Typical "movement" stupidity.
"The universal nationalist believes that one can make a case for White Nationalism that would be compelling enough, “reasonable” enough, “fair” enough to garner support from each of these biologically distinct groups.”
This is absolute, unfettered nonsense. Universal nationalism is meant as a meme for Whites, not an attempt to plead with others for our right to exist. That many - most? - Whites are so Universalist in their natural mindset that they require universalism to intrude into nationalism is a fact that needs to be dealt with. Blame all those "high trust hunter gatherers" that the HBD faction is so fond of babbling about. But don't blame those who understand that the rhetoric of universal nationalism has an appeal to the innate fair mindedness of White folks.Universal nationalism is fully compatible with "doing what it takes" to secure racial survival. There is nothing in Salter's book that suggests we need to care what happens to Burma or invest any energy in fighting their battles. Salterism says we need to invest in OURSELVES, while, at the same time, granting the Burmese the same right to do so. We are under no obligation to help them. Of course, "universal nationalism" would tell us that attempts to genocide the Burmese, to colonize them, etc. is morally wrong, so, yes, On Genetic Interests is not compatible with The Turner Diaries - but I thought that the "American New Right" eschewed Pierce's genocidal fantasies, even independent of Salter?If the author of this piece (did he actually read Salter's book?) is so exercised over WNs wasting their time worrying about others, then go over to the Alt Right and chastise them about their obsession with Assad of Syria. I for one - a "universal nationalist" - really could care less about Syrians - apart from that they do not belong in White nations and that the West should not interfere with whatever civil war goes on there. They can all kill each other off, for all I care. That's my version of "universal nationalism."
See the sensible comments by “Leon” in the comments thread as well.
I can’t speak for Salter, but he has every right to be annoyed at the typically doltish reception his work has received from the imbecilic “movement.” Also interesting is that when self-styled “racial preservationists” make (in my opinion transparently disingenuous) appeals for a Universalist approach for “preserving all peoples’ no one bats an eye or utters a word of criticism. Let an academic write a book on genetic interests in which “universal nationalism” is suggested as a broad operating principle, and then it is all some sort of big problem. In reality, “universal nationalism” is merely giving others the opportunity to defend their interests, whether they successfully do so or not is their problem. Now, if helping others can be done without harming your own interests, fine, we can all afford to be generous, but there is no obligation to help others at your own expense.