Is Homesteading Heroic?
Vaishya vs Kshatriya.
Ten years ago, I started to investigate the homesteading movement as a means of “restarting” civilization. I was looking for a cult.
At the time, I was depressed. I stayed up all night, avoiding sunlight, avoiding social contact, avoiding exercise, barely eating. My theory of depression is that, in some cases, it is a result of a deep feeling of rejection. This feeling of rejection is associated with exile from the tribe.
Within tribal societies, genetic success is impossible without some degree of social acceptance. Otherwise, one is not truly “within the society.” Consider the most extreme example, that of the rapist. The rapist either deceives others to maintain social acceptance, or exists outside of society, raiding, pillaging, and kidnapping. But even pillagers need a tribe of their own to be successful.
If one is truly abandoned by the tribe, and left behind to starve, it is possible to perhaps gather the food necessary to survive. But without a mate, reproduction represents an impossible obstacle. The only option is to regain admission to the tribe, or to gain admission to a new tribe.
The best way to achieve acceptance into a new group is to infantilize and neuter one’s self. This is accomplished by weakening the body, becoming small, meek, hunched over, pale, inoffensive, quiet, and harmless. Depression is an evolutionary mechanism which achieves the maximum degree of “integration preparedness.” In other words, depression is a state which prepares you to enter into a cult.
Every ancient tribe was a cult, with its own bizarre rituals, superstitious beliefs, and violence taboos. We still seek out tribal identities as a result of our evolutionarily molded psychology: sports teams, religions, e-celebs, fandoms, and political factions. Admitting this to myself was painful, as it implied my willingness to “sacrifice for the cause” was actually a selfish and misguided desire to satisfy my need for emotional security in a deeply flawed and perverse way. I was looking for love in all the wrong places.
Cults, political extremism, homesteading, and “alternative” communities are all attempts by limited human beings to reconcile their ancient instincts with the confusing whirlwind of modern life. The dominant identities of centuries past — American patriot, Christian, White — are now ridiculed as the source of all evil. It is no coincidence that it is precisely these people, who have been scapegoated by the academic and moral authorities, are the most vulnerable to the false utopia of the “homestead.”
Pioneering vs Homesteading
Ancient cultures were founded by pioneers. The Indo-Europeans, Turks, and Arabs were all nomadic peoples who created vast empires. Although the empires of the Arab Caliphates and Europeans are well known, the Turks were fully integrated into and intermixed with Mongolian culture before the invasions of Attila the Hun and Genghis Khan. The First Turkic Khaganate, which reached its greatest extent in 576, was the first empire in world history to stretch from Manchuria to the Black Sea.
The descendants of the Indo-Europeans, the Dorians, invaded Greece and subjugated the natives, referred to as Pelasgians. With the establishment of Greece as a “homebase,” the Greeks sent out colonists to Italy, France, Egypt, Anatolia, Ukraine, and Russia.
Meanwhile, the Phoenicians of the Levant, whose language was the most closely related to modern Hebrew, also sent out colonists to Italy, Anatolia, Cyprus, Crete, Egypt, North Africa, Spain, and France.
The process of colonization was explorative, adventurous, and sometimes violent. First, a ship would be sent with warriors to an undiscovered land. After landing, the colonists would have to either make peace or war with whatever natives they encountered. Next, the colonists had to secure some sort of resource which they could use to trade or sustain themselves — often grain, gems, or gold. Finally, the colonists would send a fleet of ships back to the “homebase” to confirm their success and invite new settlers to the location.
This second wave, the wave of settlers or immigrants, was still somewhat adventurous, but less so than the first. Each subsequent wave would become less so until finally the colony was established as its own independent “homebase.” Both Rome and Carthage started as colonial settlements, but over time became so established that they themselves began to send out colonies. This model can be seen as a tree.
At the base of the tree is perhaps some Nostratic root between Indo-European and Afro-Asiatic languages. Next, the Indo-Europeans migrated from the Pontic steppe into Greece, Anatolia, and Italy. Then, the Greeks, Luwians, and Latins each founded colonies, among which were Athens, Troy, and Rome. The Greeks then colonized lands between Spain and Afghanistan, and the Romans later colonized Britain. The British history of colonialism is endless, but is rooted more deeply in Celtic and Germanic migrations.
What is important here is to distinguish between the character of the initial pioneers and their particular spirit, their way of life, from that of the immigrants or settlers who came after them. Magellan, Cortez, and Columbus were all of an entirely different quality and mindset than modern immigrants to America. Pioneers and pilgrims of that time faced harsh conditions, the fear of the unknown, and eventually Indian raids and scalpings. The New World offered opportunity, but also tragedy. Many initial colonies were lost or abandoned, including the Roanoke Colony of 1585, the Popham Colony of 1607, and the Wessagusset Colony of 1622.
It seems somewhat inappropriate and an insult to the character of these early colonists to compare their psychology to that of a “homesteader” or “prepper.” They did not have electricity, running water, or home depot to depend on. However, it can be said that early colonists were indeed farmers, and this practice itself can be scrutinized on an even deeper mythological level.
