As promised in my article “The Freemen of the North” here is my article on slavery.
The people who first began European civilization many thousands of years ago eventually employed a stratification to their societies, slowly forming large interconnected kin groups with defined social roles and ranks. Over time, they were capable of producing enough food and wealth that they could set themselves to large administrative tasks. This first started to appear in the form of the longhouses, but later we get the great monuments and megaliths of Western Europe. Clearly, such amazing feats required great skilled labor and many hands put to the task, but we cannot be certain if there were slaves involved. I mention all of this because it is important — the topic of slavery in the Neolithic has been studied and there is clear evidence that it existed, but we cannot be certain to what extent. This hierarchical system cannot be deeply studied for it resides in the deep depths of our primordial past. Now, thousands of years later, these ancient monuments to forgotten gods are tourist spots for modern day peasants. How ironic that many of us still gather at sacred sites built by evil White slavers and demonic pagan ancestors such as Stonehenge? How curious that their ancient longhouses hold such a sway among our online conversations?
Now, the slaves of this time period are not well-studied as compared to later periods, to my knowledge, but the massive amount of labor that was required to build their monuments, and the severe hierarchical elements of their societies make it clear that the Megalith cultures were some of the most unequal peoples in our history, almost like the Egyptians in this way. For thousands of years, no one built anything like this at all, then suddenly a civilization rose that reached new heights like never before. Slavery was not the source of their greatness, but it surely helped them move massive stones across the landscape, and great timber logs from deep forests.
These Neolithic peoples are ancestral to us. Both the Western Hunter Gatherers (and their ancestors) and the Early European Farmers (and their ancestors) played a major role in the formation of the Neolithic societies who utilized some form of slavery. The Neolithic Europeans are no less ancestral to us than the later Calcolithic and Bronze Age pastoralists, it is just that many of us carry larger degrees of steppe-ancestry owing to the direct descent of many families going back to dominant steppe-males. This means that our forefathers largely conquered and took women. Sexual slavery, basically, and sure this isn’t necessarily the best love story in every case, but it’s the story of our ancestry and I am not the one to shit on my ancestors.
It is true that our ancestors conquered other people, either distant kindred, close kindred, or complete foreigners. Every single time a new Indo-European tribe swept over the broken lands of their distant cousins, they set up an aristocratic nobility that ruled over a peasantry that had a different quality of blood to the conquerors. The Bell-Beakers initially did that across western Europe before full conquest occurred. The Indo-Iranics and Indo-Aryans did that all over Eurasia, Western Asia, the Middle East, and the subcontinent of India, to the great race-mixing shame of their mongrel descendants. Romans did exactly that to countless tribes of Europeans and even foreigners. So too did the Goths and the Franks to the remnants of Rome. Most famously the Normans did that all across the British Isles, and the English followed suit when their time for ascendancy came. The Rus likewise ruled over a great many lesser tribes in Eurasia. Of course, in each of these cases, there was either an assimilation of conquered peoples, or the creation of an empire, but I am simply stressing that fact that smaller groups of Europeans have always ruled over larger groups of Europeans. I am just naming tribes here, but we could also look at the noble classes of antiquity, who were always a minority governing a majority.
I do not mean to equate this to slavery exactly, but I am outlining the discussion here. Conquest, hierarchy, and the will-to-power seems to be the governing force. Underneath all of this lingers the freedom of man — the freedom to take and to give, and the freedom to submit and to live.
Freedom vs Slavery
To get ahead of things, I want to explain that I am not opposed to various kinds of slavery, but I am not actually advocating for any slavery to occur. I do not think the miserable soul-sickness that resides in our hearts would allow for us to enact such a system without falling into terrible immorality.
I believe the most practical form of slavery would be on prisoners, either criminal or POWs. Use them in some fashion, make them useful to society and themselves, and then rehabilitate them. Unless their crimes are heinous, then it should the death penalty. Otherwise, utilize their skills and let them become oriented to some positive task that benefits society.
Another practical form of slavery would be “eugenic slavery” which is basically animal husbandry for humans. I argue that the Indo-European caste system was a form of eugenic slavery, and that certain eras of chattel slavery over Africans were likewise eugenic for them. I truly believe that there have been times in the past where some slaves were living better than their current descendants do in the industrial liberalized hellscape of the modern world.
This is because these older systems allowed for the affirmation of the natural agency of different peoples within the spiritual and mundane hierarchy, within the domains of life, and this sometimes created a sort of brain-drain, where the weakest would die off and only the smartest and strongest could survive. Slavery is directly tied to freedom, and freedom is heavily related to agency; rather than being a purely individualistic agency, it is also a social, cultural, and household agency. If a man is able to live in his natural inherited state with no constraints on his will, be he a slave, peasant, warrior, or noble, then he is truly free. Being able to live according to your natural domains so that you can seek your most worthy self is true freedom. Freedom and hierarchy are intertwined; same with freedom and willpower.
