Civic Nationalism: The CivNat Discussion Station -

[Learned Hand]

First off: What is Civic Nationalism?

In simplest terms, Civic Nationalism is a form of Nationalism that is couched on a nation that congeals around a common set of ideas, principles, and common identity. Civic nationalism differs from ethnic nationalism in that Civic Nationals (civnats) believe a nation, and those who become citizens, need not adhere to any specific religious, regional, or ethnic group, instead swearing allegiance to and affirming and supporting the principles of a single nation. This means when one becomes a citizen or seeks to immigrate, one must assimilate and cast off the bonds of their previous nationality.

Why Nationalism? Why Civic Nationalism?

The 90s and 2000s saw the rise and dominance of the Globalist mindset, or a set of ideas that dictate that all of humanity essentially belongs to one planet and one group. Globalism rejects the notion of national borders or identity, and embraces the utopian ideals of common struggle and striving.

The late 2000s through today has seen a collapse of Globalism and its supporters, driven by the realities of scarcity economies, uncontrolled immigration to western nations, and a rise in social and political unrest. Most nationalist thinkers point to the abject failure of globalist policies and the simple tribal evolutionary reality of humanity as a rejection of these globalist worldviews.

Many people have begun to realize the importance of self-determination, national identity, and a desire for security and stability at home. This has been driven by populist movements in the United States and Europe.

Although Civic Nationalism has appeal to European nations where the concept of Nationalism was birthed, Civic Nationalism enjoys wide appeal in immigrant nations like the United States and Canada. The United States in particular cannot adhere to ethnic nationalism like European nations because of its far shorter national identity and citizen demographics, but Civic Nationalism allows a way forward that binds the nation together while providing for stability beyond its constituent parts.

What are the virtues of Civic Nationalism?

Civic Nationalism promotes (among others)

- Strong borders
- A strong, unified, coherent national identity
- A demand that all members of the state, and all those living in the state, adhere to a common set of beliefs and doctrinal attitudes
- Service to the nation, either civic or military
- Rejection of arbitrary ethnic divisions that might separate one citizen from their countrymen
- The value of tradition
- National pride, while also striving to improve the nation
- Recognizes that the nation comes first; but does not preach pure isolation from the world stage
- Utilitarian view of crime and punishment
- Meritocracy
- A racially "blind" society: Employment, law, promotion, scholarship, or any advantage or disadvantage based on race or creed is strictly illegal. Discrimination based on citizen is strongly encouraged.
- Enumerated rights -- the right to self-defense and to be armed, the right to quiet enjoyment of property, the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness
- The "One God, One Country, One Flag" concept

What Civic Nationalism stands against:

- Critical Race Theory
- Identity politics
- Extremism; while many civnats, and nationalists in general lean to the modern right, there is a utilitarian balance to political systems
- Relative truth; Civic Nationalism preaches a common set of principles and morals. This is coupled with a recognition that some behaviors are degenerate and immoral
- Foreign Interventionism: Civic Nationalism is a rebuke of Neo-Conservative policies, and believes foreign intervention in other nations is a last resort to defend the state. All nations should have a right to self-determine.
- Global Organizations: The World Bank, The IMF, United Nations, WHO, etc should all simply be voluntarily and non-controlling. No global organization should have the right to dictate policy in or control any nation.

This is not exhaustive, of course, and individual dogma differs.

But it is my strongly held belief that with the rise of populism and a re-awakening of patriotic ideals in the United States and Europe that Civic Nationalism offers a viable way forward for nations. Though meant as satire, one might think of the Citizen's Federation from Starship Troopers as one example of Civic Nationalism at work in some regards.

Let this thread be a place to discuss these ideas, as Civic Nationalism continues to garner widespread appeal, if most people can't put a name on it yet.

 

[The Pink Panther]

Yeeeeeeeeeeeeeeesireeee

 

[DumbDude42]

civnat is cuck shit for spineless cowards

it is not "a viable way forward for nations" - it is merely a slightly different disguise for the same anti white positions that have created the disaster we are currently experiencing.
the end result of civnat is the exact same as the end result of progressivism: whites become minorities in their own homelands and are subjected to ever increasing hostility and discrimination by the new majority of hostile foreigners, until extinction.

