Western Europe and the US had a great thing going in the 20th century. Is an Eastern-European coalition with America the future of the West?

The old hit song is wrong—it isn’t love that makes the world go round. Relationships based on compatibility or hostility are far more important.

During the 20th century, much of the world gyrated around the axis we called ‘Atlanticism,’ a policy of close alliance between the US and Europe; it dictated our security agreements, such as NATO, and the ‘special relationship’ between the US and England. Today, this factor in global politics is more a fading myth than a fact. To elucidate requires discussion of matters that I’m as reluctant to bring up as many readers will be loath to hear; like rubbing a cat against the grain of his fur, it will be no more pleasurable for me than for the feline. But it must be done.

My focus is Europe, but a quick word on America. The traditional role of the US in the transatlantic agreement was to preserve her politically and economically progressive—and voluntarily participating—allies. But now America’s governors lead from behind. Though her size makes her a world leader, she is carelessly ruled by a bipartisan elite, who indulge their fashionable ideas instead of taking actions that would succeed if pursued vigorously. This is tolerated by a locally-oriented public that is distracted by trivia to the point that it loses sight of the national interest. The likely party nominees for president are symptomatic of misdirection by popular consent: one is honest and outspoken but emotionally incontinent, the other polished and insincere.

Not that Europe’s leadership is much better: Brussels stumbles from one cow dropping straight into the next. Take the way they bungled the Greek financial crisis; it’s still festering. How can an entity that’s five hundred million people strong lack the will to return a country of ten million to sanity? And when Russia shows signs of expansionism, we reluctantly hand out limited sanctions.

The migrant crisis is a special case. To echo Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, a country that is unwilling to control its borders is no country, and a state that is unable to assert its laws is not sovereign; therefore it is not a state. Thanks to Merkel’s miscalculations and misdeeds—and an overall impotence to enforce our laws and sovereignty—an avalanche of ‘refugees’ has now broken into Europe, and the problem will worsen in time, if our leaders fail to grow a spine. Unfortunately, in the ruling circles of the EU, weakness masquerades as a moral principle that lends a moral halo to polite surrender.

Furthermore, the Union is unable to cope with domestic and imported crime. This incapacity highlights not so much the rigor of the challenge as the extent to which the EU has hobbled itself. The elites who are supposed to protect society go on casting impostors in the role of victim, till it’s not the criminal but his target who gets blamed. If you mention the facts you’re a xenophobe, while the uncritical conception of misbehaving aliens as victims reinforces the equally thoughtless creed that crime expresses the unfairness of the social order.

It’s clear the EU has made a crucial error when its PC proclamations provoke a hitherto passive population to resistance. For the newly politically awakened, ‘Brussels’ is synonymous with failing and resented policies. That association is reinforced as the EU clings ever more doggedly to the water-soaked life-raft of anti-White dogma.

Alienation accelerates when Brussels clashes with the new patriotism that’s surging in the East of the continent; the East-West gap coincides with the tensions between small and large member countries.

The past experience of Europe’s two halves diverges significantly.  In the nineteenth century, by contrast to the powers in the West, supranational empires prevented Europe’s East from setting up sovereign nations for its peoples; servitude and foreign bossing continued and expanded in the 20th century. Yes, the Nazis subjugated most of Europe—but their rule in the racially related West was a kindergarten compared to the Eastern zone where, starting with the Jews, entire nations were marked for extermination. The East became ever more resentful of rule by great powers, as they established the nexus of limited independence and extinction.

Soviet rule—which once again featured the mass murder of ethnicities, and now classes too—amplified the association between sovereignty and survival. All this explains much about the current clash of perspectives: the West never lived through the East’s degradation to colonial status under Moscow. Western Socialism expressed itself not through bayonets, but in the form of nice cuddly Social Democrats.

