Enclavism is an alternative framework of government that we are currently developing. We’re continuing to build it and the community for it. If you’re interested, you can contact me here or simply bookmark this website and join in. I’m also writing a book on it.
Today I wanted to do a quick article with an overview of Enclavism for those who want to learn the basics prior to the main release. We’ll go over the goal(s) of Enclavism and how we intend to reach them.
Goals of Enclavism
The goal of Enclavism is simple:
- We want to create the essential tenants of an alternative government form that is resistant to anacyclosis.
Each modern government is destined to collapse given enough time. We need a new government form that addresses the issues leading to the cycle of collapse with an explicit goal to prevent it from happening. To preserve our people and culture.
Obviously, we can’t create an entirely new government form and address all of its possible future problems and intricacies. So instead, our goal is to create a working, practical framework for a government designed to withstand the test of time.
This means it is a framework. Not a strict political manifesto. It’s being built to be utilized by many people of different belief systems.
We don’t believe any of the current government forms can accomplish surviving the cycle of collapse . So, we need a new one. If the other forms of government (democracy, republic, monarchism, communism, etc) all work and collapse in a cyclical manner, there is no reason to support any single one of them.
Your contributions, at most, could only delay the cycle or temporarily turn it toward your own favor.
So, the goal is a framework that can stop the cycle. That is Enclavism. We call it that because it is “enclaved” from the rest of the worldwide governmental forms that will continue operating on the cycle. It is culturally and cyclically unique. Non-degenerative. Hence, an enclave.
We believe that the singular government styles, lackluster communities, centralization loopholes, and degenerative culture are the pinnacle reasons for the collapse, depending on the government type. So do the ancient philosophers Plato, Aristotle, and Polybius (whom originally coined the name “anacyclosis”). Along with plenty of more modern figures, like John Adams, John Glubb, Guenon, Evola, Machiavelli, and so on.
The enclaves, along with other changes to the modern forms, will help address the cycle of collapse. Thus completing the goal of the Enclavist framework.
How We Will Reach This Goal
Enclavism reaches this goal by controlling the downfalls of each other government form, thereby addressing the root causes of the cycle.
The idea is we can merge the governmental forms into one and address each component of their degenerating aspects through the use of a corrective measure of another. A sort of check and balance for an entire framework.
We can take the best of all the modern forms of government. Leave out the garbage that leads to decline.
We know that certain systems stand the test of time far better than others. We also can study how each of these better systems thrived for so long. Then, we can take these pieces and compile them into a framework for the future governmental systems.
There are very specific reasons why the cycle affects each modern form of government. Some are obvious; some not so much. If we address each version of these reasons in every government form, we could become cycle-proof.
We’ve addressed the issues of democracy many times . We’ve addressed the issues of socialism too many times . Same goes for communism (which is just a form of rule by one rather indistinguishable from fascism, dictatorship, etc) . We reach the goal by fixing these problems.
Regretfully, these problems can’t be fixed within their own frameworks, because they are issues with the frameworks themselves. To fix them requires a new framework entirely. Otherwise, it’s just a matter of lengthening how long one of the deteriorating frameworks can survive.
To summarize: No current government form can sustain. They all demonstrate some type of fatal flaw. We need one that won’t join this category.
The Basics: An Overview of enclavism
We have a lot in the making with Enclavism. It’s hard to round it down to a few key elements, but I’ll try here.
Our basis is a rule by many foundation with key elements from the others, creating a new framework. This is because the rule by one and rule by few foundations are not sustainable (nor desirable) long term. We address this issue here. The rule by many has the most potential for the safeguards we need in our framework. We don’t follow it exactly, but use it as a base to combine with the others.
A republic works decently well, but it has too many fatal flaws. We need a stronger version.
The main components include:
- Preserve the majority-homogeneous culture [and the heritage nation’s demographics]
- Ensure accountability for all important societal actors
- Eliminate centralizers (The isolated class [financial elite], SCMs, the politburo, and the intelligentsia)
- Setup a form of stakeholder (contributor) voting
- Require communitarianism
- Provide a “hands-off” system that automatically restricts degeneracy
- Enact strong law and order
- Protect real freedom, not centralizer freedom.
