ACCORDING to The Concise Oxford Dictionary, meritocracy is defined as “government by persons selected according to merit”. In other words, meritocracy may be described as a system in which only those most suited to the task of leadership have a recognised authority. However, unlike the present democratic system this particular method of authority is not enshrined in the contractual laws of mankind but in the irrevocable laws of nature.By seeking to obscure the inherent differences between individuals, groups and races through a systematic programme of ‘egalitarianism’ and the inordinate championing of the weak, democracy itself represents a highly detrimental threat to the normal and healthy development of people throughout the world. Furthermore, it is nothing other than the disorderly rule of the common mob and is a major hindrance to the abilities of the most able. In the real world, people are fundamentally different and have natural stations in life. Although liberalism is chiefly responsible for attempting to force the most able members of society to live, work and study side by side with those of a lesser ability and lower horizons, Capitalism is also an impediment to the natural order of humankind through the imposition of its parasitical class structure. So whilst on the one hand we are told to accept that the most anti-social elements are our brothers and sisters, on the other many of us are unable to rise to our natural level due to the greed and repression of the pseudo-aristocratic ruling class. In an attempt to decipher the complex nature of our personalities, some have argued that human development is shaped purely by the manner and the environment in which we are raised, contesting that - given the opportunity of an ‘identical’ upbringing - the road sweeper is capable of rising to the intellectual level of the scientist or the philosopher. Whilst this may be true in some cases, especially given the more favourable educational advantages conferred on the sons and daughters of the ruling Establishment, it remains a fact that individual human development is overwhelmingly determined by genetics. This is the single most important biological characteristic of any human being and, whilst the Nature vs. Nurture debate is sure to rage on for many years to come, when all is said and done individual ability has far more to do with racial origins than social circumstances. That said, under Capitalism a parasitical minority is permitted to prosper at the expense of those whom - in a more natural society - would be in charge of their own destinies and not held subject to the professional moneylenders by the paid mercenaries of the police and armed services. So whilst the Left seeks to obscure the healthy spirit of natural human endeavour and confine us all to the lowest possible level, the Right seeks to prevent us from becoming a threat to the bacterial gangsters who, through force of arms, reserve the highest echelons for themselves.
That said, in these post-ideological times, it would be wrong to ignore constitutional politics completely. Of course, if you are a tribalist, well - nine times out of ten you're on a hiding to nothing in the elections game. But, as Berrocscir's Banner has argued before, elections are the one time when everyone is, to some degree, engaged with politics. Radical nationalism can only move forward with pioneers and those driven and inspired by ideals, but elections are times when we can perhaps spark the wider folk into action - and sometimes elections can spring nice surprises.
Berrocscir's Banner has always strongly supported regionalist movements - because they reflect the local, tribal identities that are the result of the development of natural human societies. So in a country with a strong tradition of regional identity, last month's regional and local elections in Spain returned strong showings for regional parties. In Asturia the regionalist Asturian Forum (FAC) won a majority of seats with nearly 30% of the popular vote. In Navarre the Navarrese People's Union (UPN) topped the poll with 42% of the vote - although to muddy the waters, it should also be mentioned that in the San Sebastian and Gipuzkoa districts the Basque Nationalist (and separatist) PNV and Bildu parties were dominant (Basques claim Navarre as their own!). However, from a tribalist perspective all this is encouraging - it means that out there in the great scheme of things sizable sections of the masses display a regional and local identity - despite all the one worldism.
Crossing over to last week's Portuguese elections and we see the Third Positionist National Renovator Party go onwards and upwards - their vote climbing to 17k from 12k from 2009 and 9k in 2005. This is admittedly a small share while Europe stands at the abyss. But it shows that the message is getting through. Authentic nationalism is not falling backwards in this part of the world. As long as we remember (and probably the PNR will tell you) national revolution will not come through the ballot box.
As an aside, in Portugal, the Earth Party (a green party affiliated to the non-Left/PC World Ecological Parties) saw their vote jump to 23k from 12k last time around - despite the electoral dominance of the Leftist Ecologist Party. As this blog has argued, it is vital that tribalists wrestle green ideas away from the Left and liberal elites.
Over in ol' Blighty there is, unfortunately, within the English nationalist milieu, a strong anti-regionalist current. Many English nationalists confuse regionalism with separatism - or even worse those horrid EU zones! While National Anarchists believe there is nothing wrong with separatism if there is popular will behind it, we recognise that regionalism is merely the expression of a more localised identity WITHIN a national one. English regionalism is no threat to the concept of the English nation. English nationalists cannot deny the very real regional identities which exist among the English. We are not 'English' alone - we are Yorkshire English, Geordie English, Scouse English, Devon, Kentish, East Anglian English and so on. If English Nationalists seek to deny this, then frankly it makes them neo-imperialists. Regionalism and Nationalism should be mutually compatible - on the same side against globalism and cosmopolitanism.