The Clan and Ethical National-Socialism
The folkish way, the way of a numinous ethical National-Socialism, is the way of the clan – of a folk bound by ties of blood and loyalty. Our folkish, numinous, way is not the way of a large, impersonal, nation, nor the way of the abstract, soul-less State. The clan makes real the essence of our folkish way – the way of living-beings; the way of us, as individuals, being a connexion between the past of our folk, and the future of our folk; a connexion between the living-being which is our folk, and the living-beings which are Nature and the Cosmos. As such, the clan is numinous, and allows for – indeed is founded upon – honour, loyalty and duty to our folk, our kindred, and is thus a manifestation of genuine freedom.
For thousands of years our folk lived in communities based upon clans – and they created a way of living which instinctively manifested our numinous ethos. Now – with our ethos consciously understood, and manifest in ethical National-Socialism – we can create new communities, new homelands, new folkish clans, which will enable us to live with honour, with loyalty, with dignity, and do our duty to the living-beings of our folk, Nature, and the Cosmos. Furthermore, this return to the clan is not some return to an idealized past – rather, it is an evolutionary step; a move forward, toward a new, and numinous future. That is, we advocate a return to the clan – to communities based upon the clan; to a new homelands based upon such a community – because it is the honourable, the civilized, the evolutionary, the numinous, thing to do.
We need to understand that modern nations, and modern political States are large, lifeless, abstract, constructs which deny the right of personal honour and which undermine those ties of of kinship and loyalty – and that numinous dwelling – which exist when a folk live in a small area. Accordingly, we must reject anything and everything connected to such nations and such States – and instead embrace the way of the clan. This means rejecting politics; government; political parties; propaganda; ideology; the urban way of living.
What is a folkish clan? It is a group of individuals, of the same folk, who band together – on the basis of honour and loyalty – under the leadership, the guidance, of a chieftain, whom they all respect, and to whom they give a personal oath of loyalty. The basis of a clan is kindred and loyalty – you are related to, and/or personally know, the members of your clan, just as your first loyalty, your first duty, is to your clan. The very origin of the word clan shows it is part of our folkish heritage – it passed into common usage in Middle English, being from Scottish Gaelic clann, meaning family, from the Old Irish cland, meaning offspring.
The clan is our future – nations, States, and impersonal, tyrannical governments with their Police forces and their dishonourable laws which take away our honour, and which prevent us from doing our honourable duty to out folk, belong to the past.
The Concept of The Folk
Do you consider what you call “the folk” is the same as race? Are you against the concept of a nation, and thus against nationalism? A folk is not the same as “a race”. A folk arises over time, through living in a certain area – a homeland – through shared experiences, through a common heritage, history and so on. Over time, a specific culture arises, which represents that particular folk, and the folk of this homeland develop a certain character: a certain nature, which in general serves to distinguish them from the peoples of others cultures. This character may be manifest in their way of life, their religious outlook, their literature, their natural music (that is, their “folk music”). Consider two examples – the English, and the Germans. Racially, the two peoples are very similar. But they belong to different folks – that is, their character, their culture, is different. Generally, the people of a particular folk community share a common racial ancestry but the living being which is and becomes their folk – their folk culture, their homeland – evolves, changes, and brings into being a new type of life which is different from the life of the other communities who initially may have shared the same racial heritage. Thus, a folk is not an abstract, easily defined, static, “thing” like the concept of race. It is a living, changing, evolving, being – a unique type of life. What defines a folk is thus far more than a certain set of physical or physiological or genetic characteristics. A folk is a symbiotic being – in symbiosis with the being which is the homeland of that folk, with that community or that collection of folkish communities. All this makes the culture, the Way of Life, the ethos (or soul) of that folk living as well. And it is this living which is numinous, which presences the numinous. As I said in a recent interview:
“We are concerned with folk communities and their culture – living things – and not some abstract concept such as “race” has become. How do we define our folk? Is it primarily a physical definition, something which can be measured? No – our folk is primarily where we belong, where we dwell; where our being is at rest. Our folk and its homeland are numinous; that which connects us to our past – and future – in a living way. We either feel this, sense this connexion, or we do not.
A folk community cannot be created by some political ideology, nor by some law or laws, or even by a large State. It exists; it lives, already; it dwells in a particular place; it has come into being – or comes into being – over a period of time. Thus, to create a new folk community we begin with what has already come-into-being: the people of the same folk and culture who dwell in what was once their homeland. or whose ancestors came from that homeland. There is then a natural change and evolution – not a politically forced, abstract ideological change – within that community, which natural change and evolution arises over time through such things as following, upholding, the ethic of honour, through responding to the challenges which that community will face, through developing empathy via a dwelling on and working
with the land, and through developing reason and understanding. What will result will be a new coming-into-being: a new folk.”
What has happened in Europe, and is happening elsewhere, is that the divergent, different, folkish characters have been and are being broken down and made more uniform. This is partly due to un-folkish abstract ideas and religions, such as Christianity, and – latterly – the mass Media and capitalism which have created a soulless urbanized denizen. Add to this the effect of the social engineering that has taken place over the past fifty or sixty years, as well as immigration from other peoples, and there is the destruction of folk communities and folk identity and folk homeland – the destruction of these folkish living-beings. In truth, abstract ideas, often political, the social engineering of covert Marxism, capitalism, and religions like Christianity, are diseases which have attacked living, folkish, beings – making them ill, and in some cases destroying them. Today, in these times, what is called a “community” is a dead, abstract form or, more often than not, consists of peoples from diverse cultures and diverse ways of life. What are now called “folk traditions” are the ways of the past, often used as mere diversions or entertainment for tourists. Thus we have the unfolkish concept of “Europe” and the “European community” which are lifeless political and capitalist constructs, devoid of numinosity and which have destroyed many folk communities and which threaten many more. In the same way we have the unfolkish political concept of The State and the “nation”. Most so-called nations are lifeless, abstract, unfolkish – that is, they do not represent a particular folk, and are often more than the homeland of a folk. Many nations combine many folk, many folk communities, into an abstract, political form and thus are detrimental to the living beings of the folk. Often, such an abstract nationalism is imposed, by a ruler, or a government, and this imposition weakens, and destroys, the many diverse folks forced together into such an artificial “nation”. However, some “nations” – very few – are of one folk, and thus living. But this is not the norm, and thus it is better not to use the outmoded now rather meaningless concepts of “nation” and “nationalism”. Most so-called “nationalism” is unfolkish – for such nationalism seldom represents a true folk, a true living culture, just as it does not accept honour as the basis for the laws of such a nation, just as it accepts the un-numinous idea of The State, and just as it is for the most part far too large to be a living, healthy being such as genuine folk community is. David Myatt (Extract taken from the essay In Pursuit of the Numinous dated JD 2452918.712)