Interview for the Slovenian monthly Demokracija

Peter Hampl, born on 22 January 1969 in Prague, is a Czech sociologist, doctor of philosophy, patriot and author, whose work focuses on mass migration, Islamisation and the elites hostile to Europeans, that are shaping disastrous policies for our continent. He is also the Executive Director of the Czech Society for Civilization Studies and co-founder of the Friends of White Heterosexual Men. From 2010-2014 he was a lecturer at the University of Economics, after which he worked at Charles University in Prague from 2014 to 2016. Currently, he writes and lectures for a living, as his politically incorrect views have made him unwelcome in universities and mainstream media. We talked with him about current problems of the West, and about his latest book.

For the beginning can you tell us a bit about yourself and your work, and maybe what other thinkers and authors have had the biggest impact on you?

I am a fully qualified sociologist who works outside the university environment. This is actually a return to what sociology was originally intended to be. It was supposed to help normal people navigate  understand some of the contexts that they missed. Nowadays, that means to be able to counter the manipulation of big media, but also the manipulation of conspiracy stories.

Nowadays, that means to be able to counter the manipulation of big media, but also the manipulation of conspiracy stories.

In terms of influences, a combination of Anglo-Saxon and Central European thinking. So Karl R. Popper, Charles W. Mills, Peter Berger, Ivo Možný, and of course Thomas Luckman. I also follow Slavoj Žižek. His ideas are not very close to my heart, but I appreciate the way he was able to establish himself in the Anglo-Saxon world.

Recently you have published a very interesting book titled »Breached Enclosure«, which focuses on the islamization of the West and on the new »elites« that are in favour of such colonisation of Europe and the West. Can you give us just a brief introduction into the topics the book covers, and tell us what is the main reason  that the current elites, which you name »the New Aristocracy« are supporting mass migrations?

The book answers three key questions. Why has the West stopped defending itself and allowed itself to be Islamized without resistance? Why has this changed in recent decades? As recently as the 1980s, Western civilization clearly dominated the culture clash. Why is there such a difference in attitudes between social classes? And indeed why the elites behave so strangely. After all, it is historically normal that whoever has the most advantages in society has the greatest incentive to defend it. Now we see the opposite. Those who benefit the most, hate the most.

My conclusion is that the key difference from other eras is the composition of the power and financial elite. There was a time when the ruling class consisted mostly of warriors. Then it was heavily represented by businessmen. Today, it’s bureaucrats. In the civil service, in corporations, in the media, and universities, in churches. They got to the top by being the best at scheming a power games, accommodating, flattering superiors and manipulating subordinates.  Avoiding open conflict. Not attracting too much attention. It requires a combination of high intelligence, scheming and cowardice. Strong personalities are pushed out. Look at the kind of people who run the European Commission today. Who is in charge of Germany and France. But the same human type run the biggest corporations and the biggest publishing houses. How could such people defend their own civilization?

There was a time when the ruling class consisted mostly of warriors. Then it was heavily represented by businessmen. Today, it’s bureaucrats.

This is illustrated by recent events in the US and elsewhere. There was a time when aspiring elites competed to see who is the best at sword fighting. Now they compete to see who can best kiss the shoes of black gangsters. This is new aristocracy.

How would you describe your political or »ideological« development.? Maybe you could tell us when and under what circumstances did you first began to notice that the Western societies are facing a grave danger about which the mainstream doesnt talk about?

It’s based on the book. We need to stop the mechanisms that are creating a transnational elite completely divorced from the citizens of individual nations that is both pathetic and cowardly. Break up the multinational corporations and return most economic activity to the national and local level. Return political powers to the national level. Restore the promotion of national culture. Each country needs its own defense and control of its own borders. Without this, our civilisation will disappear – as indigenous cultures and indigenous peoples are now disappearing in the UK, Sweden and elsewhere. The risk of following the fate of the American Indians is very high.

This is related to my ideological shift. I went through what many others in my generation went through. In the 1990s, we were enthusiastic about an unregulated global free market. But it was becoming increasingly clear that the world was not behaving according to the model of liberal economics. Instead of enrichment came impoverishment and the gradual decline of most areas of life. But the main impetus came from the waves of migration and the aggressive behaviour of Muslim communities in Europe. It is clear that contemporary Western societies are unable to counter this. That Europeans are heading towards collective suicide. That if we want to preserve lives and freedoms, we must revive patriotism or nationalism.  And that if we want nationalism, we need a strong nation state, including a strong role in the economy.

Full interview in DEMOKRACIJA.EU is here

Leave a Reply