Wednesday, September 19, 2007

Euro New Right & Sexual Morality

The ENR’s “paganism” entails a naturalism towards mores and sexuality. Unlike still traditionalists, ENR members have a relatively liberated attitude towards sexuality. Thus [Alain de] Benoist had no qualms about giving an interview to Gaie France, which features homoerotic images as well as cultural commentary. ENR members have no desire to impose what they consider the patently unnatural moralism of Judeo-Christianity on sexual relations. However, while relatively more tolerant in principle, they still value strong family life, fecundity, and marriage or relations within one’s own ethnic group. (Their objection to intra-ethnic liaisons would be that the mixture of ethnic groups diminishes a sense of identity. In a world where every marriage was mixed, cultural identity would disappear). They also criticize Anglo-American moralism and its apparent hypocrisy: “ . . . a video depicting a man and woman having sexual intercourse . . . is liable to confiscation by the [British] state. One graphically depicting teenage girls being disembowelled by razor blades affixed to the fingers of a repulsive ghoul, by contrast, tops the rental figures quite lawfully across the land, goes into tour editions, each more disgusting and genuinely obscene than the last, and is not indeed the most unpleasant revelling in blood and gore to sit lawfully on the video shops’ shelves.”[The Scorpion, No. 13: Winter 1989-90, p. 52.] In this, they are closer to a worldly Europe than to a puritanical America obsessed with violence. According to the ENR: “Our ancestral Indo-European culture . . . seems to have enjoyed a healthy natural attitude to processes and parts of the body concerned with the bringing forth of new life, the celebration of pair-bonding love, and the perpetuation of the race.”[The Scorpion, No. 13: Winter 1989-90, p. 51.]

In its desire to create a balanced psychology of sexual relations, the ENR seeks to overcome the liabilities of conventional conservative thought: the perception of conservatives as joyless prudes, and the seemingly ridiculous psychology implied in conventional Christianity. It seeks to address “flesh-and-blood men and women,” not saints. Since some of the Left’s greatest gains in the last few decades have been made as a result of their championing sexual freedom and liberation, the ENR seeks to offer its own counter-ethic of sexual joy. The hope is presumably to nourish persons of the type who can, in Nietzsche’s phrase, “make love alter reading Hegel.” This is also related to the desire for the reconciliation of the intellectual and warrior in one person: the reconciliation of vita contemplative and vita activa.

This naturalism leads the ENR to re-evaluate “the feminine” and reject what it sees as Christianity’s denigration of women. The ENR has begun developing a counter-ethic of feminism which, while respecting women and “the feminine,” rejects the US ideologization of gender by politically-correct feminism. These ideas promise to overcome the poisoned atmosphere of sexual relations and the neopuritanism of radical feminism. “In pre-Christian Europe, amongst the Celts and the Norse for example, women, without in any way renouncing their femininity or seeking to be ersatz men, enjoyed essentially equal rights.”[The Scorpion, No. 13: Winter 1989-90, p. 51.]
Mark Wegiersky
http://www.new-right.org/?p=48#more-48

Labels: , ,

2 Comments:

Blogger Jay said...

Hi ya. You say, "Their objection to intra-ethnic liaisons would be that the mixture of ethnic groups diminishes a sense of identity. In a world where every marriage was mixed, cultural identity would disappear." There are two problems with this statement. First, the idea that EVERY marriage might be mixed is ridiculous. The majority of marriages will always be within ethnocultural groups, because people generally feel more comfortable with people of similar cultural and socioeconomic background, and in any case, people are most likely to get to know others of similar ethnicity, status and locality.

Secondly, the iea that "cultural identity would disappear" is nonsense. Cultural identity may morph or shift within families of mixed heritage, but it does not and cannot disappear. Culture is always present; it cannot disappear; it is inherent to human nature. Moreover, I can attest from direct observation as someone who spent much of his life in big Canadian cities, whose populations include a broad mix of people from all over the world and lots of "mixed" marriages, that there is nothing to fear: The kids grow up as Canadians. If they group up in Quebec, they become Franco-Canadians; if they group up elsewhere, they become Anglo-Canadians. Their schools and friendships and the media acculturate them.