 

[Learned Hand]

civnat is cuck shit for spineless cowards

it is not "a viable way forward for nations" - it is merely a slightly different disguise for the same anti white positions that have created the disaster we are currently experiencing.
the end result of civnat is the exact same as the end result of progressivism: whites become minorities in their own homelands and are subjected to ever increasing hostility and discrimination by the new majority of hostile foreigners, until extinction.

Except a functioning civic nationalist society would reject hostile foreigners in favor of no foreigners or immigration at all. And a functioning civic nationalist society would defend the equal rights of citizen members with force, both literal and of law.

This post is a common refrain I always hear from ethnic nationalists that is invariably coupled with a lack of action or a way forward for their own beliefs.

 

[DumbDude42]

Except a functioning civic nationalist society would reject hostile foreigners in favor of no foreigners or immigration at all. And a functioning civic nationalist society would defend the equal rights of citizen members with force, both literal and of law.

sounds like you just watchet too much starship troopers and live in fantasy land tbh

civnat nonsense isn't taken seriously because it is the EXACT same shit that leftists have been espousing for decades now in defense of THEIR immigration policies
"oh dont worry about bad immigrants we'll only let the good ones in!"
"oh dont worry about overwhelming numbers we'll cap them!"
"oh dont worry about criminals we'll deport em!"
that's what they ALWAYS say in advance, then after the fact you learn the hard way that NOTHING of it was true.

all your arguments for civnat are just the exact same lies and deceptions that leftists have been using to mislead and deceive white people about their true intentions for multiple generations now.

 

[Learned Hand]

sounds like you just watchet too much starship troopers and live in fantasy land tbh

civnat nonsense isn't taken seriously because it is the EXACT same shit that leftists have been espousing for decades now in defense of THEIR immigration policies
"oh dont worry about bad immigrants we'll only let the good ones in!"
"oh dont worry about overwhelming numbers we'll cap them!"
"oh dont worry about criminals we'll deport em!"
that's what they ALWAYS say in advance, then after the fact you learn the hard way that NOTHING of it was true.

all your arguments for civnat are just the exact same lies and deceptions that leftists have been using to mislead and deceive white people about their true intentions for multiple generations now.

Again, no. Civic Nationalism at its *core* rejects these policies. You don't destabilize the nation for sake of the immigrant. Their plight is not your concern. If you don't want any immigration, cut it off. The default position is no immigration, not more.

Civic Nationalism is a DIRECT repudiation of leftist policies on immigration, statehood, and identity. You just sound like a crybaby mad you saw two brown people in your local Tesco this morning and buy into the /pol/ meme of "muh proud white race."

The strongest people are ones built around common belief, common struggle, and national pride, not arbitrary genetics.

 

[DumbDude42]

Again, no. Civic Nationalism at its *core* rejects these policies. You don't destabilize the nation for sake of the immigrant. Their plight is not your concern. If you don't want any immigration, cut it off. The default position is no immigration, not more.

Civic Nationalism is a DIRECT repudiation of leftist policies on immigration, statehood, and identity. You just sound like a crybaby mad you saw two brown people in your local Tesco this morning and buy into the /pol/ meme of "muh proud white race."

The strongest people are ones built around common belief, common struggle, and national pride, not arbitrary genetics.

and there you go, only took you 3 posts to make your overt anti white sentiment clear as daylight
(people know this immediately just from the points you argue btw, that's why this stuff isn't taken seriously)

 

[Learned Hand]

and there you go, only took you 3 posts to make your overt anti white sentiment clear as daylight
(people know this immediately just from the points you argue btw, that's why this stuff isn't taken seriously)

I don't think an intelligent person can laugh at and mock what they view as racial grifters of another skin color while at the same time extoling their own as better than any other. It's not an "anti-white" belief or a belief in support of any other race, it's an understanding that race is a stupid thing to cling to in general and racial pride is usually the resort of the individual with no other form of pride or self worth to fall back on. Whereas belief in nationalism is a belief in a pride that exists outside of oneself.

 

[ConfederateIrishman]

...I'm sure this will be a productive conversation that will leave everyone who particpated in it better off.

 

[soft kitty]

This sounds like me and frankly most if not all of the right-wing.

An interesting idea, but I thought all of this was already implied just by being, you know, not anti-american.

 

[A Cardboard Box]

Civic nationalism has failed. Look at the UK, France, and the US. It's over. The experiment has killed the West.

