In Defense of Nobility

It is easy today, with centuries of propaganda backing it up, to assume that the nobility were a parasitic class of rich and ruthless people who spent their days playing games, getting entire nations embroiled in their personal vendettas, and sapping the economic life out of the sturdy peasants who were forced to live under them.  Movies, pop culture, and tenured historians all agree that the noble class was never anything more than a gang of glorified thugs.  The inconvenient fact is that a virtuous class of nobility is a critically essential component of any advanced and civilized nation.  Consequently, destroying the nobility in a civilized nation always results in several predictable disasters for the people that the noble class serves.

The nobility has most often historically been associated with its military role of repelling invasions and crushing insurrections.  The nobles as a class however, exercise far more power and influence than simple military defense.  The nobility as a genetically bound group has historically been responsible for preserving the cultural and ethnic independence of their nation.  The nobles, being reared from birth as a social class deeply immersed in a culture of honor and virtue, also maintain the morality and honor of the nation and are traditionally expected to comport themselves in such a way as to be an example worthy of emulation – virtue personified, essentially.  Nobles patronize the arts and academia, and by doing so develop and maintain the culture’s standards of beauty and wisdom.  Above all these things though, one of nobility’s most crucial roles is to control and prevent the corrupting power of wealth.

The culture of a nation is not a reflection of its people, it is a reflection of its ruling class because the people will imitate and obey the ruling class.  The people do not simply obey the explicit laws of the ruling class; ambitious people will also internalize the behavior and fashionable opinions of the ruling class, and disassociate from those who do not, in hopes of being accepted into the elite circles.  This cultural assimilation combined with increasing wealth is known as “climbing the social ladder” and is fairly unique to the middle class and bourgeoisie.

Among the middle class commoners, social hierarchy is primarily determined by wealth – a commoner can move up or down the social ladder within his class as his fortunes rise or fall.  With nobility being a hereditary class, wealth cannot (or should not) be used to buy nobility.  In an honorable and uncorrupted state (i.e. “Lord” Rothschild notwithstanding) money can neither buy a commoner’s ennoblement nor can money elevate one noble’s rank above another.

All money is essentially international in that money or the love of money knows no ethnic or political boundaries, and therefore the moneyed class tends toward cosmopolitanism.  Wealthy merchants across the globe generally have more interest in each other than they do in their own countrymen.  The economic power of the bourgeoisie is immense and the nobility, that class of hereditary warriors whose economic security is firmly rooted in the land, is able to counter and physically blunt money power, thereby preserving the unique cultural and ethnic identity of the nation.  When the nobility becomes corrupt, the power of the bourgeoisie over the nation grows.  Whenever the bourgeoisie becomes powerful enough, the nobility are cast off (as in France, Russia, and America) or politically castrated (as in Britain, Spain, and the Nordic countries) and the bourgeoisie becomes the new ruling class.

America retained noble virtues in its culture for longer after its revolution than many other countries as a liberal democracy, but America was a special case.  Aristocratic virtue was preserved in America after independence in the agrarian South, and also early America was not very democratic – to the point of actually being anti-democratic in some cases.  Presidents with traditional noble virtues from the southern states conquered all of modern America’s current territory, except for Hawaii and Alaska, prior to the South’s loss of political power in the late 1840’s and its subsequent destruction in the Civil War.

The corruption of the nobility and the consequent rise of the bourgeoisie to power have several predictable results, though the changes may not happen overnight.  The bourgeoisie superficially emulates the nobility in their rise to influence and continue to do so immediately after assuming formal power, but when the nobles are dethroned then the changes will happen eventually.

Money and economics become the all-consuming interest of the nation – “it’s the economy, stupid!”  The philistine instincts of the bourgeois middle class result in the fall of the civilization’s classical esthetics which is replaced by more “authentic” (i.e. ugly) esthetics, as well as the veneration of novelty for the sake of novelty.  Likewise liberal academia (as in liberal arts, not liberal politics) becomes more and more immersed in baseness, seeking to glorify the common while denigrating the high-minded arete of the old aristocracy.  The fundamental materialism of the bourgeoisie means that religion will become baser and less lofty, eventually degenerating into outright hostility to the native religion.  The nation itself will become vulnerable to foreign interference as the merchant class comingles its economic interests with foreign nationals and consequently the cultural and ethnic independence of the nation will come under attack.  The ruling class, being wealth-based instead of hereditary, will be vulnerable to infiltration by indifferent or even hostile aliens.  Ethics will descend into the absurd depths of Nietzsche’s slave morality and honor will come to be viewed as outdated, silly, or even dangerous.  Longevity will be elevated above glory, and peace will be elevated above justice.  These are the natural consequences of a nation embracing the peaceful and materialistic values of the merchant class.  The downfall of the nobility in a nation is like the crash of the immune system in a body, it becomes vulnerable to all manners of foreign interference, degeneration, parasites, and weakness to exploitation – ethnically, economically, and culturally.

In light of these facts, I believe that any attempt by Americans to “take back” their nation by grass roots movements, reform, political campaigning, or propaganda is doomed to failure because the rank and file masses will never respond to a cultural movement that is contrary to the culture of those whom the masses deem to be the ruling class.  The histories of Western nations are littered with the carcasses of mass movements against the bourgeoisie that seemed to gain momentum, and then died without issue.  Prior successful revolutions that appeared to pit the masses against the ruling class were only possible after the masses no longer considered the de jure ruling class to be the legitimate rulers in their own right – the bourgeoisie had already become the de facto ruling class and the revolutions merely swept away the decaying shells of an emasculated and corrupt, and essentially powerless nobility.

So how does the nobility become so corrupt and weak that moneyed power can turn the people against it?  Answer: by existing in a condition where the incompetent and un-virtuous are not weeded out.  The incompetent noble will become dependent on bourgeois professionals thereby losing the respect of the people and increasing bourgeois power.  The un-virtuous will betray the nation in many different ways, but especially by allowing or inviting outside interference, oppressing the people, or bankrupting the estates.  War is the traditional method of weeding out the unworthy, but the most consistent way to do so without constant warfare is to have a noble code of honor that would prevent nobles from aiding or supporting the incompetent and un-virtuous.  The nobility constitutes a tiny minority (usually less than 5 percent) of the population, so the temptation is strong to support one’s class out of the principal of solidarity.  This is a healthy attitude for survival, but it must be attenuated by a strict observance of honor as well as the hardness to allow corruption to fail if the nobility as a whole is to remain uncorrupt.

We cannot count on our current bourgeois ruling class to falter on their own and hand us the opportunity to sweep into power the same way the old bourgeoisie swept into power.  The only way to win over the people is by becoming the de facto ruling class ourselves, thus putting ourselves in a position to undermine and then subjugate our erstwhile masters and reshape the nation in the vision of noble virtues.

We must work our way up over many decades to become the effective ruling class while at the same time remaining ethnically unmixed and culturally separate from the prevailing bourgeois culture.  We must gain economic power while simultaneously preserving an abhorrence of materialistic merchant class ethics.  We, the ancestors of a future noble class, must become the people that the masses must adore in order to advance their economic interests and social prestige, yet we must remain apart from the masses and their bourgeois tendencies.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: