Originally published by the White-Papers Policy Institute, 2022-01-26
Welcome to the second instalment of our project, and our first crosspost with the Hyphen-Report! We are reviewing the policy and political platforms of White Nationalist, Ethno-Nationalist and Pro-White political parties.
In our first instalment, featuring Patriotic Alternative, we started with the broad question:
“How could our Nations actually be reformed? How could any of this be done?”
Let’s once again re-formulate this question in more specific and explicit terms:
“How could the United States of America be reformed according to the principles of White Nationalism? How could this be done, politically?”
As we did last time with our look at the British political party Patriotic Alternative, we are going to limit our discussion, as much as is possible, to describing actions which could be taken using the legal framework of the United States as it stands now, i.e. without stipulating a great number of far-fetched constitutional changes or legislative victories as a pre-requisite to our reforms. White Papers believes that while root-and-branch reforms should be the ultimate goal of our politics, we must also adhere in our thinking to the old adage: politics is the art of the possible – and so in this project we will focus on ways of dealing with the political cards we were dealt.
And once more we are going to take as our model of political action the manifesto of a viable contemporary organisation.
The National Justice Party (NJP) is one of the few organisations in the United States advocating for White Americans. And of these few, it is unique in being an organised political party with a sizeable following.
Party Chairman Mike “Enoch” Peinovich leads a demonstrating demanding justice for the victims of the Waukesha Christmas Parade terror attack, committed by anti-White rapper and convicted criminal Darrell Brooks.
Point One of their party platform is as follows:
- The United States of America will be declared an outpost of Western civilization and a state dedicated to its European-heritage population and their posterity. It will be the policy of the state to set immigration and natal policy that will ensure a permanent European majority. The rights of historic minority populations will be respected.
This contains three distinct policy proposals:
A) the declaration of America to be an explicitly White (European) state.
B) the setting of formal targets to ensure demographic dominance for Whites.
C) the pledge to ensure historic minorities retain specific rights.
A) The United States of America will be declared an outpost of Western civilization and a state dedicated to its European-heritage population and their posterity.
This is the most straightforward proposal. It can be carried out with a simple Presidential proclamation. The American President, as head of state, is empowered to issue directives in the form of a proclamation. Such a proclamation could set forth a new vision of the way the American state should both define itself and set its political goals; there is nothing in the Constitution or in the historical precedent of American political culture that rules out a decisive and transformative executive action of this kind.
But a proclamation is not itself a policy making tool – rather its function is declarative and descriptive: it sets the bounds of the Nation’s view of itself, and of permissible future discourse and action. For a proclamation to have any standing as a base for policy-making, it must be accompanied by an Act of Congress. However, we shouldn’t mistake the strong value which symbolism and communication carry: just ask the Israelis about their Nation-State law.
B) It will be the policy of the state to set immigration and natal policy that will ensure a permanent European majority.
For the purposes of the present discussion we will separate this proposal into its constituent parts: immigration control and the promotion of White fertility. Looking first at immigration, we see that major changes to the status quo can be achieved with relative ease by the Executive. Many may recall the legal battles in 2017 and ’18 over President Trump’s largely ineffective ‘Muslim ban’ and other attempted actions on immigration; while these actions largely amounted to nothing but giving Conservatives of the Baby Boomer generation some political red meat, there were some positive outcomes.
The most relevant from a policy-making perspective is that the Supreme Court upheld that Title 8 of the United States Code § 1182 “exudes deference to the president in every clause”. Title 8 grants considerable latitude to any radically Reformist administration. Because of this ruling, and because of the way the legislation is worded, a future NJP administration could easily issue a ban on Nationals from non-White countries using any variety of justification, from the most purely economic arguments to the most idealistic of Racial principles.
Turning to the question of setting pro-natalist policies, we can identify some practical methods to ensure the long term stability of the White family, and a youthful population able to serve the Nation. When certain polities in our present era seek to boost fertility (a seemingly uncontroversial objective but one that is politically incorrect in many parts of the West) the “go to” plan is to spend large sums of State money. While White-Papers is not in any way averse to the State being involved in addressing social issues (we are not Conservatives) we do not want to see pointless spending. Research from the Pew Centre, the Hungarian and German Governments, and the Institute for Family Studies(IFS) have all made one thing abundantly clear – marriage results in children. The IFS research found that if a woman is married from age 20 to age 50 she will, on average, produce 3.41 children.
A future NJP administration should seek to use the apparatus of the State, including the educational system, to inculcate young people with healthy notions concerning the benefits of marriage; it should be a formal demographic goal to bring the average age at first marriage down from the current historic high of 30 years old back to the historic norm of 22 years old for women and 26 years old for men (thus allowing for men to finish their education or job training). Furthermore, the State should implement a family-formation policy which is no longer based on the false concept of “planning” for children. Children can never be completely ‘planned for’ and would-be parents are overstressed by the idea they must be “fully prepared”. The introductory scene of the cult film Idiocracy remains a truthful illustration of the damage wrought by this particular social norm. Economic incentives, such as a baby bonus or interest-free housing loans are wonderful ideas, but data shows they are simply not enough. Social attitudes must change completely.
C) “The rights of historic minority populations will be respected.”
White-Papers has little to add to this. The aboriginal Red Indian tribes have their reservations; this system stands in need of reform, but that is beyond the scope of the present discussion. As for the Black population: it is our opinion that they must have leadership willing to come to an accord with a future NJP administration – making any other recommendations would involve little but outright speculation; again, something that does not fall within the remit of our current project.