called academics, by the clergy (those whose political aspirations are, or have been, shaped by these changes in traditions), and by government sanctioned public education – taking the lead from the common man and woman – that we should “teach our children in the ways they should go,” and have used this maxim to inculcate their own devices. One wonders where the ‘voice of the people’ is, and if heard, not respected in kind. The Family, therefore, has been the target of those attacks, as this essential unit discloses the direction and impetus of the nation-at-large.
Traditionally, the function of Mother and Father was helpmate and teacher; provider and protector respectively. Although these categories tended to overlap at times (e.g., the mother become protector if the father was away or dead and, conversely, the father would become a nurturing father if the mother was unable or dead, so as to fulfill her duties) but usually differences in these responsibilities were quite apparent. This, of course, is natures way, and fulfills the requirements of both individuals: the unity of two becomes one. This, in turn, provided a solid, balanced foundation, by which the children, boys and girls, can identify with. Traditions are extant because, with time, these habits and mores have proven themselves to be functional and has proven to be consistent with the direction of any certain culture or group of people. This instills values and conceptions that are evil or good depending upon the needs of that same people. This, ultimately, defines man and woman in their society. Moreover, in today’s multi-cult of races, gender-norming, and infused misdirection of qualitative certainties, any game is the game of choice, depending upon where one lives, or what group demands the greatest attention.
Today, the masculinity of man and, the femininity of woman has been rearranged so as to confuse all parties involved. Instead of the natural understanding of human nature, man’s natural instinct of adventure, responsibility, defense, and Fatherhood, has been shunned as aggressive, repressive, and insensitive. The woman, on the other hand, has been taught that she needs more; that she must become selfish; that she need not bear children; that she is equal in all respects to a man (such is the communistic interpretation), and can function quite well biologically without a man (e.g., through artificial means, man can be replaced). However, nature and common sense, provides the proof that woman needs man, just as man needs woman. This is the way of the eternal cycle of nature. Any exception, however limited, does not constitute a ‘way-out’ by those that would promote this anti nature imperative. The eternal difference between man and woman is not to be termed a negative opposing another negative: man and woman are simply incommensurable with one another. This simple diversification is what makes each of us, man and woman, interesting and valuable to one another. This defines the spirit of humanity, that which animates the love and loyalty that man and woman bring to any culture that has gained a higher mark in the history of the world.
It is this spirituality, and yes, it is this metaphysical apparatus that decides the path of the family when united into the divisions of man, woman, and child. Without these constants, the future of our race-culture is uncertain: its destruction is assured. Such we see even today.
This issue of ‘family’, as well, parallels the aforementioned aspect of education. The right of the family to teach their young values, of all sorts, is paramount, so long as it does not hamper the race-consciousness of each child. As folk-nationalists, we care not what god’s you worship; we are not a theological body, nor do we admonish you what to teach, rather, we desire free thought for the whole family remembering, as well, that these children must be given that most intrinsic and long-term of lessons: identity.
The folk-nationalist, sees this parental responsibility as a duty we owe our children. The foreign concept of ‘day-care’ has taken the infant child away from the mother and father, and has ‘structured’ that child with interactions and concepts alien to his/her family. Moreover, this has for at least three generations, been forced on the white ethnic child by the government and its assorted ‘agencies’, despite the concern and disaffection it has caused – why should they care after all, they possess the machinery which will force this change, has changed, the ethnic traditions which made us such a distinct and vibrant entity – and if allowed, a mother would respond to the calling of her gender and become the solid rock of that child’s development; in this regard, both man and woman have become selfish. Both want ‘play-time’, time in which to pursue their desires at the expense of their children. Both are to blame; and both must accept full responsibility for the conditions of their children’s behavior under these conditions.
With the prevailing system fully in control of the family through economic, social, and legal avenues, it bas become almost impossible to create the conditions necessary that would enhance the living conditions for all concerned. For this purpose, as well as many others, the folk-nationalist has dedicated himself to a solution. In a ethnic corporate perspective, economic subsidies to families who have two or more children is acceptable, as well as incremental increases, annually, for more than three; subsidies are also mandated for those gifted children who show a greater maturity in scholastic endeavors. This would include ‘work bonuses’ for the Father or, if separated, the Mother of single parent families. The mother, after the last child has graduated school, should receive financial aid to start a business, and would not be penalized if she is already engaged in a ‘family’ business, or to pursue an extended educational program (minimum of three children).
The above Programmes are conditional however, and are predicated on the concept that motherhood be promoted firstly; then personal, academic or professional achievements can then be realized. This does not deny woman opportunities; on the contrary, it elevates woman to that respected level once afforded woman. Man, as well, will also come to realize his duty and paramount responsibility: his Family.