They may retain cultural influences of some kind from each parent; insofar as this occurs, it tends to enrich, not diminish, Canadian culture as a whole. Canada now has better and more diverse food, music, and sports than it did thirty years ago (e.g. a lot of white people engage in dragon boat racing in Vancouver, the population of which is now 50% Asian, especially from Hong Kong, Taiwan, the Philippines and Punjab). It's also worth noting that children of mixed marriages are often extraordinarily good-looking; the term 'hybrid vigour' may apply.

It turns out that diversity is beautiful, a delight, not a threat. The French and English language 'mother cultures' of Canada are in no way diminished by the plethora of origins of its modern inhabitants.

It seems to me that what you are really on about is racism, pure and simple. I almost feel sorry for you. May you open up your heart and realise that people from non-European backgrounds are 100% as human as you are, and no less talented. Think on this: The entire human family alive today is descended from a handful of people that lived in what is now Ethiopia, and whose descendants spread in all directions starting perhaps 75,000 years ago. There is only human family. We all of us are cousins, part of a single gene pool. This is not a poetic metaphor; it is a scientific fact.

I'm of German heritage, by the way. I'm as white as they come, though I do not ordinarily identify myself that way. I don't feel threatened by diversity. Given the disastrous consequences of racism in and on my own nation within the past 100 years, I feel the threat is from *lack* of mixing. Mixed marriages build bridges between families, and are perhaps our best hope for long-term peace.

Please think on this, let go of your racism, and go get to know some people whose skin colour is different from yours. Make some new friends. Let go the racism. Just let it go.

6:12 AM  
Blogger Jay said...

Hi ya. You say, "Their objection to intra-ethnic liaisons would be that the mixture of ethnic groups diminishes a sense of identity. In a world where every marriage was mixed, cultural identity would disappear." There are two problems with this statement. First, the idea that EVERY marriage might be mixed is ridiculous. The majority of marriages will always be within ethnocultural groups, because people generally feel more comfortable with people of similar cultural and socioeconomic background, and in any case, people are most likely to get to know others of similar ethnicity, status and locality.

Secondly, the iea that "cultural identity would disappear" is nonsense. Cultural identity may morph or shift within families of mixed heritage, but it does not and cannot disappear. Culture is always present; it cannot disappear; it is inherent to human nature. Moreover, I can attest from direct observation as someone who spent much of his life in big Canadian cities, whose populations include a broad mix of people from all over the world and lots of "mixed" marriages, that there is nothing to fear: The kids grow up as Canadians. If they group up in Quebec, they become Franco-Canadians; if they group up elsewhere, they become Anglo-Canadians. Their schools and friendships and the media acculturate them.

They may retain cultural influences of some kind from each parent; insofar as this occurs, it tends to enrich, not diminish, Canadian culture as a whole. Canada now has better and more diverse food, music, and sports than it did thirty years ago (e.g. a lot of white people engage in dragon boat racing in Vancouver, the population of which is now 50% Asian, especially from Hong Kong, Taiwan, the Philippines and Punjab). It's also worth noting that children of mixed marriages are often extraordinarily good-looking; the term 'hybrid vigour' may apply.

It turns out that diversity is beautiful, a delight, not a threat. The French and English language 'mother cultures' of Canada are in no way diminished by the plethora of origins of its modern inhabitants.

It seems to me that what you are really on about is racism, pure and simple. I almost feel sorry for you. May you open up your heart and realise that people from non-European backgrounds are 100% as human as you are, and no less talented. Think on this: The entire human family alive today is descended from a handful of people that lived in what is now Ethiopia, and whose descendants spread in all directions starting perhaps 75,000 years ago. There is only human family. We all of us are cousins, part of a single gene pool. This is not a poetic metaphor; it is a scientific fact.

I'm of German heritage, by the way. I'm as white as they come, though I do not ordinarily identify myself that way. I don't feel threatened by diversity. Given the disastrous consequences of racism in and on my own nation within the past 100 years, I feel the threat is from *lack* of mixing. Mixed marriages build bridges between families, and are perhaps our best hope for long-term peace.

Please think on this, let go of your racism, and go get to know some people whose skin colour is different from yours. Make some new friends. Let go the racism. Just let it go.

6:13 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home