As soon as conflicts break out – especially so when they are military in nature – confrontational narratives develop or harden. Propaganda substitutes discourse and each side demands a stalwart stance, not mediation. All too often, people are confused with their respective governments and the necessary distance to the responsible executives and legislatures are lost. Due to the current demographic situation, the European peoples – whether Romance, Germanic, Slavic, etc. cannot afford to bleed themselves out through quarrels that escalate into military conflicts. War and mass immigration are both already life-threatening for Europe and Western culture in general. However, simultaneously, they are tantamount to an apocalyptic catastrophe. One problem is that every outbreak of war is usually followed by a war of position and undiplomatic alliance politics, where there would be a paramount need for mediators.
Side-by-Side in Juxtaposition, Rather Than Confrontation
Of course, there are sometimes very different historical traditions and alliances between European nations, which can potentially provoke emotional reactions between nationalists, especially if there are still tangible interests based on these connections (for example, in the economic field). However, at present, there is no government in Europe that is supported by a genuine ethnic nationalist consciousness that is entrusted with the representation of interests, which is why they, at best, only concern themselves below the main interests of nationalists – in other words, the preservation of indigenous European peoples are to be pursued. Furthermore, from one point of view, it could be advantageous for us nationalists to NOT be become involved in government work, for this makes it easier to distance ourselves from government actions. Such distancing from the government is imperative when the two aforementioned main evils of foreign infiltration and warmongering foreign policies dominate the political agenda. Anybody who agrees that a single nation alone will NOT be able to sustain itself in the long term on the continent should logically conclude that nationalism must be a side-by-side in juxtaposition, rather than a confrontation that weakens in the face of the chaos of the modern world.
The Focus on Conflict Resolution
Far too often in history, European brethren nations have been at each others‘ throats, each time resulting in generations of resentment. In most cases, it was neighbouring nations who suffered as a result. Due to that resentment, confrontational narratives became entrenched, which left potential synergy opportunities abandoned, because people did not look constructively forward but revanchistically backward. This does not mean that looking back could not be instructive, but European nationalists argue far too much about reviving past animosities in order to address issues of war guilt instead of devoting themselves to the study of how wars were ended or ended successfully. In other words, which negotiation strategies and which immediate post-war treaties in history caused new problems or instead offered opportunities for future-oriented mutual understanding. The demographic decline of Europe in its indigenous composition requires nationalists in particular to define European cultural heritage as a protective space for nation-state loyalty. In such an overall view, this is not only to examine undesirable developments from history solely in terms of shifting blame onto others, but rather to focus on examples of successful conflict resolution.
Uncovering Self-Fulfilling Prophecies
What is required is the intellectual discipline to examine the scenario of war from the perspective of its end, whereby one will possibly discover that from a nationalist and identitarian point of view, there was never a real winner. We must uncover disastrous automatisms in the course of self-fulfilling prophecies (for example, the so-called Thucydides Trap*) along ossified political doctrines that have perhaps long been in need of reform. History confronts us with challenges that we will not be able to overcome as long as our nations allow themselves to be conditioned to clashes of interests of secondary importance, whether these clashes have been caused by internal or external factors. The current situation poses two crucial questions of principle – firstly, how can Europe maintain its thriving level of self-determination and influence in the midst of hegemonic competition, while at the same time minimising division without becoming too centralised? Secondly, how can we deal with indigenous minorities within Europe – especially in border regions – without letting historical burdens dictate our actions, but rather keeping the future prosperity of our European brother nations in mind as a priority?
Peace Research & Peace Concepts
Unilateralism, bloc confrontation and Cold War mentality – all of which characterise the current situation not just in Europe, but the whole world – are the most unfavourable of framework conditions for successfully meeting the aforementioned challenges. Binary patterns of thought fuel an atmosphere of polarisation that even makes war socially acceptable again, although even the United Nations Charter describes, first and foremost, a requirement for peace, and only then a prohibition of war – the obligation to resolve existing conflicts peacefully, as well as the prevention of future wars. Our European peoples cannot afford to let their current generations bleed to death in civil war-like scenarios triggered by a number of different factors – mass immigration, racial unrest, religious struggles, the meat grinders of fratricidal conflicts, etc. Without indigenous Europeans on this continent, the question of nation-state sovereignty no longer plays any role. The ideological task of Europe’s ethnic nationalists today is to conduct historical peace research and develop political peace concepts. The historians within our ranks in particular may the ones who will begin such research into historical peace initiatives.
With this article, I want to initiate awareness and discussion about everything that has been covered above, and I also recommend Europa Terra Nostra as a suitable platform for this task.
*Thucydides Trap
This refers to a high expectation of military conflict when an emerging power threatens to displace an existing great power as a regional or international hegemon. The eponymous Greek historian, Thucydides, described this constellation using the examples of his time, according to which „the rise of Athens and the fear it instilled in Sparta made war inevitable.“
Sascha Rossmüller
ETN Vice-Chairman (Germany)
t.me/rossmueller (German)
t.me/rossmueller_dissident (English)
gab.com/SaschaRossmueller (Mostly English)
gettr.com/user/sascharossmueller (German & English)
Twitter: Rossmueller1972 (German & English)