Your duty is to care for your children. The foreign concept of “day-care” has taken the infant child away from the mother and father, and has “structured” that child with interactions and concepts possibly alien to his/her family. If allowed, a mother would respond too the calling of her gender and become the solid rock of that child’s development. But, in this regard, both man and woman have become selfish. Both want “play-time,” time in which to pursue their desires at the expense of their children. Both are too blame; and both must accept full responsibility for the conditions of their children’s behavior under these conditions. The “state” also, is to blame in this regard.
With the prevailing system fully in control of the family through economic, social, and legal avenues, it bas become almost impossible to create the conditions necessary that would enhance the living conditions for all concerned. For this purpose, as well as many others, the folk nationalists have dedicated themselves to find, and project a solution to those who would work hard to help us realize this goal.
We see the lessening of racial instincts throughout the folk-community, and this means the same thing to an individual, as it does to a race, people, nation, national political unit, or an existing race-culture: unfruitfulness, lack of will-to-power (meaning a lack of group identity), lack of ability to believe in or follow great aims, lack of inner discipline, and an overriding desire for a life of ease and pleasure (this, however, is not a negative, but only in extremis).
The symptoms of this racial decadence in various parts of the Western world are manifest for all to see. The sexual disassociation of sensuous love from that of reproduction, as is seen on any magazine stand, attempts to sell one the idea that the total significance of ‘sexual love’ is an end in itself – it becomes only eros without consequences. A true folk-community, sees this human relationship as a more cosmic, yes, spiritual coming together of two grains of sand, not rootless, but conjoined, seeking to reaffirm the continuity of life itself through large families, adequate to the needs of replenishing and extending our folk-community. The folk-community knows that the simple-minded may encourage one, maybe two children within the ethnic nation, looking at these simple lives as mere abstractions and diversions, our mothers waiting until they are far beyond the natural age, having waged their economic battles in the field of competition and selfishness. The large family, however, is derided as too complicated in our day and age, as well as too cumbersome and life-denying for one or both partners.
This is nothing but the instinct of decadence.
The modern dissolution of Marriage (yet another tradition), accompanied by modern divorce laws, the victory of the destruction of life itself, abortion, as a viable choice for the modern busy-body, to that of recreational impulses, and the inability to offer nurture and parental companionship, do we see our chaos of destruction. We all know that this is presented in movies, novels, journalism (oh how the culture distorters love their journalists), and drama to encourage this mechanized erotica for its own sake, not willing to project this as a part and parcel to a normal sexual union which, it must be said, is not seen as prison cage by the folk-community but, rather, the affirmation of complete and unrestricted license between these partners who, unlike no one else, share the private lives of their imagination, each to the other, sensuality not being a constraint, but a positive permission in marriage.
And all of this, Eros, discipline, tradition all, each in turn, for the singular extension of our folk-community – that is, solely and purposefully for the increase in our Western Peoples, not for those committed to the suicide and murder of their ethnic existence, their fellows of blood and bone.
The personal tragedy of separation, of the loss of love, is something that comes with being human, and the final intemperate realization that two people may not remain together is something that we should look at as the last, but inevitable gasp of efforts which could not bear continued fruit, and seek not a quick fix, such as divorce as a first course but, if accepted at all, as that sorrowful death of a healthy organism, and laid to rest, amicably if possible, not trumpeted as any type of victory over tradition, such as we sadly see so much of today.
The Family must remain a major tenet in our world of the future.
It has become increasingly popular for those who pose as folk-nationalists, or who have given up because of what they perceive as an un-viable working programme, to portray the male/female duality as negative, somehow regressing to the point of shrill sycophants of one extreme or the other, parroting individual complaints as if they represented a status quo within the body-politic. The often juvenile perception of faithfulness, or faithlessness of one or the other sex is seen in comic relief as humanity flounders, and intra-personal interactions remain as they were 50,000 generations ago.
In my own personal experience, it is observed that folk-nationalist men, remain much more conservative, as a general rule, when it comes to relationships as would be admitted. The women of the folk-community, as well, are generally more loyal, loving, and accepting of male interest and participation in political affairs, yet it must be admitted that these are two differing applications of the same intent. This does not lessen either party.
It is my observation that there are roughly half of men and women, generally, who favor a traditional relationship, the shades of grey may receive more publicity, but in no wise mitigates the working reality of millions of our sisters and brothers who work hard, every day, to maintain the traditions of our mothers and fathers – let us, then, encourage the other half to do the same.
Reaffirmation and change is the watchword of the day.