#SlavShift: Is The “Western World” Even Worth Defending Anymore?

Is The “Western World” even worth defending anymore? I don’t think so. I am now beginning to believe that it is time we ought to head more in Vladimir Putin’s direction.

The New “Western World”

The Western World was first to see the rise of the modern Republic, a series of Universal Charters and Declarations on Human Rights, a credible interest in the protection of private property and capital as an end and not merely a means of governance, and so on.

Life is no paradise, but in the late 18th century, life outside of the West was invariably and indisputably worse. Although the introduction of novel livestock and disease to the American continent decimated millions of Native Americans before contact was ever made, this was not an intentional “depopulation strategy” as some provocateurs would have you believe.

The Trail of Tears, a series of forced removals, sometimes at gunpoint, of Native American nations from their ancestral homelands in the Southeastern United States, resulted in several thousand Cherokee deaths, and this was also very evil. I am not saying that life was not brutal and unfair, but it was not as bad as at other places at that time in history.

Progress is slow, but life certainly chugs along in a generally positive direction. Yes, the African Slave Trade was a horrid, irreparable crime against humanity, yet almost nobody talks about the “Slav Trade”, that the word “Slav” is actually a self-declared derivative of the word “slave” and that it went on for much longer than the Anglosphere’s interest in African bondage.

Slavs have been the premiere object of desire for most chattel slavers throughout human history, and almost none of this history of the plight of Slavs achieves anywhere close to commercial limelight in today’s Social Justice-obsessed Civil Rights movement, which, ironically is now energized by new-found Islamomyopia (a strange obsession with protecting a billion strong asecular culture whose even moderate sycophants stone women and homosexuals to death for show). The irony of this coincidence should not surprise you. Will the Slavs be required to free the West from chains of its own making?

It is now patently clear that the Western World is crumbling. The institutions that allowed it to flourish, such as regulated monogamy, traditional sex roles, Patriarchy, “The Protestant Ethic”, Classical Liberal philosophy, and most importantly, freedom of speech, are all falling to the wayside. Its allies, Russia and The Philippines most prominent among them, no longer respect “The West”, and its cultural sphere of influence is dwindling.

It is time for , a new paradigm that recognizes that what truly made “The West” great is alive and well today, strangely enough, in the Orthodox Post-Soviet states of the Eastern bloc, the home of the Slavs. We must become cognizant of the fact that we as Slavs are all that remain of the traditional “Western” world, and aim to protect our values from those who would have them taken away. Slavs, from Russia to Czechia to Croatia and to all those living elsewhere abroad, must unite behind Neomasculinity and traditional living in order to free the West of its daily expanding shackles.

It’s my life. I know I won’t live forever. I just want to live while I’m alive.

One thought on “#SlavShift: Is The “Western World” Even Worth Defending Anymore?

  1. Sorry, but your etymology of the homonym “Slav” is wrong.

    The Old Church Slavonic word for Slav is “Sloven” or “Slovin”, adjective form of “slovo” which means “word” in proto-Slavonic (and even in relatively recent incarnations of the language of your ancestors, while today it means “character”/”letter” it used to mean “word”, as in “slovo Isusovo” = “the word of Jesus”). Given how Slav language spread among neighbouring peoples through trade (more than through war) the logical meaning of the “worded”/”wordfull” i.e. “Slovin” is really “intelligible”.

    Consider how the exonym for Germanic people is “Njemac” in Serbo-Croatian (and “Nemec” in western Slavic languages), which really means “mute”/”unintelligible” it’s quite obvious how the dichotomy is to divide neighboring tribes on basis of sharing similar language (“Sloveni”) and mute strangers speaking gibberish (“Njemci”).

    There is not a single word in old Germanic languages to derive the word Sklave from either a laborer or some social rank. It’s quite obviously adaptation of Latin word for Slavs (Sclavi) and the position of enslaved neighbors in their warrior society.

    In short it was the other way around. The name Slavic people used for themselves is the source of the word “slave” in modern English.

    This brings us back to dark ages. Germanic tribes had aggressive states and warrior cultures and their attitude toward large organized, yet weaker strangers is reflected in that ethnonym. Slavic micro-states were peasant-nations whose cultural hegemony and assimilation in Eastern Europe was mostly a consequence of basic craftmanship (today’s Slavic areas in Eastern Europe are sites of earliest european pottery soma 6000 years ago) and trading networks.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *