The Alt Right made it big time, and then everybody seemed to lose their minds. Or was it simply confusion? In this episode of Translations, we look at two of the intellectual leaders of the Alt Right and their reaction to recent events.
Translation: The Alt Right has become The Right. This is a good thing because mainstreaming Alt Right views into conservatism means these topics can be openly talked about — and acted on. At this point, it makes sense to avoid cultural associations which do not translate, like National Socialism, and instead talk about these newly taboo-freed ideas as where they fit into normal conservatism, which Ramsey sees as a type of commonsense realism.
Richard B. Spencer
Translation: Move the movement forward. The Alt Right is not solely limited to being pro-Trump, and while we helped get him into office, he is ultimately a centrist who came into realism honestly because he needed to succeed in business deals. He will treat the presidency as a business deal as well, which means that we have to increase the pressure on him to push past fixing the problems of 2008-2016 and into the Alt Right realm of fixing Western Civilization: ending diversity, stopping degeneracy, finding a positive purpose and restoring social order.
Neither of these gentlemen are intellectual slouches. Spencer, if memory serves, went to St. Marks and then an entirely reputable college, which suggests he has more capacity than many in the mainstream give him credit for. Paul Ramsey, who formally gave up anonymity with his video application to be ambassador to Hungary, has been posting quick but insightful videos on Alt Right topics for some time, irritating all of the right people and making many more have a good laugh at the state of the world.
This is what Ramsey had to say about the Alt Right:
We on the Alt Right are the hippies of our time. We are the counter culture. And while we are not a formal organization we do have organizations such as American Renaissance (AmRen) and National Policy Institute (NPI) that represent many of our values. The primary of these values being self-determination for all people.
We are also starting to see mainstream pundits such as Ann Coulter and mainstream politicians such as Donald Trump tap into many Alt Right themes. As we continue to grow, we will see more famous people reject the globalism of the Democrats and Republicans and embrace nationalism.
The root of the confusion between the messages of Spencer and Paul is this: the Alt Right is hard to define. They are basically saying the same thing, which is that we do not want to become a Nazi movement, but we are heading toward a few key concepts which partially overlap with the ideas of other right-wing politicians.
The Left succeeds because its entire oeuvre is based in a single idea, egalitarianism, or the notion that all people are equal and therefore should not face the consequences of their own actions. Under egalitarianism, intent is more important than results.
At it core, the Alt Right is realism, but realism requires one to have a goal to replace the “feelz > realz” sentiment of Leftist ideology. Under realism, results are more important than the intent of the individual, which is replaced with transcendentals or qualitative goals that are perpetually ongoing. The easiest of these is the idea of being excellent, which means to always improve over your previous state while heading toward the best outcome possible.
That pairing — transcendental realism, let us call it — is the core of conservatism. The Alt Right is conservatism that rejects the Leftist demand that the Right not mention ideas which contradict Leftism, specifically identitarianism/nationalism and any notion of different abilities or optimal roles among individuals, whether by class, race, caste, gender, ethny, sex or lifestyle.
Realism is non-ideological, meaning that it is not based in intent/preference (“I would like everyone to be equal; they should be equal”) but logical fact, or verifiable experience or common sense deduction (“people are not equal, nor do it make sense that equality would lead to anything but heat death”). Transcendental realism adds a quality dimension, but this is the opposite of a change in quantity or type of approach; it takes time-honored methods and uses them to gradually refine all situations to their best qualitative outcomes.
Non-ideological political inclinations tend to be “big tents,” or formed more on shared belief in a few central principles rather than methods themselves. People of many different beliefs find that those beliefs overlap in a few loci, which makes it easy for the group to feel that they are moving in roughly the same direction. Even better, because they agree on the same principles, they can argue with each other about whether or not any proposed action upholds those principles, and can use that to exclude entryists and the confused.
It makes the most sense to view the Alt Right as an ecosystem because of its basis in principle and not ideology. In an ecosystem, many dissimilar individuals fulfill different roles toward roughly the same end, which is different from human-style control-based organizations where everyone does the same thing at the same time for maximum effect. As an ecosystem, the Alt Right can have different roles for different types of people, with some serving as trolls and some as sober, mature intellects. Some may even straddle those roles.
Because of its origins in the same principle that is the essence of conservatism, namely a transcendental realism based in historical results or consequentialism, it makes sense to view the Alt Right as a form of revitalized conservatism that is not neutered by the restriction of having to avoid noticing facts and truths that contradict the Leftist narrative; that restriction is called “political correctness” or “cultural Marxism,” but it means the same thing: an unwavering assumption that only Leftist observations are true and morally good, and therefore, a psychological compulsion to destroy any observations which fail to conform to the Leftist narrative.