- Chain unrestricted capitalism
- Secure business in the interests of the nation
- Incentivize regional unification
- Restructure government
- Vet strong, qualified, and virtuous representatives that function aristocratically
- Provide an environment that operates solely on merit
- Provide checks and balances for problem leadership
- Have a final “nuclear” option safeguard in case the nation degenerates even with our protections
This is a massive topic, so we can’t expand on them all as detailed as we would like in only one article. But let’s break down some of these.
Culture drives politics. The cultural swing in the US is what directly preceded the political shifts we are seeing now (more far left and more far right). We must stabilize culture and cultural parameters in any country that is to be immune to the cycle. Degenerative culture will naturally provoke decline.
This isn’t to say that culture can’t change or evolve, but the people who “direct” the culture must at least be held accountable to the nation. In modern republic societies, this doesn’t happen. The chosen ones who determine culture are accountable to none. The financial and cultural elite decide your culture, not you nor your government. This must be corrected to have a sustainable nation.
The same logic applies to the demographic situation. The nation-state is a combination of the nation [the people] and their government, the state. If one of these elements change, the nation-state irrevocably changes with it. To sustain, the people must sustain alongside the state.
A big factor in this is formulating a correct power cycle: The Power Cycle: When The Institutions Own The Government
There exist numerous societal agents that are fighting for centralization in republics. Historically, the only one that existed were governments. In the modern day, that is not the case. Cultural elitists, the financial elite, and even the mob work in their own interests toward centralization.
Accountability is needed to ensure that the centralization by any type of societal actor, not just the government, does not occur. We need proper checks and balances to fend off each type of power struggle so no societal agent can ever gather too much control and push the country back on the path to full centralization.
Any large business, influencer, cultural marker, or politician must be held accountable. Currently, we aren’t able to control the majority of these… at all. Sometimes, we can barely hold politicians accountable. If this can’t be done in a rule by many, then it certainly cannot be done in a rule by few or rule by one. We need a new option. We need free speech for the average person, but accountable speech for the ruling class and cultural markers.
The people in charge of different areas of society exert tremendous short-term and long-term influence on the nation. As they degenerate, they bring us all down with them. Why do unelected, greedy individuals (Hollywood) get to direct our culture, laws, and business? We can’t do anything to stop them under democratic (or even socialistic) nations. Under authoritarian regimes, the state just replaces them. No option exists to actually control them. That’s where we come in.
Instead, we need to ensure we hold these groups accountable to the public. No more free rein. If they can exert as much power as our politicians, we should hold them to the same accountability standards. Our justification requires this.
Cultural elites have tremendous power. Financial elites have power that most politicians will never match in their decade-long careers. Information elites hold power over our beliefs, income, and distributionary resources. Media elites control every narrative and story. The Intelligentsia are bought off by these other centralizer groups.
Yet, none of these groups are accountable to anyone. They have tremendous financial, cultural, distributary, and network power, but no real oversight.
No society can survive when hostile elites are present indefinitely. Eventually, oligarchs or aristocrats form. Hatred and resentment grow. Moreover, the resentment grows justifiably. This is how a rule by many falls into a rule by few.
We need a system where elites are not allowed free rein without oversight. We also need better elites. There will always be a hierarchy, but we can have an aristocratic hierarchy instead of the dysgenic one that we share today. Together, we will hold these individuals and organizations accountable for the actions they commit to the nation. We will also remove most of them from their positions of un-hinged, un-elected, and un-accountable positions of power. Part of this is the absolute destruction of the “isolated class” of elitists at the very top.
The rulers should be fairly elected by contributors and then subsequently rule and lead in an authoritative fashion. There should not be unaccountable, unelected individuals in other arenas influencing or directing those rulers. They must be curtailed.
Every single great society was built around the idea of community. Community is an essential safeguard against anacyclosis, because it’s the foundation for what holds the nation together and allows for dissent to become actionable.
The Roman Republic was not founded by large swaths of diverse groups. Instead, it formed from independent, culturally similar local communities uniting with one another. These groups would later conquer other, diverse communities; they would then either enforce the adoption of their attitudes by those conquered tribes, or they would integrate their views with the views already in existence in those communities.
