We must differentiate ethnoi from the civilizational state they belong to. When the originating identity of these ethnoi are lost to the civilization they founded, an inversion occurs. There can be no justice because the leadership of the founding group is attacked and leveled out by other ethnoi that enter their state and cannot be part of peripheral ethnogenesis (different race). Whites as leaders of civilizational states are attacked for that very leadership role; the identity is rejected inherently so that hierarchy can only exist in a shadow, with no recourse because there is nowhere to place responsibility. If this inversion is not addressed with legal and philosophical distinction, it becomes a destructive force that promotes globalism.
The globalist moral framework is centered on victimhood, and those in positions of strength or health are portrayed as victimizers. There is this idea that if a person or group cannot be assimilated to the civilization, they are a victim of those that created the civilization instead of understanding that not all hominids are capable of the same societal norms and living standards. Since materialism posits everyone as interchangeable cogs in a machine, a defect must be caused by the machine instead of there being an innate difference. When this framework is internalized, it creates ingratitude and conflates fairness and justice with a desire to equalize unequal people.
Identity politics stem from the attack on identity itself, with the liberal alchemical simulacrum that race and ethnicity do not or should not exist, and the retrosynthetic reaction that they should exist in stasis (i.e., no peripheral ethnogenesis and no room for alliances). It also negates the way people have lived in empires and civilizations for millennia, with various ethnoi maintaining autonomy while living under the guidance of the originating ethnoi — both in their cultural shaping and living lines of leadership. What liberalism does is place ethnic minorities against the founding stock of their civilizational states and the traditional reaction is still lacking an identity for the founding stock.
Distinguishing Civilizational States or Empires from Founding Identities
What needs to be added to the concepts of the Fourth Political Theory is the natural hierarchy of peoples and protections for the founding stock of civilizational states. A civilizational state does not come into being spontaneously but from the very life force of the originating ethnos. Distinguishing the living ethnoi as identities distinct from the civilizational state or empire they created or are a part of is key to upholding it. There are actual American ethnicities that need to be distinguished from legal citizenship or other groups living in the American Empire. It does everyone a disservice to replace the founding groups in the long run, even if inequality is something that people are now uncomfortable with.
Just because various cultures can only be understood through a qualitative valuation does not mean they can be equalized quantitatively. This mass equalizing is inseparable from the moral globalist framework of perpetual victimhood of every minority against those that uphold them. All civilizations are a form of colonization, only culturally more so than as a mechanism of production and monetary/power output. What was wrong with neoliberalism was not its desire to exert influence as an empire but the inversion of hierarchy for a cultureless mercantilism that creates an anti-culture. Distinct cultures within an empire or civilizational state still have to work with the founding cultures; there is an interplay between the two and a type of selective exchange over time.
The recent interview that Jared Taylor did with a Chinese man who grew up in America pointed out the distinct issue of revolt against the originating group by ethnic minorities. When Jared Taylor said that Whites should not become an ethinc minority in our own nations because we would be unable to exert influence or seek out our own interests, the Chinese man responded with how he grew up as a minority here and had a great time. He thought this was a counter to the idea that being a minority was not a horrible experience for Whites, but disconnected it from a living context. Living chains of context are needed to interpret datasets. It is simply untrue that Whites fare well as ethnic minorities among third and developing worlders. What the Chinese man did was show that minorities live well under a White majority but will become ungrateful and easily drawn into globalist anti-White propaganda when given the same legal status as the founding stock.
In this manner the goose is killed that lays the golden eggs. Those that uphold civilizations are demonized and those they uphold are used against them. The very identity of the civilizational state then becomes a simulation when the founding stock is displaced. The originators must lead and be in charge of the civilization and techniques they founded or the civilization will run amuck because no one else can uphold what their ancestors did not create. The revolt of the lower rungs of the hierarchy must be prevented by legal means to guarantee living leadership at the helm again. This negative exchange with minority groups that harms everyone can be entirely avoided by different legal distinctions.
Supralegal Status of Originating Stock and Distinguishing Ethnic Minorities from Unfettered Migration
Birthright citizenship is inherently globalist because it destroys the identity of the civilization’s originators for a simulation of the nation’s identity with all people as interchangeable parts. This mechanization of people only happens in White nations, where good intentions went horribly awry in the desire to grant various people rights without protecting the founding stock. In other nations, ethnic legal distinction for citizenship is the norm because they understand that the originating culture is the nation. In Nepal or Japan, you are not given citizenship just for being born there. The Nepalese do allow for some peripheral ethnogenesis with Indians, which is common through the history of mankind. Even places with ethnopluralism like Malaysia do not indiscriminately flood their nations with migrants. Ethnic Malay hold a strong majority. Indigenous peoples there live according to their own traditions in a minimal balance with nature without demonizing the Malay.
The 14th amendment cannot be repealed to end magic dirt citizenship because we do not have the numbers to do so, which would require the ratification of a new amendment. There are other means of immediately addressing the immigration invasion like a court ruling on its application to illegals or declaring a state of emergency at the border. From there, we can push to redo elections for states that did not take voter ID to get enough votes to amend the Constitution. We need to not only reverse the current immigration invasion but proactively prevent this from ever happening again.
Instead of trying to rewind to the past, we must look to a new form of regaining past wisdom while being just to those who have long been ethnic minorities within our nations that support our leadership. We must incorporate lessons learned in the past decades and centuries as new context (or a living origin myth) instead of just trying to repress their existence and rewind to past idealizations. What we need is to create a new amendment to protect the American founding stock while being fair to loyal, longstanding ethnic minorities.
