Reflections on the Purpose of Government
The word ‘nation’ is rooted in the Latin verb nasci, meaning ‘to be born’. When paired with the Greek word ethnos - broadly understood in ancient languages to mean ‘people’ - the context is fully revealed: to be born of the people. Add to this the Latin status (meaning ‘condition’ or ‘circumstance’), the origin of the term ‘state’, and a metaphysical relationship is realised: a people must exist in order to beget a nation; to rule a nation, the state must reflect the circumstances of the people. Everything about the nation-state starts with the people, and so without the people both cease to exist in a meaningful sense, a country devolving back to being just a piece of land.
Some have perceived this truth to mean that their elected representatives of state - aka, the government - should cater to their every whim and never make them do anything they don’t want to do. When written down in plain English this is clearly quite immature, and frankly if this is what people truly want from their government then they are either politically ignorant or are simply anarchists who are too lazy/scared/complacent to take on the personal responsibility of a life without a state structure. What the matured ethnonationalist should desire from their government is strength: the ability to carry out their role by any means necessary and consequently achieve results.
The results I refer to are, of course, found in the metrics of a thriving society: low crime, high productivity, low incidence of poverty, high incidence of success markers, and many happy families. Ideological allegiance often gets in the way of achieving these things, so I tend to work backwards from the ideal outcome and observe what strategy would be most effective. High productivity does not come from government interference, for example, but from workers feeling that they are being appropriately rewarded for their labour. The reward doesn’t necessarily have to be financial, either - more abstract things like national pride definitely went a long way - but the perception of fair remuneration is likely (and understandably) of prime importance to most.
Low crime, on the other hand, is definitely a metric improved by government involvement, with one vital caveat: the government must be trusted by its people. Without trust, even an expansive militarised police force and harsh criminal justice system will not remain in control of crime. In modern Britain, the police are perceived as untrustworthy by most sections of society, and as such crime has exploded because criminals no longer feel the likelihood of consequences is one to be feared. But a trustworthy and strong government has a cast-iron mandate to do whatever it takes in order to deliver a low-crime society, and its citizens will be grateful for it!
This is my conclusion on the purpose of government - not to be an overbearing nag that exhausts all natural inclination to good, but an authoritative leader that does not strike often but does strike hard. People who pursue the right path granted in return a feeling of freedom from the state, those who don’t condemned to live in the cold dark shadow of the government. What our current establishment offers is an insane level of involvement in everyone’s daily lives, with those who do the right thing overall experiencing more wholly negative interactions (high tax/cost of living, poor healthcare, ineffective policing) with the state’s operations than those who aren’t.
But in order to regain this trust so that it may be strong, the state must revisit its etymological and metaphysical origin: the people. How can it be reformed to again serve us - and by serve I mean delivering what we need to function and elevate as a nation, not literally on hand and foot bending to every hysterical demand. Maybe a more pertinent question would be how we can reform popular opposition to the current government to make it more effective in selecting representatives that are willing and capable of doing what’s needed to achieve improved outcomes for society. At present the political sphere is such a mess it’s hard to envision, and that’s partly because democracy has put government in the hands of the people, instead of how it should be: the people safe, productive, happy, and free in the hands of the government.
Eventually I may publish something more technical about how I would structure the government to best serve in the nation-state of my people. But for now, I encourage people to free themselves from the chains of circular and black-pilled debate over that which cannot be changed: the past, the existence of destructive theoretical concepts, bad people who’ve done bad things, and obsessing over hyper-idealistic outcomes with the most minimal chances of succeeding. We do not need to be perfect in order to make progress, and make progress we must. If you are not willing to do what it takes to win, make no mistake: you too are a contributor to our loss.