Under nearly every modern day system, we have an awkward top-down approach. Our unity is supposed to come from the top. Even though we are horribly splintered at the top. We need to invert this. Community drives unification. Individualism has become a plague on Western Civilization, and may in fact be the final nail in its coffin. The individual can only be so free and prosperous as his community. Without it, the individual is nothing.
Yet, we barely know our own neighbors in modern cities. Capitalism has wrecked us and pitted us against one another in an individualist fashion. Capitalism is a useful tool when used correctly. Damaging when used incorrectly. America was not originally based on individualism. But rather, personal community.
People and society work better when we think of our local communities first. When we have communities that we believe in. With people that we want to form a community with. Right now, we forcibly live in cities for a job or in the suburbs because of financial cost. When we should live with our own community; our own “tribe”.
There is a lack of community in every modern Western nation. We must address this. Enclavism does this by bringing the focus back on choosing and supporting your own community. The best way to help the nation is to help your own (chosen) local area, driving growth all the way to the top instead of the top down. Currently, we segregate living areas based on financials instead of segregating living areas based on communal desire. We aim to fix that.
All Governments Must Choose A Focus. We choose the community focus.
Degeneration and decadence can bring down even the strongest of nations. Once degeneracy hits a country, there is relatively no return to the previous normalcy. It will either be stagnant or get worse.
We here in the Western world have started ascending the peak. The depravity won’t be getting better from here on out. It’s either a change to a government form resistant to the effects of degeneracy (through the cultural methods we mentioned above) or the eventual depraved descent to a worse form of government.
Even if we fix the degeneracy with a collapse and re-installation of another form of government, it is only a matter of time before it returns in true cyclical fashion.
Any nation that wants to be resilient for the future must place stopping degeneracy as one of its primary goals. There are systemic processes from other frameworks that can prevent the spread of degeneracy, but they have to be integrated into the system as a rule by many does not have them by default.
Protection of Freedom
With these changes in mind, we also have to protect important freedoms. We have a lot of freedoms that we take for granted. Freedoms that aren’t offered under totalitarian alternatives. Many dissidents are happy to throw these out because of the current situation, but such extreme action does not necessarily need to be taken. We can have both.
We just have to balance out the need for sustainability with the use of authoritarianism. What is the use of a government if it is miserable to reside under should a poor leader come along?
We must protect these essential liberties. Historically, the best method for this kind of protection is through a constitution. Both federal and state. We want to keep and expand the level of protections offered by the constitutions.
We also want to place the opportunity for freedom into the hands of the local communities, instead of the government itself. There are numerous other freedoms that can be guarded and protected by communities and their vanguards. So, that individual people using their chosen communities can have leverage to defend and fight for their continuation. This requires strong, vanguard men. Something that is often destroyed in the latter stages of degeneration. And something that can only be retained through the proper upbringing of children, which is another essential component of a sustainable nation-state. All topics we address.
Capitalism has offered tremendous growth and poverty alleviation. We likely can’t develop an economic structure better than capitalism in terms of growth potential. Yet, what worth is economic growth if the entire civilization is on a path doomed to collapse? Is the economy the end or the means?
We see the economy as a means to help our people reach happiness and prosperity, not an end in itself. It is essential, certainly. But not at the cost of our people and our nation.
Minor economic gain will not offset the required economical price required to rebuild from a collapse. Nor will it justify the tyranny that our children will have to go through because we desired economic growth, consumerism, and materialism over something actually meaningful.
An open market is a useful tool, but it provides a very easy avenue for negative societal agents to seize control and begin centralization. This is because of its very nature of decentralization.
This is because it is unchained. Monopolies, elites, and a nation dominated by those who accumulate the most capital is not the original intention of a capitalistic system. But it is the inevitable result of unrestrained capitalism. Capitalism, by its nature, will turn into a type of oligarchical socialism run by the isolated class.
But both systems are at risk of degrading. Capitalism, through turning into oligarchic capitalism (a form of socialism—rule by few). Socialism, from turning from that base into pure centralization by the politburo over enough time (rule by few to a rule by one). So, what do we do?