It is essential to look to potential allies to correct this nation and that can support a new constitutional amendment. We can and will remigrate illegals and developing/third-world refugee placements that neoliberals used as demographic warfare against us. What the recent polls show us is that there is a Hispanic demographic that is patriotic to our civilizational state and not opposed to the American ethnic founding stock. The argument that this contingent can represent all of Hispanics is a globalist manner of thinking since all Hispanic groups are not interchangeable parts in a machine but represent different living contexts that need to be explored. Hispanics are far from a homogeneous group, having different native populations in their backgrounds and varying levels of selective pressures for civilization in their unique histories. Not only does the type of Amerindian vary, but the percent even within given groups. Furthermore, within a given ethnic group some have offshoots that long lived in our lands, like Tejanos.
As seen in California, many Hispanics historically vote blue and that is due to rapid demographic changes there. The state was turned blue by demographic replacement coupled with massive propaganda campaigns in the media and in school indoctrination against ethnic Europeans to shame Whiteness inherently. California rapidly went from a White majority state to a White minority state with the rise of both legal and illegal migration, mainly Mexican. This shows a lot how liberals use demographic replacement for votes. It is also why they flood major cities with African and Muslim “refugees” to turn states blue. These newer arrivals in the last few decades increasingly do not represent all Hispanic votes nor does it mean illegal migration and laxing legal migration routes would result in the same election outcomes in post hoc election analysis.
In polls, Hispanics were treated as a monolith, not even distinguishing White Hispanics or the vast array of ethnoi we have in the US. Tejanos in Texas have a long history of living among our civilization and selective cultural pressures over time to become compatible there. They historically vote conservative and are not as prone to gang culture seen in newer Mexican arrivals. There are many smaller cases of long-standing Americanized Mexicans distributed through the US who usually are at odds with the new migrants of the same macro “ethnicity.” They might be lumped in together as a race but need to be distinguished by their uniquely different histories and living origin myths. The same can go for US territories like Puerto Rico and other regions where Cubans and Columbians have long had conservative communities. The moderate levels of support for President Trump come from these demographics and should not be projected onto new mostly Mexican and Central American migrants or all Hispanics.
An alliance with long-Americanized Hispanics who support America is possible. They need to be distinguished from unfettered Hispanic and other immigrants who are being brought here for votes and to change the values and leadership of our civilization. It is unjust to count them in with a mass amalgamation of the term “Hispanic” and equally is it unjust to our originating population. We can be fair to those long selected within our civilization who appreciate our leadership in our nations without denying that it is a White-founded nation or denying the existence of our unique ethnos. We need to secure our racial majority within our nation, have long treated civilized minority groups well, and it is in their interest to support this.
Proposed 28th Amendment to the Constitution
Supralegal status of the originating stock is given to the lines of founding stock. There is a double weight given to state and local elections, and this group is the only one allowed to vote in federal elections aside from natives. Supralegal status can also be given by extreme merit to those that earn the place, similar to Roman citizenship for ethnic Romans and adoption into the Roman ethnos also common among Northern and Western tradition. Elon Musk would be a perfect example of someone who should be given merit-based supralegal status. Supralegal status must be a requirement not only to run for federal office but also to hold any federal judicial position, or any federal non-elected position or contract. No dual citizenship is allowed in the supralegal status, all other allegiances and voting rights given up upon adoption into this group. Unwillingness to do so places the person back to naturalized or peripheral citizenship designations.
Peripheral ethnogenesis are those of the same racial stock of the founding stock that became American by marriage, later migration, and refugees and can vote in all state and local elections, have full constitutional protections, and their offspring become part of the supralegal group unless they advocate for any anti-White rhetoric, then all citizenship will be removed and they will be deported. Anti-White rhetoric is a direct attack on the civilization itself as a White-founded nation, and is a form of treason. First amendment rights will not apply to non-citizens, and citizenship status is void when the person engages in anti-White treason.
Native designation gives them their own republic on their territory that only they get to vote in and they can vote in all elections, including federal. No aid shall be given to them but no restrictions on their autonomy of governing and trading within their reservations. Natives will be given the respect of their American status in all manners and rights, being allowed to vote in all elections and hold their own without imposition of the federal or state government and not be used by liberals to facilitate their further replacement with third world migration.
Naturalized citizens would have voting rights in state and local government and constitutional protections. These are people who legally migrated at least three decades ago aside from refugee status, and have a long-standing history in America. They have full constitutional protections and are eligible to move into supralegal status by adoption of merit for outstanding service to the civilizational state. Post-slavery groups that clearly act against the interest of the civilization will have migration to Liberia expedited. Destroying historical monuments, demanding reparations, or anti-White rhetoric will strip them of naturalized citizen status and remove them to a penal colony in Africa.
Territories remain republics that guide their internal governing structure, with the ability to move within the American Empire as territorial citizens and with full protections provided by the Constitution. When living in America, they can vote in local and state elections and their Republic’s elections. Without this measure, we are the territories of our territories, and everyone becomes an economic vassal of internationalism without the proper leadership of Americans.
Remigration of those born in the US by illegal means, including but not limited to illegal crossing, birthing on vacation, etc., shall be cut off from all aid, not allowed to work, and required to leave without judicial process retroactively. They will be stripped of all rights and constitutional protections. Only citizens as described above (terrirorial, originating stock, naturalized, peripheral, native) will have constitutional protections; all non-citizens will no longer be granted the same rights when visiting America or its territories. Until all illegal lines are removed, they will be treated as tourists. Citizenship will also be stripped for those that came from third and developing world nations by means of refugee invasion and they will be returned to their host nations or any nation willing to take them.
Foreign entities and nationals will not be allowed to own land in the United States proper though legal citizen designations outlined above (native, supra, peripheral, territorial, naturalized) can. Foreign workers will be evaluated on a federal, state, and local level for meeting the needs of the local citizenry for residency status. Residents cannot own land or state title nor are their children eligible for any form of citizenship.
