Recently, a criticism of the thought of “national populism”, “new spring of peoples” or “national folkism” present in the All-Polish movement has emerged from the conservative right. So it's a fewer points to explain what we're talking about.
One of the allegations from the Conservatives afraid our approach to the imagination of man. Nationals do not reject the social concept of first sin, as any conservative commentators suggest. We do not accept liberal anthropological optimism. We know that people by nature have tremendous possible for evil, or alleged "Jung shadow". This means, therefore, that restrictions and laws are needed which the state imposes to discourage or forbid evil and to advance Christian and Republican values (concerning for the common good). We do not believe in any good savage who has depraved the bad country." We request any clues. This should be served by the state, the Church and culture. That is why we are far from liberal ideas that have religion in the immaculate nature of the individual.
Today, however, you, the Church and culture neglect due to the fact that they are mostly led by transnational elites, frequently called liberal aristocracy by nationalists, or a layer of globalists who do not identify with their national states. They advance the alleged "open society" – based on deceptive rights and freedoms. Just like the aristocracy at the dusk of its power. Liberal democracy has committed itself to implementing a government not elected by the people, experts, large global corporations and tribunals aimed at defending liberal values, frequently in contravention to natural, democratic or people's interests. Simplifyingly, the regulation of liberal aristocracy serves a narrow strata of wealth and delights in GDP, while the people are surviving worse and worse despite the announced economical development. What if the economical indicators are improving as the rates of social fragmentation increase in proportion to them? What can we do with more and more wealth erstwhile most of the capital is gathered in the hands of any of the richest families? The narrow caste of transnational globalist aristocracy rules on behalf of its interests, not average people, not on behalf of national communities.
In this way, let's give mass immigration is promoted due to the fact that it pays off to globalist elites – it gives an injection of inexpensive labour and blurs cultural/national communities, so it prevents the governments of people who are besides diverse. This removes concepts specified as national interest or national state. Discussing communities in a broader sense besides destroys these narrower, or families. This is how micro-identities arise – 100 different genders and hyper-individualism, which makes people no longer Poles, Germans, or Swedes, and the consumer layer, only seemingly different individual preferences, which are frequently limited to the sexual sphere. Global corporations are much easier to direct a product (for example, a media product) into a unified consumer layer than to various national groups that have their culture, moral norms and a sense of taste.
Despite the fact that the people are not perfect, which is very frequently emphasized by critics of the thought of "the fresh spring of the peoples" but in it the Latin values – Christianity, family, property, respect for the nature without bambism and eco-terrorism – have been most preserved. In the interests of the widely understood right hand is the greater power of the people, due to the fact that present it is the people who are the depositors of the lifestyle and values that can inactive be described as normal. The people are not perfect, but expanding their competence is present the most realistic alternate to the degenerate planet of elites from Brussels, Davos and Silicon Valley.
As I wrote in the beginning, folk nationalism has naively put religion in the sanctity of the people. Reading ,,,Elegy for Bidoks” J. D. Vans, or following local problems of the Polish village, we see that the state is besides plagued by many pathologies. However, they are mostly system-friendly. Liberal aristocracy can no longer be affected. However, the Polish resident of a tiny village can be offered better transport opportunities, so that he does not gotta emigrate to morally corrupt metropolises, support tiny entrepreneurship at the expense of large corporations and make local cultural houses. advance healthy self-government at municipal level to halt the suckling of valuable people from the state to the cities and make distant work opportunities, mainly for mothers wanting to take care of children at home. Thus allowing the people to live in local communities according to the conventional lifestyle. Communityism and Cooperativeism are natural modus vivendi Polish countryside and tiny towns. The state should not only restrict this natural way of being, but besides support it institutionally.
Ultimately, it is in people, in tiny towns and villages that the last hope is to turn against liberal democracy, and only a folk-swinging vector, not a liberal vector, can let the people to gain real influence on reality. This is demonstrated by the always stronger national and populist movements in western Europe. Not due to the fact that the people are perfect, but due to the fact that they are least corrupt, and inactive humiliated by the liberal aristocracy that perpetuates the present, corrupt, order of the world. So it is not hard to turn him against his oppressors. The modern revolution against the modern planet is so national populism, which, for the intent of the text, I called folk nationalism, and this thought should find the vector of contemporary thinking, the Polish right.
Rafał Buca
