THE SECRET DESTINY OF AMERICA
The purpose of The American Minervan began as a side project to question and refute by myself, certain unverified claims made in Manly P. Hall’s The Secret Destiny of America and to lay out what was addressed between William Q. Judge, Dolatram and H.P.B. on the question of Freemason and Rosicrucian involvement in the American Revolution, which H.P.B. states was an independent effort, and has no connection to the Asian brotherhoods. Hall, like W.Q. Judge interpreted historical events and figures through the lens of Theosophy and other esoteric traditions, often molding facts to fit a narrative of a “secret destiny.” The secret destiny narrative is not the purpose of my effort.
This secret destiny, according to Hall and Judge meant, that the United States was founded by a secret society of mystics and philosophers with a “Great Plan” for an occult experiment in enlightened self-government.
This only sometimes seem to fit Washington’s “civilization-through-assimilation” vision for Native Americans, which turned out to be naive and disastrous for the tribes in a time when tens of thousands of white settlers wanted and were already stealing land. Hall rarely provided verifiable sources, which prompted me to question the work, which was also being twisted by conspiracists. An objective historical account of the history can still verify certain esoteric interpretations and influences, which challenge modern religious and political perspective. The intentional reframing of history as a spiritual and occult narrative is problematic, so it is not taken seriously by historians. I am using this as cautionary in my writings, while arguing there is ample room for demonstrating the divine philosophical influences and lineage of historical Republicanism. This side project has blossomed into something much more, that has led into research and interest I have been involved in for nearly all my life. It is not a project of mythmaking, but more of an operation table on the poisons and ills that have afflicted and followed the peoples of this land, certainly since its acquisition by European settlers.
I do enjoy the direction things are heading for my writing, but there are always doubts about the interest of others in my work, especially if they think I might be engaged in outré interpretations.
I am bound to make sides angry, as I reject both far-left reductionist viewpoints that construct caricatures about the U.S. founders and the Revolutionary War, as well as rejecting of course, White ethno-nationalist and Conservative viewpoints about the founding. I want to break from certain limited pathological patterns and perspectives contributing to the fractional animosities between the two main political parties and Americans. This is not to adopt a centrist or a moderate political stance. It is because they are blind to the very perspective I am trying to lay out, and it might not be perfect, but I will come with a mountain of credible sources against the doubters.
This can be best remedied by searching more closely into the history. I would hope for the Republic to endure. I am free to consider the ways in which we could advance as a mature People and live to our fullest potential, and I find no race perfect or worthy of worship. I think, all Americans have to dream once more; that our vision has become too clouded.
The white settlers came to these lands thinking they were the civilized and are destined to civilize. Their descendants create lies, that their interaction with other races contaminated them, e.g., are Africanizing them (I hear this in reference to dancing from people like R. Duchese). They adopt the most ridiculous positions to blame others. The Native Americans were told to assimilate to survive, but it led to their expulsion, extinctions, over-consumptive corruptions and suppression till this day. Trauma runs through the soul of this country, and there are many Judas’ here. I do not believe Hall’s “secret destiny.” This would be to misunderstand the work, as it has become more than a little side project of an investigative theosopher.
TRADITION AND CONSERVATISM
This ideal will build on the vision of REPUBLICANISM and democratic reform as entirely rejecting of and distinct from the “White Wonderland” fantasies of the White ethnostate and race realist revisionists of our day. It will provide for the youth a grander and stronger vision that counters all the influences that have emerged since the influence of Russell Kirk on modern conservatism, who in his The Roots of American Order, also projects a similar limitation as Manly P. Hall, though imposed in the form of a traditionalist conservative framework. There are many people, including youth that adopt that framework and carry it for the rest of their lives as some nobler legacy in opposition to the caricature tragedians of the political left. Just as Russell Kirk’s 1953 book The Conservative Mind gave coherence and legitimacy to conservative thought in the postwar era, influencing generations of thinkers, politicians, and institutions; perhaps something new can come along to counter it with far more rigorous historical or philosophical analysis.
My philosophical introduction to political thought came by way of Edmund Burke, who was as an abolitionist, a lifelong moral opponent of slavery, although Burke reflected the typical racialized aesthetics, racial hierarchies and civilization narratives of the eighteenth-century. In order to understand U.S. history more in-depth, you have to, e.g., deal with the arguments of philosophers like Thomas Paine who argued against the core tenets of Burke’s conservative philosophy. Burke’s philosophy and elitist approach take us away from the democratic vision towards aristocratic attitudes and the belief that the “common people” lack the wisdom for self-governance. This was also a core position of the Fascist philosophers. In order to question Burke, you have to question his flawed and limited understanding of the actual conditions in France leading up to the revolution (1789-1799).
In order to question Burke, you are led to then question the reverence for tradition, which perpetuates class and gender oppression.
You see. I had to unlearn certain things, and I am always questioning not only beliefs of others, but my own.
Take for example this provocatively structured answer full of oversimplifications and historical elisions by a paleo-con and traditionalist I kept tabs on in sixth grade, the late Lawrence Auster. Auster argues that “genuine” traditions are inauthentic, when they are retrofitted for philosophies of inclusion. More can be said on the limitations and framing of the arguments here, but it is given as an example what I wrestled with in my youth. I knew about the Alt-Right in their inception, and the Paleo-Conservative movement before them, only because I had liked some Ron Paul. Excuse me (laughing), I had a very strange and contradictory journey. I had never shared my political views, until I was forced to question them when Trump emerged on the political stage.
DO TRADITIONALISTS HAVE ANYTHING TO SAY TO BLACKS? – LAWRENCE AUSTER
Edward to LA: “I don’t believe, however, that there is much room for traditionalism among blacks, with one exception.
“The problem is that all the American traditions that blacks might admire come from white people! Moreover, none of these traditions, when practiced genuinely (not as phony, recently invented “traditions”) ever genuinely espoused full equality and inclusion of blacks. Yes, the Founding Fathers famously wrote that “all men are created equal,” but many of them were slaveholders. Traditional religious congregations may have espoused a universal brotherhood of all mankind, but were always extremely segregated. The freemasons, who were among the earliest adopters of doctrines of universal equality, still have segregated lodges to this day. And on and on.”
“There is a “tradition” of radical egalitarianism in the U.S. that can be traced back hundreds of years. But it only represented the views of a small minority of whites and was rejected by the American mainstream until the 1960s, at which point the genuine traditions were swept away, and radical egalitarianism became the cultural law of the land. A black could view Martin Luther King as his Founding Father and trace his “traditions” forward. But the result would be a very young tradition of multiculturalism that rejects the older, genuine traditions.”
“A “traditionalist” black in America is in the same awkward position that an American would be in if he moved to Japan and tried to become a Japanese traditionalist. Not only would he have to adopt the values and belief system of a different race and reject his own. He would have to accept that much of the tradition he so loves involves the exclusion or denigration of people like himself; and he would never be really accepted by the very people he admires.”
So, I had to unlearn some things, and that only began exactly a decade ago. Advice is to not underestimate how much time it takes for the mind to change but also don’t underestimate its elasticity. I have spent much of my life in reflection, squandered in an intellectual life in a labyrinth of other thinkers. What professors work at with students is to help them find their own voice. I am still finding mines, and that’s alright. Be a little kinder to yourselves, if you have also undergone changes in your views in life.
The American Minervan 
Leave a comment