Every successful nationalist organization is a movement based on a sense of mission and a community dedicated to that mission. This national mission is to unite the people in close communion. We may be divided by party, social or religious issues, but we are united by a national idea – the idea of common roots and common destiny. The community of the organization or movement is not only the core of the activists of this mission, but also serves as a micromodel for the relationships between the people that the movement would like to bring to life throughout the nation. This idea is communicated through inspiring and cohesive events that allow the spirit of the movement to reach more and more young people, thus gradually expanding into the nation and transforming it in accordance with the ideal of national community. In short, the task of the movement is to show an alternative to the existing division of the nation by its own example.
Of course, there are nationalists who believe that the national idea should be “sold” as an alternative liberalism, which is no longer even liberalism, but Neo-Marxism. When they face defamatory campaigns, it seems to them that it is because they have not proved well enough that they are the same as their political opponents. But for the Neo-Marxists, “good nationalists” are only those who are bad nationalists – who are so fitted into the system that they pose no threat to it. But our choice is not to be “good” or “bad” nationalists, but to respond to the challenge of ideological subversion. The answer cannot be, “leave us alone, because we just want to speak our language and will be happy to work with you.” Neo-Marxism is a totalitarian ideology that knows neither peace nor privacy, it seeks to take over all areas of life. As their power grows, Neo-Marxists only become more hostile to everything national and traditional. National idea must be offered as an alternative that is not limited to linguistic, cultural or historical issues, but also requires the reorganization of the state so that it would work in the interests of the nation. This inevitably leads National Democratism to collision with forces of opposite direction. It is a metapolitical struggle for the fate of the people.
What is metapolitics? In the context of theory of hegemony by the Italian communist Antonio Gramsci (1891-1937), metapolitics means a patient but relentless struggle for the institutions that are forming the soul of society. In Western Europe, neo-Marxist hegemony is almost complete, while in the Central and Eastern Europe, this struggle and its connection to the subversion methods of Cheka is only now beginning to be realized. Metapolitical struggle takes place at several levels of power – in the media space, cyberspace, think tanks, universities – wherever people’s opinions are formed. It has no breaks and it does not depend on election cycles, which only show the results of public opinion shaped by metapolitics.
Metapolitical struggle cannot be won by a simple political party. Activities of political party are limited by the contradiction between the task of the party to bring its ideology into the life society and, at the same time, the need to ensure good ratings in order to fulfil the first task. However, active advocacy of ideological questions triggers the media, think tanks, public authorities of the opponent, which begin to act in a coordinated manner against the political party, depriving it of the opportunity to come to power. As a theoretical compromise, the tactic is adopted for the party to move slowly and gradually of realization of its ideology, carefully choosing the struggles that can be afforded, considering the resistance of public opinion – gradually realizing its ideological program and not losing election results. But such a compromise is an illusion because public opinion is not static. As a result of the metapolitical activity of the Neo-Marxists (i.e., the Overton window – a model for multi-stage social change to turn things that are categorically unacceptable to society into normal), public opinion is constantly moving further to the left. The basic political current is also adapting to this, and finally the nationalist parties have to adapt as well, because the natural tendency of every party is to think about the outcome of the next election and its ratings.
Even if such a path of adaptation would bring a parliamentary victory, it would mean nothing in the long run if it were not backed by a metapolitical movement that would provide informational and staff support for the party’s political efforts. Let us remember the time of the Conservative Margaret Thatcher as British Prime Minister. During her 11 years of rule in Britain, she focused entirely on economic issues, but in no way stopped Neo-Marxist ideological subversion. As she resigned as prime minister, Britain continued its path to a multicultural “welfare state” with double vigour, even after Conservatives that had drifted to the left returned to power. An even more grandiose failure was the inability to prevent Marxists from infiltrating public opinion-building institutions during the Cold War in the United States.
To overcome the limited freedom of action of political parties, it is necessary to go beyond the usual categories of political thinking – a national movement must be formed that includes both political and metapolitical aspects. Contrary to the common myth about metapolitics, it must be emphasized that Gramsci never denied party politics nor advocated for a purely academic “long march through the institutions,” but he still supported the role of the avant-garde Communist party. Gramsci saw intellectuals only as the party’s “social workers,” anticipating that without the party’s support, such groups of intellectuals would be marginalized and lose all influence. The success of the left in the second half of the 20th century can thus be explained by this interaction between political parties and the ‘social workers’ they support. This is a lesson that must also be considered by nationalists – the recovery of institutions from neo-Marxists is not possible without the support of a party in power. In addition, the views of any party represented in parliament are heard by thousands, which helps to shape public opinion. A party needs a metapolitical movement, just as a metapolitical movement needs a party – the relationship between the two elements may be different, but the actions must be coordinated. As a rule, the metapolitical movement must be the one that can be more categorical in its actions and communication, not allowing the party involved in political compromises to “drift” to the left.
Organization of national democrats is a new national elite, characterized by:
- Sense of mission – to respond to the informative and psychological attack (ideological subversion) directed against our nation and is taking place through the public opinion forming institutions;
- Goal – to take back these institutions or create new ones, thus laying the foundation for a state built on the principles of National Democratism;
- Branched structure with many territorial and interest substructures;
- Movement as a mechanism of mutual support for the realization of the goals of each separate platform of interests and activists;
- Long-term activity and in all spheres of public life that affect the interests of the people;
- Willingness and ability to show the organization as defenders of interests of the people. But the people are often unaware of their own interests and importance of them, so these interests need to be articulated and the people united around those interests in order to create the necessary pressure on the political environment;
- Proactivity against the agents of ideological subversion, determining the topics and rules of public discussion ahead of time;
- Readiness to face a backlash from the perpetrators of ideological subversion – slander, slander, provocations;
- Legal and non-violent methods of achieving goals – political terrorism is not only criminal, but also “useful idiocy” in the interests of opponents of nationalism. Extremists must be treated as infiltrated provocateurs whose goal is to discredit the organization and its purpose;
- Aesthetics that communicates the values of National Democratism and vision of the future on an irrational level.
But before such a movement changes public opinion, the mindset of nationalist leaders themselves must change. It is the last moment to realize that ideological subversion is no less dangerous than a military threat – in fact, it is an earlier form of warfare. Not every generation has been given the opportunity to prove itself by fighting for the future of their nation and country. It is a huge responsibility to our ancestors and unborn descendants. Our task may take decades, but in them we will lay the foundations for centuries in which our nation will flourish, that with its identity and vitality will help to regenerate the rest of Western civilization.