This means that when the lion eats the gazelle after a long chase, both have experienced the freedom allotted to animals. When the noble puts the thrall to work, both are likewise experiencing the freedom of humans. Foreign masters with no Aryan intellect and soul could ever conceive of a system wherein the thralls are slowly, over the course of many generations, turned into worthy members of society. When the Indo-Europeans established the caste-systems, these were not done in hard and fast methods at first. It took a long time for these systems to degrade into what they are today, which Logan rightly calls out when he talks about the fall of Indo-European societies like the Aryans. However, at first, these systems were completely “in-house” meaning that we weren’t coming into contact with foreign races, and were only coming into contact with cousin peoples.
So, the caste systems of most of the Indo-European world actually put the labor of less intelligent kinsmen with less agency to good use, so that the entire tribe could benefit which would have a net positive effect over generations. This is exactly what we see, even with earlier Europeans. The Megalith Builders were the first to achieve massive building works, probably using a very intrusive form of chattel slavery on their own cousin peoples — later, the Romans would do even greater feats using the loyalty of their soldiers and the labor of their slaves. The steppe-pastoralists and their descendants (us) often put lesser criminals or foul kinsmen into servitude, a form of serfdom. These men would then have to work for their freedom, which would force them to actually do something with their lives that benefits the household and folk. They were allowed to marry, have families, and even work their way up the social ladder and eventually secure better marriages for their children.
This sort of an attitude was even applied to black slaves in the colonies and in the American South. Blacks were illiterate hunter-gatherers when we found them. After slavery was finally ended, they were able to read, talk, and do all manner of regular human activity, albeit poorly owing to their natural state in the hierarchy. The blacks of America are generally smarter and more capable than their cousins overseas, and this is not entirely due to European admixture. It is due to us taking them under our rod for many centuries and forcing them into the modern world. Of course, I hate that we did this because now we are stuck with them, but we proved that eugenic slavery is a working reality. It just takes a significant amount of time to really see the results manifest in any meaningful way, and they haven’t really even manifested here because the project was ruined twice — first with the ending of slavery, which was good, second with the Reconstruction and later Civil Rights movements which enshrined blacks as members of our country.
Of course, not every single tribe and era acted this way, or even partook in slavery or serfdom at all. I mention that the Frisii were renowned for their “Frisian freedom” in my previous article, and cases like this were surely somewhat common, and this definitely gets seen with various tribes across the world who abhor the slavery of their people and have an undercurrent constantly flowing towards revolutionary freedom. Nonetheless, over the course of the vast majority of our history, great Europeans have been putting lesser Europeans to work, and this created our civilization.
There have been many different types of slavery done throughout history. There’s sexual slavery, chattel slavery, serfdom, slavery over foreigners, and slavery over native kindred. When it comes to our folk, various forms of slavery and serfdom were ingrained into our early cultures. In the Neolithic, Calcolithic, and Bronze Age, we find that slavery was practiced in the most prosperous tribes — ranging from the Megalith Builders to the pastoralist Indo-Europeans who conquered them, slaves and servants were utilized to fulfill certain functions and roles in society throughout it all. This seems to be a slavery established under the understanding of hierarchy and freedom, the freedom of noble chieftains and their households.
It is easy to point out the hypocrisy in everything that I’ve said about freedom and slavery thus far, mainly by stating that we enslaved kindred folk, and that is quite true. When the noble families and tribes of Europe conquered another tribe, we viewed the conquered people as “others” or “not-people” since they were not of the known folk. This fact has bothered pan-Europeanists like myself for centuries, since various stronger European tribes have dominated lesser ones all throughout our history, tearing at our tapestry, and changing the threads to suit their wants and needs.
This is largely a physical concern, but in a spiritual sense it is spurned on by an ancient belief that we are descended from specific Gods, while other races and families were not, but there were many other reasons and justifications for ancient conquests of course. Later on, we conquered and enslaved on the grounds of Christian morality, so the justifications for why people conquer and enslave another can be quite varied even if the results are similar. Many folk consider their own people “people” while they use words which equate other peoples to “foreigners, strangers, aliens”. This is natural, ingrained, and clearly spurned by our different physical origins and the spiritual ramifications of our individual histories. When the jews claim descent from Yahweh, and the Europeans from the All-Father, and then affirm the spiritual ramifications that this spiritual support brings, we are only doing what is right and natural for all humans. This is why jews seek to enslave the goyim, and why Aryans seek to conquer and colonize the world.
I have long pondered the curious fact that northern European tribes were constantly threatened with two brutal facts of life: endless Imperium out of the Mediterranean and the Middle East, and the threat of foreign invasion from the South or East. Eventually, we fully succumbed to Imperium and took that charge up for ourselves, and through our reckless empire-building-and-breaking we are now being faced with endless hordes of foreigners from the very peoples we were once in contest with.
Empires and the presence of foreigners in our civilization have proven to be terrible for the ultimate good of our peoples. These things tend to erode national identity and cultural norms until traditions become commodities and ideologies become identities. Empires allow for the imperial ethnos to reach the highest heights known to mankind (Rome, Britain, America) but when the zenith is reached, the depths of Hel start calling and the unstoppable descent donwards begins. Likewise, the presence of foreigners either as slaves, servants, or fellow citizens will create short term periods of economic growth in the form of colonialism, consumerism, and mass production, but these foreigners quickly create long-standing problems.
