Combining Economic Distribution With Defense of the Nation: A Swiss Model for Traditional Conservatives?

The Swiss do not often register on peoples’ radars. They’re often seen as either reclusive and neutral bankers, or snobs who look down on trashy Americans. At least that was the impression that was imparted on me when I grew up. However, irrespective of these stereotypes, the Swiss have recently attracted my attention for the right reasons. In a recent initiative that would be unthinkable in the United States, a large number of Swiss have signed a petition demanding a monthly minimum wage of 2,800 American dollars.

“What, how dare they!” I can hear some conservatives and Republican lackeys saying. “Socialist, pinko commie, effete eurotrash scum!!!” Such an initiative can only be considered abnormal or absurd if you subscribe to post-Reagan neoliberalism and divorce policies from their societal contexts. In many ways, this recent Swiss initiative is an illustration of the role nationalism and demographics play in producing economic policies. How so? Well, consider the fact that Switzerland is a relatively racially homogenous society. Eduardo Porter, citing credible research, once asserted that the U.S’s lack of support for welfare, social programs, and other initiatives designed to uplift the disadvantaged stem from its racial and ethnic diversity. On a micro level, white Americans are actually generous, and will charitably support that which they deem worthy of support. However, on a macro level, this diversity occludes any feelings of brotherhood or an overall sense of the common good. As it turns out, humans are tribal and prefer to lend their support to those whom they can most relate!

Since Switzerland is a much smaller, older, and more homogenous nation than the United States, this economic egalitarianism is hardly radical, whereas one would be instantly branded a subversive radical just for suggesting a similar policy here. Not surprisingly, this Swiss sense of brotherhood also translates into a desire to defend their nation from subversion and radical demographic transformation, as the Swiss hostility towards minarets demonstrates. As longtime readers are aware, it is not my intent to bash on Muslims or parrot Daniel Pipes, but rather to illustrate the overall nationalism and cultural self-preservation of the Swiss.

The Swiss demonstrate that a nation can support its people and national interests without subscribing to moronic Republican style conservatism that worships corporations more than God or the “family values” that they claim to uphold. They also demonstrate that those on the left who support open borders are  useful idiots who facilitate plutocratic goals in the name of being sensitive to those poor brown immigrants. The more diverse any given country becomes, the more economic progress and equality will be retarded (oops, how ableist of me!) on account of growing polarization, not to mention the proliferation of stress that results from increasing competition.

In conclusion, the Swiss serve as a valuable reminder of what a functioning, healthy society looks like, as well as a sad and stunning indictment of how far the decadent American empire has fallen.

This entry was posted in Economics, Europe, Immigration, Race, Uncategorized, White nationalism and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

9 Responses to Combining Economic Distribution With Defense of the Nation: A Swiss Model for Traditional Conservatives?

  1. WmarkW says:

    Yes, I think there’s a definite demand for a “third way conservatism,” and the missing element from contemporary politics is a political party whose primary emphasis is on workers and jobs. I’ll copy my comment from TakiMag:

    The Left used to mean labor (wage-earners) and the Right was management (investors). Today, the Left is those dependent on the state (either as direct beneficiaries, government employee, or at a job that wouldn’t exist without government mandate), leaving the wage-earner without a political advocate. Too much of politics today consists of each party playing to their base, and trying to convince the worker why the other one is worse for them. The Tea Party and Occupy Movement actually have this in common.

    The middle class is tired of being given the “choice” of having their income directed toward the rich who haven’t earned it, or the poor who haven’t.

  2. batterytrain says:

    WmarkW, I understand you are pretty much a libertarian and a classicist and I have seen you advocate those ideas elsewhere. The thing is that if you want to preserve your demographics and the survival of the Europid/Western race, you have to go take your nose to the grindstone, which means you have to do the dirty work from the bottom up implying that you have to care about the least financially/successful stable person of European descent at the bottom of the class ladder and treat him/her as relevant as that of the beloved higher class. This is how you keep populations stable; the plumber/latrine cleaner/Greasy Mechanic/Gardener/Pipe builder/Garbage collector/factory worker/waiter/Janitor/Locksmith/carpenter/painter/stand owner/washer/oil pumper/store owner etc has to take as much reverance and priority as the revered upper class banker/engineer/actor etc etc. Why else do most hardcore “racists” come from these class occupations? hint it’s not a lack of education and a non-upper class upbringing that is to blame for these people saying whats on their minds.

