December 1, 2022

National Progressivism

National Progressivism is best understood in a literal sense. A nationalist believes in maintaining the cultural and economic health of the nation. We have chosen the term “progressive” because we must find new solutions and look for them in the future and not the past. For a long time, the United States has been a capitalist country, which is inherently international, or “globalist.” Our banks are privately owned by foreign share-holders. Even our culture has been globalized; American “culture” has become multicultural, dividing our races and ethnicities into separate categories, only capable of crossover when activities, religion, et cetera, unite them – but rarely the country itself. Americans are not one single biological race; we are a creation of Anglo-imperialism, and the founders had a vision for our nation – it has failed. The term “American” changed over time. On the one hand, it has grown to accommodate the many different types of people who live here, people who came from outside the Anglosphere. On the other hand, very little has been done to bond Americans in their shared destiny.

This is not to say that every group needs to entirely shed the culture or legacy of the countries they emigrated from. But there needs to be an American Macro-Culture (a larger, more encompassing and inclusive culture), that unites Whites, Blacks, Asians, Hispanics, Indians, et cetera, regardless of their separate Micro-Cultures.

At this time, what unites Americans is our desire to succeed in life. The liberal capitalist system has reduced “succeeding” to a purely materialistic endeavor; a true dog-eat-dog world, where citizens compete at each others’ expense. The American dream, modern “Americanism,” has been diluted into pursuing wealth and fame. These values have been pushed through television, media, entertainment, magazines and interest groups. These goals were not created and envisioned by the greater society. They were fabricated by the same elites that print our money, run our government, write our laws, and manage our police. The modern American Dream was devised to create a culture of consumerism. Culture is a sociological phenomenon. Yet, it is treated as a commodity to be sold. This means that those who participate in this culture have become as expendable and only as useful to the elites as the products they buy. Once upon a time, the American dream was built around the idea of working hard, reaping the benefits, and sharing them from family to community.

This tradition, this old vision of the American Dream, is one worth reviving. It has been strategically replaced by a decades-long cultural revolution instigated by those who put profit over people. As long as the GDP and corporate profits were increasing, the instigators were happy. 

The financial and political elite have devised an economic inequality that keeps Americans at each other’s throats. The kind of inequality that comes from this system has nothing to do with organic inequality; it is a manufactured inequality. This manufactured inequality means a small group of individuals having institutional power over a country despite being a small fraction of the populace. This inequality means rights advocacy groups existing for certain races, but not others. This inequality means that a wealthy elite keep their money circulating between themselves, while the rest of the country struggles. This manufactured inequality is the enemy of this country, and an enemy of National Progressivism. It is the byproduct of a society that is based on exploitation and profit, neither of which concern themselves with the needs and progress of a nation.

National Progressivism believes in a strong State; it believes in a synthesis between the people and its government. A great State would require the wealthy to spend a portion of their wealth advancing the well-being of their nation and its people. Socialism is when there is State control of the economy and society; the State is both the people and its government. Currently, it’s the rich who control the inner machinations of society. If there is to be a wealthy class, then they must work for the benefit of society. Without this guideline, they will use their wealth to influence society to suit their own needs at the expense of the greater needs of the rest of the nation.

Should we eliminate class distinctions altogether, it would be, arguably, more difficult to maintain socialism. The only class that we should work to do away with is the lower class by means of changing the society so that their needs, too, are met, and are thus able to integrate into the “middle” class. With class collaboration, socializing wealth for the pursuit of nationalized health care and education becomes possible. The State must have a government that concerns itself with the people, bridging the gap between the classes. With this comes a new social contract: those who want to be wealthy must share that wealth. This does not include the average well-off man or woman who happens to have earned an above average amount of income; it includes the kind of wealth hoarders we are used to seeing run monopolies, which, too, will no longer be privatized, but State regulated.

At its core, National Progressivism is a merit-based ideology. To receive benefits, one must give back to the nation. It is as simple as this: those who work may eat. Exceptions are acceptable for the elderly, those who have retired after considerable work, the profoundly handicapped, and so forth. Such exceptions might need to be examined on a case-by-case basis. Even so, socialism dies if it does not concern itself with merit and does not require something from the citizen in return.

The idea of giving back to the nation is alien to the powers that rule us. National Progressivism does not concern itself with the rights of a few individuals, but with a greater collective. Hence, it is completely illiberal. And because none of this exists in our recent history, it is not reactionary.

Our ideology ascribes to this understanding:

Meritocracy is progressive.  Aristocracy (the idea that something simply is what it needs to be no matter what) is stable. Hierarchy on its own is also aristocratic. The existence of the State is aristocratic.

Our roles and our jobs are inherently aristocratic — they contain an inseparable value that can neither be replaced or disposed of. Aspects of traditions and culture must have merit (a reason to exist or be as is); some traditions could be fine, and others could be outdated. However, the notion of culture itself is aristocratic; life without culture creates a soulless existence.

A person in the role of a teacher inherits a title given to them by their ability to work well within their field.  They become replaceable when they fail to carry out their job adequately; the job itself does not lose its value if a person does not live up to its standards.

Whether the role is that of a teacher, writer, barber, cashier, librarian, mother, father, the person within any one of these is a worker.  Some work more with their hands, others work more with their minds and intelligence.  All of them are proletarians (replaceable if incompetent, the opposite if otherwise); proletarians are meritocrats within irreplaceable (aristocratic) jobs. 

With this understanding, National Progressivism calls for the maintaining of a Proletarian Aristocracy.  Honest work is an irreplaceable necessity that can neither be overcome nor  replaced.  Our concern with bridging meritocracy with notions of aristocracy comes from a fusion between certain Left and Right concepts that date back to the French Revolution.

This is how we wish to redefine the American dream. Using socialism from the Left, and coinciding it with the hierarchical attitudes of the Right, brings about a legitimate third option that challenges the status quo.