Empires have an annoying habit of ignoring and assaulting the inherited state of freedom felt and experienced by Europeans. From Rome to her successors, to Britain and hers, European nations and tribes have suffered under the eventual collapse of imperialism. The ancient freedom of the Slavs was taken by them from foreign imperialists no less, and now people think of them as the eternal slave (and sometimes for good reason). This quality of life can indeed be eroded away until the once-free peoples are now little more than thralls — however, the seedling of freedom resides in their hearts, for it is an inheritance from their forefathers and the Divine.
This erosion of freedom has been most keenly seen those families, classes, and tribes who have most suffered under the hands of foreign rule. This is quite natural to think about — a people who were once free can eventually get conquered or overtaken, and their way of life can be changed to better suit and benefit that of the conqueror. Overtime, the conquered people would either have to struggle for their freedom again, or they will remain a conquered people to be passed around by world powers like produce and cattle.
This is how nature works when it concerns native tribes being taken over by foreign tribes — one culture, one tribe, one people, and a select number of powerful families will be on top while the others will not. Given enough time, the different ways of life will shape both groups and create new mindsets where the conquered becomes merely a group of thralls, a shadow of their former selves, and the powerful becomes elitists. This has already occurred throughout history, and now there are dozens of tribes and families who are little more than thralls when compared to their ancestors, or to some of their peers. Similarly, there are peoples and families who have maintained this inborn freedom into modernity, and in some ways they have even expounded upon this natural state, to codify it into law and religion.
What I am describing is animal husbandry done to humans, which has been enacted upon humans by ourselves for thousands of years. We have forced different changes within our minds, hearts, and bodies until some of us are more noble and free, and others are less. When ancient Stone Age Europeans partook in slavery, it was mainly to build the great megaliths, or it was purely for sexual reasons. Some humans, like Africans and Aborignals, maintain a sort of animal-like state of freedom, one filled with impulse and drudgery, and yet they also partook in slavery but produced nothing. Clearly, there are different types of slavery and freedom created through generations of human behavior.
This isn’t 1:1, for there can be thrallish families within the same tribe as families of freemen, even thrallish individuals within noble families. Owing to the seedling of freedom that resides in our hearts due to our genetic and spiritual legacy, there exists a fertile space of time wherein the conquered can seek freedom once more and reassert themselves. This assertion isn’t a one time thing either, for freedom must be maintained through constant effort and struggle. This requirement for constant effort is why many remain thralls, and will likely forever remain thralls. You can lead a horse to water, but you can’t make it drink.
Many times throughout history, Europeans of all classes have been conquered, spiritually, socially, and ofttimes physically. We are no longer the Bronze Age conquerors who understand the meaning of freedom — we aren’t even the colonial pioneers who briefly relearned this ancient state of being. We have fallen into thralldom, and thus, the jew has taken over the role of master, and no longer do we view freedom and slavery through the eyes of our ancestors, but through the eyes of Semites. Peasants are now ruling over noble lineages, and this cannot last, even if they think their egalitarian revolutions are forever.
In the eyes of our ancestors, this practice was natural. However, many people alive today do not seem to agree. It is not as though people really rejecting hierarchy or spiritual superiority, in fact people often allow for some specially elevated group, and some specially hated group. This is natural. What is not natural is the liberal idea that our folk were especially evil for doing these things, when indeed, we were the most humane out of them all. Too many liberals and conservatives seek to “redress” the “sins” of our fathers. This is kind of a “White Man’s Burden” mindset. It doesn’t even make complete sense when applied within our own race. For example, why should the Slavs help uplift the Gaels? It is not their calling, rather both should uplift themselves and join the noble household again.
At the end of the day, freedom must be maintained by individuals, kin groups, and larger genetic populations. There are levels to everything. Hierarchy and slavery will always exist in some fashion because freedom exists, and strong men have the freedom to conquer weak men. It’s that simple.
Thank you, and good-end! Hail victory! o///
And slaves often kill their masters and interbreed with their daughters.
"Hierarchy and slavery will always exist in some fashion because freedom exists, and strong men have the freedom to conquer weak men."
Just saying something doesn't make your claim true. You have to back it up. Slavery, like all evil ways of life, can be eradicated. Good does not necessitate evil; quite the opposite. The thesis + antithesis = synthesis abomination must go. Decartes, like every dualist, was a clown. The body begets the mind, and Woman created that body for you.
The ones who enslave others are *weaker*, they just band together to do their dirty work. It's numbers, not strength.
The weak man is greedy, hungry for power, needlessly competitive, phoney, eager to impress the boys' club. He obsesses over his "legacy" and does what he is told by his own masters. Because he has sacrificed his true self in his service to them, he sees no reason why those he sees as "less than" should not have to serve *him*.
The strong man does his *own* work. He builds with his own two hands until he is experienced enough to act as a consultant. He does good business for his household. He is kind, courageous, thoughtful, and authentic. He puts virtue before all else. He lives by the Golden Principle.