The past should teach us to be wary of great powers who would exert their ‘guidance’ over the cacophony of the ‘small fry’ to the East. Take note of British and German complaints about certain other member states: it hardly relieves tension when powerful member states are run by Leftists who preach that commitment to a newly liberated nation equals ‘fascism’.

The prospect of a united Europe without a European people might not create much apprehension in the West. However, in the Eastern precincts, a new super-state that negates ethnic-cultural identity is alarming. The more so since bureaucratic centralization is supposed to compensate for the lack of natural bonds between allies—making it all the more tempting for large members to convert a federal facade into a system of rule by themselves.

Finally, what of security? If those who wish to centralize power in Europe are determined to extend the grasp of their bureaucracy, one might hope they feel a similar determination to protect the realm they are creating from imperiling external entities. This is not so.

On the whole, EU potentates are either one-world internationalists, cultural relativists, or guilty apologists for past colonialism. The more assertive an alien force becomes, the more these doctrines determine our responses—even in cases that imply a threat to the indigenous way of life. Europe is reluctant to defend herself because, subconsciously, she is convinced that nothing bad can happen to her. Indeed, clinging to their beliefs that all cultures are equal, our leaders loudly tell us that obvious threats are merely racist phantasms. Unfortunately, a danger you ignore is a danger you can’t resist.

But amidst the symptoms of decadence, a new alternative center is emerging within Europe: the Visegrád Group, comprising Poland, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, and Hungary. (A sub-franchise is reportedly in the making in the West.) All four nations share a proud historical record, which, combined with their recent experience of life under tyranny, gives them the heady sensation that they have something that deserves to be defended, and is under attack.

Such determination has vast potential—particularly if America’s next round of elections unearths a will to reassume her leadership. If so, Visegrád is a potential cluster of willing allies. A series of bilateral commitments could provide Washington with a more virile parallel to the indulgent joke that is NATO—if her leaders are bold enough to embrace it. The entrepreneurial truism that ‘the future is unpredictable and only innovators can cope’ holds just as true in international relations.

About The Author

Profile photo of George Handlery

George de Poor Handlery is a historian and holds an American Ph.D. In the US he has served as a tenured Associate Professor. Since 1972, responding to the restrictions imposed by quotas, he has lived and taught in Europe.

  • Dillon Francis

    So let me get this straight. The author admits the people running most of the West, but particularly the EU, have their heads in the sand, that Russia is a threat, and that small eastern european states and ally with the USA to restore order to the vanishing civilization?
    How is this a new right article? Sounds like a neo-con wet dream.

    • John Morgan

      Where does it say that it’s a “New Right” article?

      • Dillon Francis

        It doesn’t. But this is an article one could just as easily read at cfr.org
        So what’s it doing on a website dedicated to rightist views of the world?

        • John Morgan

          This is a Rightist view of the world.

          • Dillon Francis

            If joining forces with the Ango-American empire is a rightist view than your movement is in serious trouble.
            For starters, everything that the real right dislikes about the modern west is in one way or shape tied to London, NYC, Hollywood, and Washington.
            Moreover, the current migrant crisis affecting the EU was caused by American led wars of choice against sovereign states in the Near East, and in case of Libya, American backed.
            If the USA ever returns to its pre ww2 foreign policy than perhaps this article can be taken more seriously by those who actually belong to the real right and know their IR theory.
            Again, this article stood out from a number of others posted here precisely because it doesn’t fit the agenda you all claim to back. But I could have misinterpreted the website.

          • John Morgan

            If something is relevant and well-written, we’ll post it. A Website which only ever runs articles that agree with a specific agenda would be rather boring. We’ve already run a number of articles that agree with the picture you’re painting (including one that I myself wrote). Why not write your own and submit it?

          • Dillon Francis

            1) Thanks for the kind offer John. Perhaps when my workload decreases I may submit something.

            2) Most msm websites do run similar articles and they never give the true right or even conservatives a chance. So why extend a hand to the other side when they do not reciprocate?

