To whom does a country belong? The obvious answer history teaches is: whoever takes and holds it. Though since most Westerners require moral justification to save their own lives, I’ll ask: to whom should a country belong?
What is a country? Why are they formed? Why do they exist? Are they functions of geography–patches of dirt on tectonic plates? Are they just economies–simple administrative subdivisions of factories and consumers? Are they instead platforms for seasonal abstractions? Freedom this day, Equality that? Tolerance another?
Who are these countrymen–the tolerant, the equal, The Economy?
Or are countries formed by a particular people, for that people? For their own mutually particular benefit. Do people of like kind, culture, and temperament flock to form polities designed specifically to suit their particular raft of traits? Do they form institutions that are privileging to the people for whom they were designed…and less so for hostile aliens they were not? One assumes so as blandly as one assumes a man builds a house, chooses a wife, and selects an occupation that will most benefit him. If not, then only incompetence or malice can explain the absence.
Or alternatively, do groups coalesce around the notion of furthering the interests of hostile outsiders to their own detriment? Of designing institutions that strip them of wealth and life so that others may proliferate in their stead.
One of these paradigms is psychopathically masochistic and maladaptive…the other is racist. It requires little wondering to alight upon which we have chosen.
Do founding peoples justifiably expect privilege from the countries they form? Do children justifiably expect privilege from their own parents? Is a nation an extended family? If so, are there those we acknowledge as members and those who are not? None seem to ever question the notion that their neighbors are not their family. That the latter are welcome only as temporary invited guests. Strange that neighborhoods across the country manage these distinctions and micro borders daily without flimflam accusations of hatred and isms. There are those who are of us and those who are not. Families to nations. We understand the distinctions as implicitly as we do the proscription on ever acknowledging them.
Of course there are obvious reasons why these fundamental questions of country and nation may never penetrate the public sphere. Awkward answers would percolate to the surface as rapidly as the bubbles in a frog’s pot.
Though being shrouded in sophistry doesn’t make the answers any less obvious. And periodically video presentations surface to poignantly address the fact. I recall being mesmerized by the stark emotional potency of the Generation Identitaire video upon release. Now a similar short is on YouTube. It addresses the existential question of to whom Europe belongs. And offers the only unspeakable answer.
As I have mentioned previously, a people determined to perish will suffer no resistance from others in the pursuit. A man may simply vacate his property to auto-asphyxiate on precious pieties. That will be his choice to make.
But there should never be a question of whose property it is.