 

[Women should die]

Literally the only way Civic Nationalism Could MAYBE work is if Segregation was still a thing.

 

[Fek]

This thread is gay and so am I for replying...DEEP THOTS:

The United States in particular cannot adhere to ethnic nationalism like European nations

Fucking..what? America was originally founded by (and, if you actually bother reading our founding documentation: for) English, German, and Scandinavian people in particular. You think there was no reason for that? None of those groups have any shared heritage at all? No common ground one would dare say comes from the same or similar ethnicity?

The strongest people are ones built around common belief, common struggle, and national pride, not arbitrary genetics.

Yeah, those silly genetics don't mean anything. EvErYoNe Is ThE sAmE. Remember when South Africa figured out how to cure AIDs?

I don't think an intelligent person can laugh at and mock what they view as racial grifters of another skin color while at the same time extoling their own as better than any other. It's not an "anti-white" belief or a belief in support of any other race, it's an understanding that race is a stupid thing to cling to in general and racial pride is usually the resort of the individual with no other form of pride or self worth to fall back on. Whereas belief in nationalism is a belief in a pride that exists outside of oneself.

You've gotta be bullshitting. You just want to be the arbiter of what is and is not worthy of pride. That's pretty faggoty.

Do you think anyone with an opposing viewpoint is racist as well?

This post is a common refrain I always hear from ethnic nationalists that is invariably coupled with a lack of action or a way forward for their own beliefs.

Can you name a method of taking action or finding a way forward that doesn't land you incarcerated or perforated by glowing ones? You wanna be quick to disregard a dissenting view, but you seem intentionally fucking ignorant of the state of <lolcurrentyear> America.

 

[wtfNeedSignUp]

That sounds like just renaming the original form of Fascism so you can get hope beg the left for a "not racist" card which will never be given to you.

 

[The Pink Panther]

@DumbDude42 be like

ANYTHING THAT DOESN'T FIT INTO MY INCREDIBLY FRINGE IDEOLOGY IS ANTI-WHITE, BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH. Nigga, please.

 

[Samson Pumpkin Jr.]

civic nationalism works until it doesn't. The imagined "Danubian confederation" would have sought to maintain the Austro-Hungarian borders under a constitutional monarchy or a republic. But the reason it would not have worked is because the people that would've comprised it don't have the same loyalties or ideals. Contrary to popular belief Austria-Hungary was very stable before WW1 because the non-German population owed its allegiance directly to emperor Franz Joseph. He was the glue that was holding that empire together. Once he died in 1916 the empire really began to crumble.

We could imagine an alternative Austria not based on loyalty to the emperor but to something else. This alternative country would survive because all its people believe in the same thing, and therefore it would be a successful civnat country. But finding that "thing" that holds your country together is hard. It often comes in the form of a benevolent dictator who plunges the country into chaos once he dies. You could make the argument that AH was already a civnat country.

The only good thing about republics is that they have a built-in thing which everyone can put their allegiance to; a constitution (or some other piece of paper enshrining the rights of all citizens.) This is why republics have a better chance of surviving as a civnat country in the long run.

 

[Learned Hand]

civic nationalism works until it doesn't. The imagined "Danubian confederation" would have sought to maintain the Austro-Hungarian borders under a constitutional monarchy or a republic. But the reason it would not have worked is because the people that would've comprised it don't have the same loyalties or ideals. Contrary to popular belief Austria-Hungary was very stable before WW1 because the non-German population owed its allegiance directly to emperor Franz Joseph. He was the glue that was holding that empire together. Once he died in 1916 the empire really began to crumble.

We could imagine an alternative Austria not based on loyalty to the emperor but to something else. This alternative country would survive because all its people believe in the same thing, and therefore it would be a successful civnat country. But finding that "thing" that holds your country together is hard. It often comes in the form of a benevolent dictator who plunges the country into chaos once he dies. You could make the argument that AH was already a civnat country.

The only good thing about republics is that they have a built-in thing which everyone can put their allegiance to; a constitution (or some other piece of paper enshrining the rights of all citizens.) This is why republics have a better chance of surviving as a civnat country in the long run.

I'm curious what your opinion would be of a nation rallied around something like the US Constitution, then. Most Americans, especially on the right, correctly fanatically defend the Constitution as the blueprint and framework for successful governance. The Founding Fathers are uplifted, or used to be, before liberal agency began strangling out public education and higher ed in the country.

