The Refounding of a Nation

Nations are fundamentally chained to their founding, and how a nation understands its origins will put a restraint on what it can and cannot do. No nation can fundamentally clash against its own founding in the long term, new reforms are usually just window dressing. This is why, even long after Rome ceased to be a republic in any meaningful sense and had become a military-backed monarchy, it never declared itself one; hence why the Roman emperor was not a king, but rather “imperator” meaning “one who leads.” For Rome to officially declare itself a monarchy was an anathema, it would be an insult against the brave Roman patriots who risked their lives to overthrow the hated Etruscan monarchy.

When ruling powers collide with the founding ethos of a nation and this ethos restrains their goals, they then must create a new founding of that nation. The French Third Republic is a major example of this. For as important as an event as the French Revolution was, it is critical to remember that it took almost a century for those revolutionary changes to fully manifest in French society for a sustained period of time. Indeed, from 1789 to 1870, France alternated between a Catholic monarchy and a militantly secular republic. A secular republic simply could not take. A major reason why the atheistic forces of republicanism could never achieve their victory was because of their own radicalism for one; they would always manage to alienate the majority of the French population soon enough, but there was an even larger reason – France still considered its founding in terms of a Christian monarchy. France was the nation of Charlemagne’s Christmas Day coronation, of St. Louis, of Charles Martel and his men courageously saving Europe from Islamic domination, and it was “the eldest Daughter of the Church.” A France that refused to give up its Chrisitan heritage could never be truly transformed.

All that changed with the rise of the Third Republic in 1870. Unlike previous attempts at republicanism, this iteration was able to moderate itself, preparing for the long road to victory. While previous attempts would see a sharp and bloody rise in anti-Christian violence, the Third Republic would only ramp up the militant secularism slowly; in fact, Catholicism would be the state religion until 1905. However, transformation would eventually come to fruition. More fundamentally, they would shift the founding ethos of France away from its Christian heritage to that of the Revolution; hence, why the national holiday of France is not the anniversary of the Battle of Tours, but the Storming of the Bastille – a previously obscure and unimportant episode of the French Revolution. And it worked, although embers of old France still burn to this day, they have never been able to have a seat at the table to impact the direction of the country. Today, France is one of the most aggressively secular countries in Europe.

Using the example of France, we can now understand what is at stake with the United States. As long as America understands its identity as rooted in 1776, if not an earlier date, there will be restraints placed on the Left. There is no issue where this can be better observed than with gun control. It is true that Anglo-Celtic societies have a stronger tolerance for gun ownership than most other ones, and the settler nations that sprang from an Anglo-Celtic culture have a stronger tolerance still. Nonetheless, it is clear that American gun culture is very much an outlier when compared to Canada or Australia. This is because the United States understands its founding ethos in terms of the American Revolution, and the armed citizenry that was necessary to win our independence.

Thus, the Left must transform the founding of the United States. These three major years/events could be used by the Left as the “refounding” of the United States: 1) 1865, the end of the War of Northern Aggression, 2) 1965, the end of Home Rule for Dixie, and 3) 2020, the George Floyd Riots and all the social chaos that came out of it. Of these, 1865 is likely the safest decision in terms of not causing a significant backlash; braindead normie Republicans would likely jump at that without realizing what they are doing (“Lincoln was Republican!”). But, no matter what date/event the oligarchs pick, it all means the same thing – a restructuring of what is fundamentally possible in American politics. Southerners should be particularly concerned here because all of these incidents are anti-Southern in some significant way, be it the crushing of our attempt at nationhood, the end of home rule that brave Southerners struggled mightily to achieve, or the removal of anything related to Dixie’s unreconstructed past. Under any of these new schemes, the founding of the nation will be grounded in the triumph of Dixie’s enemies, and one in which they will have a free hand to obliterate us. It is a new nation in which we have no place.

Much like old France during the Third Republic, Southerners must work diligently to maintain our original understanding of ourselves as a nation. One of the greatest paradoxes of the Third Republic is that even while it was militantly secular at home, abroad was a great era of missionary activity. The Society of Saint Pius X can be traced back to this period as the Society’s founder, Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, was born during the Third Republic and was a missionary to Africa, eventually becoming the head of the Catholic Church in Francophone Africa. They created a parallel France, waiting for the day, a day that has not yet come, that the France of St. Louis could be restored. And to this day, a fragment of that France still burns.

We must do the same, maintaining our old ways in the face of a government that absolutely hates us, keeping those embers of old Dixie aflame until the moment is right.

Harmonica