    This is something that Steve Sailer, you, Takimagazine, Jared Taylor, some people on Robert’s blog, racial right-wing libertarians on anthro-forums fail to understand. How else do you think so many Bantu’s started arriving in South Africa to fill in jobs that the Afrikaaners were just too lazy to do? The thing is that if you want to get positive viable results when you are in a rut, you have to get your hands and feet dirty and do shit stuff that most people aren’t willing to do or go to places that you would best not want to go to do work. I like to think of the demographic transition prevention as that of cleaning the garbage/washing out pipes/cleaning the toilet/clearing out a large sewage system/taking the dirty trash/handling the dirty stuff; it’s something that not many people want to do and especially not someone of a “higher class” whom tend to self-segregate themselves from the rest of society like Jews in a black neighborhood. However the high and mitghy need shoulders to stand on, Proles have a purpose in that they keep the existence of the nation state. You have to take that lens of what you consider the ideal parts of Western society and shift to the very bottom and start from there if you care about Europeans.

    The best way to prevent a stain from appearing is to get rid of it when it appears as small and tiny.

    • WmarkW says:

      Where did you get the idea that I’m a libertarian? I most certainly am not. Government plays a useful and creative role in society, for which it often does not receive enough credit. Much of what it does, like building bridges, operating parks, or providing Medicare, improve our lives much more than they influence GDP, motivating conservatives to say that taxes are cutting into the economy, when they’re really providing us with bargains.

      Now, I do think too much of modern liberalism is based on demographic identity politics, most especially false accusations of victimhood. Gender pay gaps, Hispanic dropout rates, and Af-Am rampant single parenthood, are NOT caused by the actions of the majority and do NOT justify government favors to the targeted groups. On issues like that, I’m a libertarian, unless we approach it from “you need to start acting like the successful culture.”

      But I’m also most decidedly pro-labor. I believe there are too many people not working at those blue-collar jobs you listed, becuase their wage structures have been decimated by immigrants, and the motivation to take them reduced by generous welfare. At the other end of the scale, I’m also extremely concerned how our 401k’s have been diluted to pay excessive executive salaries and bonuses. That’s why I say we need a politics of the wage-earner over the tax consumer and wealthy investor.

      • Bay Area Guy says:

        That’s why I say we need a politics of the wage-earner over the tax consumer and wealthy investor.


        I once pointed this out on Robert’s blog a couple of years ago, but the fundamental problem with our economic structure today is that it’s all based on the parasitical financial sector. Almost all of our “growth” is in soft currency and debt. Gone are the days of entrepreneurs and industrialists like Henry Ford who provided his employees with solid enough wages to afford his own cars.

        Today’s economic elites are financial leeches such as Maurice Greenberg.

        This country needs more industry, better compensation and respect for blue collar work, and fewer globalists and financial oligarchs.

      • WmarkW says:

        I thought Robert was about to have a really important discussion about the importance of jobs in getting people to buy into capitalism; then he got a couple of long threads about India and Bigfoot and it kind of died.

        One aspect of Switzerland that may be worth studying is why they have such a unified society despite their language differences, which is a cleave along which many nations break up.

  3. Dota says:

    I can’t say I’m impressed with the Swedish attitude of demanding a job that pays $2.8k a month. Nobody is entitled to a good job, meritocracy should be the only policy. But I understand the point that BAG is trying to make, that racial homogeneity boosts solidarity, even if that solidarity is sometimes expressed in incorrect ways.

    As I stated on Robert’s blog, a free market works well so long as it’s practiced within a nation’s borders. Globalization is essentially bogus as it disrupts the dynamics of a free market, decimates employment, and causes Capital flight. Outsourcing should be made illegal and corporations should not be allowed to relocate their HQs in foreign countries. This will not erode competitiveness, but will in time reduce the income gap between classes. I would also imagine that stock prices would plummet, but this shock (while painful) would be temporary. In time company stock prices would more accurately reflect the earning potential of a business free from the chaos that speculators create.

    Mark’s position is entirely reasonable.

    • Bay Area Guy says:

      Perhaps I should have clarified that in the post, but it wasn’t my assertion that a guaranteed minimum income by itself is a blessing. Rather, as you hinted at, I do approve of the conditions that could produce such a petition in the first place.

      That being said, I’ll take the Swiss’s excessive economic egalitarianism over the globalist slash and burn economic policies of the current establishment.

  4. coward says:

    BAG, wouldnt a minimum monthly wage of 2,800 cause inflation?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s