An open market needs to stay in the local economy, not in the politics or the culture. We want the economic benefits of certain aspects of small business capitalism without the political elite and business control it leads toward. Let small business operate efficiently, but let’s remove our large corporate un-accountable, un-elected, and solely profit-driven nature.
We need a mixed approach to the economic. No government nationalization of the means of production, but no free lunch for oligarchs, either. Large business should work in the interest of the nation first; profit second. If it does not do so, then the unaccountable business elite would become a larger threat than the government, which we must prohibit for sustainment. Small business, however, should remain free to function in an open market.
We have since expanded on this idea in the terms of an economic system of “Dominionism”, where different economic dominions function separately within a society. It is neither capitalist nor socialist, corporatocracy nor corporatism; rather, it is a type of fourth position. This will need to be further expanded in a future article in the interest of a reasonable-sized dialogue here.
Our nations need to become unified once again. Not unified as in Ayn Rand’s Anthem unified, but unified enough to form a cohesive partnership. Globalism will not accomplish this. We must have nationalism. Strong nationalism. Every nation should share this goal.
Nearly every form of government risks internal collapse. This is from the fall of the nation because of internal conflict. We’re on that path due to the nature of the two-party system and other in-fighting between people that should be on the same team.
A prime aim of Enclavism is the focus on nationalist unification. Tactics, strategies, and policies to unite groups of very different mindsets and beliefs. The people and the political class. The contributors and the institutions. We intend to do this through placing a more serious effort on community structures, incentive structures, and cultural norms. A nationalist, stabilized culture can aid this.
For an empire, or nation-states with more than one nation, regionalization through separate political structures is within our framework. This would preserve the overall empire, while allowing the formation and unification of independent nations.
We promote all nations. Everyone on this planet deserves a home and a people they can call their own.
We need a better government distribution. Not necessarily smaller, but more dispersed. We need the bottom-up approach.
The government should look and operate like a pyramid. Most of the action and people on the lower (local) levels with fewer on the state and even fewer at the federal. Right now, in the US, we have the opposite of this. Most of the government power is at the federal level. The pyramid is upside down. We have a federal managerial system.
The federal government does not have the power where it matters, but they have the power in every other avenue. It is truly a sight to behold when the federal government cannot enforce unfettered illegal immigration but can enforce mask and vaccine mandates. The entire power structure of degenerative systems is asinine.
We need to have a process for politicians to go up through the ladder of government instead of pay their way directly to the top. Our politicians must demonstrate their worth and ability at the lower levels first, to be qualified to move higher.
Also, we need to have laws move up from local communities, instead of the federal government deciding everything for everyone. We have created a process that would allow this to occur. We also desire to limit a lot of specific policies on a state level, to ensure they can not infest the federal level and cause degeneration, dis-unification, or regional disenfranchisement.
This high level approach is risking the entire fiscal health of a country on singular federal policies. The federal agents should not force minor topics on everyone else. We need more decentralization in the power structure to fight off federal centralization.
Instead, let’s let the communities decide. If it works at the lower levels, it will naturally keep spreading and growing. If it doesn’t, let it fail. One community failure is a lot easier to handle than the likes of entire countries failing from a single forced federal policy.
This is also the killer of authoritarian regimes. One bad policy and you get Mao’s great famine, which killed hundreds of millions. We need to test any new policy, belief, or procedure on the low levels first. We intend to provide this “sandbox” and “bottom-up” approach in Enclavism.
Let’s discuss voting while we’re on the topic of authoritarian regimes. The risk in any government is the possibility of a centralized control under the hands of one or the hands of a few.
We need to ensure this possibility is as far eliminated as possible. We intend to do this through constitutional protections, unified communities, and direct measures to take on every influential position.
But voting itself presents risks. When a nation learns it can vote itself free money, how much longer will that government be fiscally prudent? When a politician learns they can win office by buying out votes through welfare or by importing voters, how long will the nation remain in the hands of the virtuous? The answer is obvious.
Instead, voting should remain in the hands of individuals whom are best suited to wield it.
Stakeholder voting is a system whereby we place voting more heavily into the hands of people who actually hold a stake in the nation. Less voting power for the welfare recipient who has accomplished nothing. Less voting power for the college student who have contributed nothing to the nation yet. More voting power for the employee with 20 years of experience that has 4 kids. More power for the small business owner of 10 years and the soldier.