My thoughts revolve around a nation dedicated to the survival and prosperity of the nation itself -- the state is supreme, and citizens are the state. You build the ethos of the worldview around the Constitution and Bill of Rights. That is the supreme law of the land from which all is derived. Free speech, the bearing of arms, the public forum, and the preservation of culture, language, belief, and national unity would be key. Charging those who try and divide as the traitors and domestic enemies that they are would be important.

I suppose in the perfected form, a citizen would answer the question, "What are you?" Not with "I'm African American, I'm Italian-American, I'm Jewish, I'm Asian, etc," but instead simply, "I am an American, like you. This is my identity. This is who I am."

It would be civic virtue and nationalism perfected, while rejecting the ethnic tribalism that causes ethnic nationalism to fail.

No doubt many on the left would simply call this fascism, but many on the left are overt enemies of the state as it is, and should be treated as such. I'm really not trying to curry their favor, rather, I'm trying to bond countrymen together beyond the basic barriers that divide us. Propaganda in the US used to understand this:

 

[The Last Stand]

@DumbDude42 be like

ANYTHING THAT DOESN'T FIT INTO MY INCREDIBLY FRINGE IDEOLOGY IS ANTI-WHITE, BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH. Nigga, please.

And then they wonder why White people are looked down upon as "racist." They ain't exactly helping their case.

 

[Samson Pumpkin Jr.]

I'm curious what your opinion would be of a nation rallied around something like the US Constitution, then. Most Americans, especially on the right, correctly fanatically defend the Constitution as the blueprint and framework for successful governance. The Founding Fathers are uplifted, or used to be, before liberal agency began strangling out public education and higher ed in the country.

My thoughts revolve around a nation dedicated to the survival and prosperity of the nation itself -- the state is supreme, and citizens are the state. You build the ethos of the worldview around the Constitution and Bill of Rights. That is the supreme law of the land from which all is derived. Free speech, the bearing of arms, the public forum, and the preservation of culture, language, belief, and national unity would be key. Charging those who try and divide as the traitors and domestic enemies that they are would be important.

I suppose in the perfected form, a citizen would answer the question, "What are you?" Not with "I'm African American, I'm Italian-American, I'm Jewish, I'm Asian, etc," but instead simply, "I am an American, like you. This is my identity. This is who I am."

It would be civic virtue and nationalism perfected, while rejecting the ethnic tribalism that causes ethnic nationalism to fail.

No doubt many on the left would simply call this fascism, but many on the left are overt enemies of the state as it is, and should be treated as such. I'm really not trying to curry their favor, rather, I'm trying to bond countrymen together beyond the basic barriers that divide us. Propaganda in the US used to understand this:

View attachment 1586387

you're not wrong, but in time everything fails. How did the US constitution stop the great depression? The US has been lucky with its geography and parasitic relationship with the old world which continues to this day. Because of those two things the people of the US haven't lost faith in the constitution. Americans have had a very prosperous republic to put their faith in with only one major hiccup, that being the great depression.

I praised republics for having an already built thing for the people to worship, that doesn't mean it is better than a monarchy. The citizens of a monarchy build up trust with their ruling house over generations, and often times their faith in the house doesn't break with one or two bad monarchs. It is not uncommon to see republican societies lose faith in their republic over one generation. This is what happened with Weimar Germany and Italy.

A functioning civnat country is undoubtedly good because it can mobilize everyone from all facets of society to work for the state, but the relationship between the citizen and that state is fragile. Your imagined America would be a powerful force, but without totalitarian measures to keep everyone enthusiastic about the regime how long ?

This also brings me to totalitarian countries and their relationship with the citizens. Totalitarian governments sack their citizens of all wealth and use some of that wealth to brainwash everyone to love dear leader and only the purest communism, fascism, national-bolshevism etc.

 

[The Pink Panther]

And then they wonder why White people are looked down upon as "racist." They ain't exactly helping their case.

I wouldn't say that it makes that case look bad, the only real reason why they're looked down upon is the over politicization of victimization narratives and our institutions being invaded by people who follow fringe race theory shit that is like the extreme opposite of eugenicism (hell, eugenicism, at the very least had some accurate dispositions).

I'm just making fun of him because it's whiny and pathetic and viewing race as the mere badge of honor is just a waste of fucking time.