Pan-Europeanism vs. Ethnonationalism.
Re: the recent debate at Counter Currents, re: "Grandiose nationalism" (political Pan-Europeanism) vs. "Ethnonationalism" (political petty nationalism), I object to the Manichean mindset that seems always present in "movement" discourse. Things are always black/white, yes/no, A or B (but never C), etc.
Take a German racial nationalist. Should this person have some strictly German ethnic concerns? Yes, of course. Should this person also have concerns on the racial/civilizational level? Yes, as well. Are these two layers of interests, these two sets of concerns, always in conflict? No. In the cases when they are in conflict, is this an insurmountable problem? I do not believe so. Is conflict between the two sets of interests always to be resolved in favor of the same side (whichever that may be)? No, I do not believe that is necessary. When conflicts exist between different narrow European ethnonationalist interests, can compromise win out? I hope that would be so. Is such compromise more likely if the racial nationalists of each European ethny are as much pan-European as they are ethnonationalist? I would think so.
The lower masses may be currently incapable of handling both concepts at the same time, but, on the other hand, let's not sell White intellect short. This is the race that put a man on the moon, after all. With respect to leadership, obviously one would expect the ability to balance both concepts - the broader and narrower interests.
However, given the sordid history of ethnonationalism and fratricidal conflict, one must be very careful not to "feed the dragon" too much. There seems to be still too much of this reflexive, default narrow tribalism, especially in Europe, and it does not need to be encouraged. Don't worry, it is there. The danger is - and shall be at least in the foreseeable future - too much ethnonationalism, not too little. If you want a proper balance, you need a bit more of encouragement of the big picture, the big canvas. The small canvas mindset will always be there, running in the background. It's the same with the individualism vs. collectivism spectrum in Europeans. Do we really need to encourage individualism at this point? Should we denounce collectivism, when our problems are in part due to insufficient collectivist feeling? If Whites have a natural tendency toward individualism, and that is becoming pathological, atomizing Whites, should we justify even more individualism? Should we justify more universalist altruism? What individualism and universalist altruism are to Whites on an individual basis, is what ethnonationalism is on a group basis. It's an inner tendency that has gone too far, that is exploited by our opponents, it is not something that needs further development, it is the default pathway and we in fact need a bit less of it, not more.