          • John Morgan

            I really don’t understand why you think this article is so beyond the pale. I’d hardly go so far as to call it “the other side,” unless you think absolute anti-Americanism is the most important element of the Right.

          • Dillon Francis

            No John I don’t believe anti americanism is the most important element. I don’t even think it is an element. The usa like most western states no longer serves the interests of its people. I don’t support imperialism. Traditional cultural mores are important to me, and as I mentioned earlier, all the things that rightists dislike about the modern world are in one way or another now tied to the usa.
            The author also calls for closer ties between eastern Europe and the usa; but as we can see the eu is a junior and subservient partner to Washington. It’s best that the eastern europeans work to make their states strong without constantly looking for a great power patron. Moreover, in an ideal world America would focus on its many internal issues instead of empire building and destroying various 2nd and 3rd world states all in the name of democracy promotion.
            Is there anything I’ve outlined above that strikes you as unreasonable?

          • John Morgan

            No, nothing strikes me as unreasonable, but neither does anything in the article above, it just happens to be a different take on the matter than you or I have. That’s the nature of debate.

          • machiaevil

            America is the enemy of national sovereignty, tradition and culture, Europe’s suffering is the direct result of US political occupation and this asymmetric relationship harms Europe’s economic and ethnic interests. It the source of globalism, zionism and free market fundamentalism which are antithetical with the conservative-traditional-identitarian ideology. Anyone proposing any kind of alliance with the US is enemy because the US by default is enemy of the entire world and Europe in particular.

            If anything Eastern European nations with their insistence on national identity and strict immigration policy are an impediment to the full Americanization of the continent and the project of Americanism. It is actually where the ideological resistance to this American project of a homogeneous, rootless world stems from and not where its imaginary “restoration” will start from. Expel America and its collaborators.

          • machiaevil

            No it is not. It is favor of of the globalist/liberal order since America is associated with it and looks to export it globally, either through subversion or war.

  • Off topic (but not much): I’ve just set up this aggregator for Alt Right webpages, allowing you to check the most recent updates in almost 100 Alt Right aggregated sites and blogs without having go to visit them individually, which is both convenient and time-saving: http://theshitlordhub.blogspot.co.uk/. Give it a look guys and if you like it, feel free to bookmark it and spread the word.

    • Sean Fielding

      Just checked it out – fantastic resource. Everyone I love is there. I do suggest an extra listing for Right Stuff Radio, in addition to The Right Stuff, already listed. Thanks for doing this.

      • Cheers! I decided to put up this blog because I’m a voracious consumer of news and I realized I needed such a tool (a Drudge Report for the Alt Right) but I just couldn’t find one. In the coming months I’ll give this blog a more slick, professional look with a better template and stuff, but even as it is it is already functional and does the job quite well I think.

        • Dillon Francis

          May I suggest adding http://www.zerohedge.com/ to your website?

          • Good suggestion. I know the Zero Hedge site but it hadn’t occurred to me to add it there, but you’re right, they’re not pro White but their economic views are by an large in agreement with most of the people in our camp. Check the SLH, I’ve just added the feed.

          • Dillon Francis

            Great! They may not be pro white, but they are not anti either.

      • By the way, I just checked the page you mentioned, the Right Stuff Radio. I didn’t even know about it. I just added its feed to the Shitlord Hub, you can follow it there as well now. If you ever find any other cool Alt Right sites or blogs that you think people should know about, just let me know. I’m on the Gmail Circles, Lawrence1978.

  • The idea that the United States is anything other than the source of Europe’s present ethnosuicidal course, and that US involvement with the Visegrad group would be anything other than an attempt to sabotage it, is pretty ludicrous. The US is part of the problem, not part of the solution.

  • I hope the Visegrád Group becomes the basis for a sort of re-constituted Habsburg Empire in Central Europe. Romania is ready to join. So is Bulgaria. As are large parts of the former Yugoslavia. And even Greeks who hate Orbán at least respect him for his accurate prediction of events in Europe over the last 18+ months.