We allow everyone the right to vote but splinter it based on their contribution/stakeholder level. This allows everyone the opportunity to have higher voting privileges, so no one is denied equal opportunity. But, it protects the nation against the lowest form of voters, voting in policies that would degrade the nation in the long-term. Consider it as a type of weighted voting.
We are also not concerned with democracy. The stakeholders should elect a qualified, vetted leader and then have effective oversight over them. They should not be voting for policies or the politician that offer them the most free stuff. Instead, they should have the vote to curtail problem politicians. We shift the voting focus from a policy one (direct democracy), or a representative one (strictly for choosing leaders), to an oversight focus over a strong leadership.
The state should not always reflect the general will of the people, because the general will of the people is often selfish or idiotic. We can easily recognize this situation in the degenerative times. During those times, the state should likely do the exact opposite of what the people desire. The state must reflect the nation as it should be, not as the current generation demands it. Then, it should be overseen by those who contribute the most to ensure that the leaders remain committed. Pure democracy is an unnatural position. Instead, democratic means should be used as a lever to restrict the centralizer, rather than direct the state. This is how oversight and stakeholder voting would operate.
Likewise, we can instill higher voting age requirements and other voting restrictions such as a history test required before receiving a voter ID. These things would ensure that voters were active, engaged, and knowledgeable enough to vote.
We can’t toss aside the importance of voting. But we can fix the voting system itself to favor stakeholders over freeloaders. While also keeping the leaders directly accountable to ensure that we prevent tyranny and revolution.
Our voting would not be strictly dictatorial nor would it be the dreaded “one person one vote”. But rather one of a contribution incentive with a focus on oversight on the leaders. Those who contribute more get a higher say. We did an initial foray into this thought with this article: Democracy Sucks: Let’s Return To Stakeholder Voting. But, we have since expanded on that idea and have a near fully functioning version that is similar but not identical to it. A new article will need to introduce the concept at a later date. For now, it’s focused on in the book.
Checks and Balances
Every form of government needs another to balance it. Proper checks and balances ensure tyrants aren’t able to seize control and that the mob can’t destroy itself.
The main balance is not another form of government but the citizenry themselves. If we elevate them to be the proper checks and balances, we could create the strongest oversight over government possible. This isn’t to say governmental structures shouldn’t also provide a balance, but it doesn’t have to be the only one.
Likewise, checks and balances must exist between the societal agents attempting to centralize the nation to ensure that no group can ever grab more of the power than others. The arenas must be subjugated and a proper power cycle must be enacted.
For any system to sustain, it must agree with the natural order. This includes a proper hierarchy in all of life’s domains and a recognition of the human condition. Each piece of our system is designed with these in mind, which is why we have had to deny many elements stemming from the Enlightenment. Likewise, because of this, we strongly favor traditionalism over progressivism.
Another principle concept is our idea of The Three Essentials. We harmonize these three instead of focusing on one over the other. We believe all three are needed for a sustaining civilization.
We also inject a much needed moral framework into our government system, but we leave it open to national determination on that system. I would of course lean Christian, but the moral framework could be instituted by any spiritual nation. But our system would require a religious and virtuous people—As would any nation-state that expects to sustain. Without a unified and cohesive moral framework, any nation will fail. This moral system would not need to demand compliance within the population, but would serve as a basis for the morals of the people and a method by which the society could be ordered and how society could prevent damaging behavior from becoming destructive to the overall whole.
Wrap-Up: Overview of Enclavism
All of the above comes from the recommendations of ancient philosophers, the study of governmental forms, common sense, and millenniums of governmental histories. Using what has worked and removing what has not.
You can also stay tuned for more articles on Enclavism or subscribe to my newsletter if you want to get a reminder when the book comes out. I would also be interested in your thoughts or amendments. Leave a comment or contact me here.
Thanks for stopping by.
If you enjoyed this article, give us a bookmark and check back often for new content. New articles every weekday.
Help us fight the censorship – Share this article!
Finally, please consider supporting my work. Every donation is immensely helpful to keep us growing.