Consider this an addendum to my previous piece, to provide more clarity.
We are at war.
We have been at war, in the sense of divine war, since the French Revolution cemented the feet of Modernity on Occidental soil, proceeding from there to stamp its hideous footprint onto every nation of the world. This is not a conventional kind of conflict of course, neither hot nor cold, but constantly in a state of oscillation. At certain periods it has been the platform of bloody struggle, but for the most part it has been a low-level guerrilla campaign on our part to preserve the shreds of past glory from the juggernaut of Liberalism which will use any strategy it can in order to dispossess us and ensure that we do not escape once the yawning abyss of its own internal contradiction finally implodes.
Imagine a barren prison chamber with a poisonous snake inside, one that would someday die as all living things do, but was peculiar in the fact that it could not be killed. If you were locked inside such a chamber, you could wait the snake out, but you could not be inert. Assuming the creature was unaware of its invulnerability, you would have to make it afraid of you, drive back its predatory advances.
This is the justification for whatever goes above and beyond the pursuit of virtue, the betterment of oneself. What folly it would be to think that Liberalism, this behemoth, would be felled by a paltry election or by discrediting some particular group of its advocates or practitioners. These things will not bring about an end to the Modern World, but they may allow us to preserve some valued piece of our history, our culture, our very lives, and strengthen our position. I said in a recent article that I was throwing my unabashed support behind Donald Trump’s presidential campaign for the pure reason that his realist view of international relations is invaluable to Russian interests, and to end what I view as senseless bloodshed and misery in the Middle East. What do I sacrifice in endorsing this boorish yet surprisingly refreshing opportunist? Nothing. I do not feel that I have compromised my principles in endorsing him for despite the fact that I despise democratic politics, he would help achieve the Reactionary goal I outlined earlier, the preservation of something under threat, and trust me when I say he is weirdly unique in that regard.
stopping this banshee would be nice
The majority of the AltRight does not think in these terms. Those who are not simply attention-whores or shock jockeys have vague notions about Trump ushering in a new era of ‘free association’ which will somehow solve the United States’ demographic problems. Others believe his quick-fix protectionism will bring the moribund economy roaring back to life when the issues are rooted far deeper than Chinese sweatshops. Still others have fostered amongst themselves a loathing of political correctness and newspeak, and see Trump as their halberd to smash open the door and say what has been on their mind all along concerning blacks, jews, women, etc.
Perhaps in my previous piece I deviated from what I usually do, which is to put forward the Reactionary interest, in order to praise all of the things that the AltRight has accomplished. Some may say that these achievements exist only in cyberspace, and to an extent they are right, however cyberspace is a space. Its a field of warfare opened up by the invention of the internet, for better or for worse, and unlike previous fields (civil institutions, many churches, even real battlefields) it is one in which victories against the Cathedral are starting to snowball. Now, I did say a while ago that I believe this will eventually lead to this space being liquidated, but that’s a bridge to cross when we come to it.
I am willing to accept that a major portion of the AltRight is not in any way serious, that it contains within it a smörgåsbord of degenerates, crass buffoons, edgy nihilists, and even people with very questionable mental states (the best figures involved in the movement would also concede this to be true). This is the case for any fringe movement, especially when such descriptors could apply to a large segment of the given population in most Western countries. I can’t fix that, and it would be a waste of my time to try. I’m not a life-coach, and I’m certainly not a priest. When an ideological position is put forward and strikes me as antithetical to rightism, I will say so, but it would be presumptuous of me to think that the aforementioned individuals would respond to calls to ‘tone down the rhetoric’ or ‘be a little nicer to Ben Shapiro’. One AltRight publication with many times over the interest that my blog generates had tried to do such a thing and did not succeed in dampening the meme-brigades of Twitter and 4chan. It becomes even harder to make such a proclamation when these tactics are ones that are winning rhetorical battles and scuttling an entire Potemkin opposition in their wake. If I were to hazard a guess, the degeneracy of trolling is probably amplified simply by the nature of the online medium. Anybody can slip into a pseudonymous identity and do as they please, without any consequences to their daily life.
People who follow my Twitter can judge for themselves how complicit I am in crass discourse. I have my fun, but I don’t think I’m all that bad (hence why my ADL-certified Twitter ban was a surprise). In my writings and my conversations with people in this corner of the dissident right, I have found an unparalleled mix of intellectuals whose knowledge of metapolitics, economics, esotericism, genetics, etc. is astounding, and this pillar is one that will endure because it is one that has endured since Reaction received its baptism of fire in the 1700s. Long after Twitter and 4chan are gone, this will still exist. I do not feel the broad AltRight is damaging this ‘school’ in any way, and instead it is actually helping achieve some objectives (one aforementioned is geopolitical multipolarity). Gauging as best one can the quality of the average shitposting AltRighter, I do not think there is a way that such people could be put to better use than helping weaken the attack vectors of our sworn enemies and thus, wittingly or unwittingly, helping to achieve something for the future of our peoples.
The demotic, leveling view is always a temptation, but it is a false one. Not even the radical right is immune to a hierarchy of function. Not everyone can be held to the same intellectual standard, and not everyone has better things to do with their time than ask why it is that Japan never has to accept any migrants but Hungary not doing so is some kind of war crime. We cannot police this space, this foothold that the AltRight currently has. We cannot wrap it in a nice ribbon. What we can do is encourage what elements help to achieve Reactionary goals, and discourage what elements hurt this endeavor. I have done both to the best of my ability.
We are not in a war of equally opposing forces. Our enemy has all of the advantages one can imagine save one; being in alignment with truth. The conflict that is waged is one in which we are on the back foot, and one which we do not have the luxury of fighting exactly as we would like. Certainly our adversaries are not deserving of common courtesy, that much is obvious to me. I have more respect for bloodthirsty Jihadists than I have for the average Harvard social studies professor or Guardianista. When a lone man is accosted by a pack of bandits, the rules of fair play scarcely cross his mind. He will do anything to save his skin, even if his methods would be decidedly measured under other circumstances. This is why I am not particularly repulsed by the tactics of provocation used by most in the AltRight, and do not see their negative aspects as outweighing the good things that are being achieved through them.
It would be correct to say that the AltRight ‘renaissance’ has incidental value, rather than intrinsic value. Squandering this value, however ephemeral it might be, seems unnecessary to me. For over a year now, the Reactosphere has been grappling with how exactly it can coordinate its relationship with the nascent AltRight which seems to encapsulate so many areas of activity and thought. The previous article, and this one, are my attempts to do so. Obviously the broad coalition is unworkable as a foundation for anything concrete, but it exposes our thought to greater numbers of potential converts, and in the process gives a black eye to the left on a medium that is vital for our own activities. I would like to think the quality of my analysis, for the years I have been writing, has not declined and so those who do follow me understand that I am not a shitposter. I remain a Reactionary in no uncertain terms, but a Reactionary can still look at the exploits of the day players and say “you did good, kid”.
quite literally the best thing they’ve done