The Legend of Rama
The world of Rama was similar to our own. It was divided into two parts: on the one hand, the invincible empire of Lanka, and on the other hand, the rest of the world. Rama, who was destined to defeat this empire, did not begin his quest by homesteading, prepping, getting out the vote, changing public opinion, putting up stickers or flyers, holding protests, holding conferences, networking, or even building a community. Instead, at the first opportunity, Rama left his home with his wife and brother.
Rama’s exile to the forest was highly ambiguous. On the one hand, it was clearly not an act of desperation. Rama was well-liked, poised to ascend to the throne, and had every amenity which could possibly be imagined. On the other hand, Rama seemed to have no attachment to the baubles of modern civilization. Although his devotees insisted on following him in order to found a religious community, Rama rejected these people. He had no need of social rejects or fanatics. He simply wanted, in some senses, a vacation in the garden of Eden, a return to simplicity outside of the inauthenticity of modern life. He was not looking for hardship or a celibate, lonely lifestyle. With his wife and his brother by his side, he had all that he needed.
However, the kidnapping of Sita by Ravana represented the beginning of Rama’s campaign to destroy Lanka. In this quest, Rama did not employ the people of his homeland, but rather a mass of monkey men. The depiction of the monkey army indicates clearly the quality of Rama’s soldiers — they were perverse, prone to lust, given to animal instincts, rowdy, and quarrelsome. However, Rama, by his unrelenting power and excellence, was able to form an alliance with the exiled monkey king Sugriva who was ousted by his brother Vali. With the sealing of this alliance, the fate of Lanka was decided.
The story of Rama is not unlike that of Alcibiades, the Athenian general who, instead of remaining at home, fought for foreign armies such as Sparta and Persia. Both men were not motivated by a desire to “save their homelands,” but were Gods on earth with no strong “nationalistic” allegiance. While Alcibiades failed to found a new civilization, Rama appointed one of his allies to the throne of Lanka, and returned to rule in his home city of Ayodhya.
Kshatriya vs Shudra
The point of telling this legend is to distinguish it from that of the myth of the “homesteader.” The founding of Rome, of Anglo-Saxon Britain, of Rus, of Greece, of Israel, and of the colonies of north America all required explorers, soldiers, and adventurers. None of these colonies could have persisted if they were founded by monks and farmers. In each case, the defining act of foundation was war or piracy. The adventures of Aeneas, the Anglo-Saxon raiders, the Vikings of Rus, the Dorian invasion, the conquest of Canaan, and King Philip’s War required something more than “community building.” In each case, the attitude of these civilizational founders was more aggressive than it was defensive. They were not attempting to maintain ancient traditions, cuisine, customs or cultures. Instead, they were attempting to wrest power and establish for themselves dominion over a new land.
It could be argued that there are no new lands, and therefore the foundation of new civilizations is impossible. However, some “foundational” cultures achieved this within “known” lands. Joseph Smith and his Mormons began their journey west in 1831. Violence between Smith and non-Mormons began almost immediately, in 1832, when he was tarred and feathered to the point where he was assumed to be dead. Afer Joseph Smith’s death, Mormons arrived in Utah in 1847, and the Battle at Fort Utah occurred only three years later.
The South African pioneers, the voortrekkers, began their Great Trek in 1836. The Battle of Vegkop in 1836 saw the victory of 35 voortekkers against 5,000 Matabele warriors. In both the example of the voortrekkers and the Mormons, already known land became the basis for the foundation of new cultures and new ethno-religious identities. It seems impossible, however, to imagine this sort of migration in the present day, given the global military hegemony of the American government.
Yet world history moves forward. Myanmar persists in a state of civil war, and Russia and Ukraine both are redefining their national identities around war. For Americans, such opportunities seem fruitless. If the situation calls for a “wait and see” attitude, in what environment should one wait?
In general, the fall of empires does not come from its disgruntled farmers. Rather, warriors and mercenaries on the fringes kick in the door. The Germans found themselves invading Rome as they were themselves fleeing Attila. However, we are not at the stage of the fall of Rome. Rather, we exist in a pre-Caesarian period. Caesar was born in the city of Rome, and his allies came from either the financial sector or from the military. The Roman middle class, peasants, handymen, tradesmen, and other ordinary people had little to do with the revolution of Caesar.
Conclusion
Farmers cannot found civilizations, nor can they create revolutions. Pioneers, explorers, adventurers and pirates represent the most likely groups to break away from an existing empire. Secondly, ethno-religious groups like the voortrekkers and Mormons have shown that the internal colonization of war-torn territories is possible. Thirdly, in cases where no land is available for colonization, the only option available for revolution lies in the financial and military sectors.
Ignorance of these historical facts could lead one to believe that pacifistic solutions, like monasteries, homesteads, communes, co-opts, farms, or “communities” could help provide a foundation for a “fresh start.” These sorts of introverted and neutered ghettos can survive, much as the Amish and Coptic Christians have survived in “parallel communities” for hundreds of years. Such limited and parochial ideas do not have the potential to change the course of history. At best, they can calcify the reproduction of obscure and archaic cultural practices. In the final analysis, these limited approaches lack the virility and purity of spirit to truly change history.