This means that the Alt Right can speak plain truths. Some of these include:
Many come to recognize that the Alt Right is a refutation of The Enlightenment™ or the notion that social order could be created out of the intent of individuals, and not — as previously was one — by measuring results and creating a hierarchy of unequal roles based on the degree of success in those results. The Alt Right reaches even farther back than that.
The Alt Right is, in its simplest form, a rejection of rule-by-socializing. It recognizes that the enemy of humanity is our tendency to form little groups which conspire to deny reality and to enforce that denial on others. The root of these groups is found in our big brains rejecting the risk of being wrong in conjectures about reality, and determining that they should focus on the tangible alone (nominalism) or the other easily verifiable thing, the appetites/whims/desires/intent of the ego.
Being anti-social has its benefits. One can speak the truth, even it offends other people, and this over time forces people to stop being offended by truth and reality. That allows us to have a hierarchy based on who is most successful at understanding reality, and this is our only bulwark against collapsing like the ancient Romans and Greeks.
While that statement seems grandiose, it cuts to the core of the question of framing on the Alt Right. Framing is how we perceive issues and the breadth of our purpose. On the Alt Right, our focus is not about politics or avoiding the disaster of 2008-2016; ours is a fight against civilization decline, which is the slow but seemingly inevitable process by which advanced societies degrade to third world status.
Our weapon here is the realization that civilization decline is not inevitable. It has a clear cause and we know how to counteract it. In other words, we can beat civilization decline so long as we keep our focus on defeating it, which is why those who want more license — freedom to do that which is destructive or degenerate — first attack the idea that we should be vigilant against civilization decline. This is why Leftists always act as if our present society will continue in its current form forever no matter what we do to it.
At this point in the West, our population has separated into two groups. One group accepts the decline and rationalizes it as good, and the other ground recognizes the decline but sees it as both negative and avoidable. These two groups are incompatible like the many other special interest groups that diversity has created. The permanent alienation of these groups guarantees the fragmentation of Western civilization into local nations, and that these will be essentially defenseless against invaders from outside, which is the threat the Left uses against us.
As a result, we cannot speak intelligently of secession or breaking away. We must reconquer our society, gently remove those who do not belong, and begin rebuilding — because there are always foes outside, and they always have the same goal, which is to invade us and take our wealth. The new civilization will be more like the ancient ones, which is to say based on the four pillars: nationalism, aristocracy, hierarchy and transcendental purpose.
Currently our people are dying because living here is miserable on an existential level. On a material level, we live in the most comfortable civilization on earth. On an existential level, where we measure the significance of our lives in comparison to the certainty of death, no one intelligent feels good about living here. We know it is a moribund civilization that will destroy our contributions as it collapses. We are awash in incompetence, and most of our daily labor goes toward mitigating it, which makes us bitter and controlling. The few responsible people carry the over-half of the population which is purely parasitic and of null contribution (that is, if they all died tomorrow, nothing important would change).
We are tired of living in a failed society where the asinine always wins. We are beyond annoyed at having to work extra hours to support parasites, grifters and fools among us. We are also irritated that there never is a bottom line where the reality principle comes in. Someone can always be found to buy the bad product, or vote for the stupid non-solution, or participate in the moronic event. In fact, since fools are numerous, every good product or idea is quickly replaced by carbonated sugar water or Fifty Shades of Grey. Idiocy always wins. To restore the West, we must make sure that idiocy always loses and intelligence, honor, piety, honesty, cunning, kindness, aggression, sanity and realism always win. We must bring back the beast in mankind, and get rid of this oversocialized obese and impotent fool that we have created.
This brings us back to Hitler. In 1945, the West decided that since Hitler was bad, anything like Hitler had to go; this dispossessed conservatism of the ability to argue for nationalism, social darwinism/eugenics, traditional sex roles and family life, and other time-honored and common sense blessed historical habits of our people that led us to great excellence. It also created what we might call “the taboo cuck line,” which is the barrier between “safe” Leftist thoughts and all those dangerous thoughts that we read about in Hitler, Nietzsche, Machiavelli and Houellebecq. We have made realism verboten, and those who wish to save Western Civilization must first shatter this taboo cuck line so we can accurately perceive our world and our situation within it again.
The Alt Right likes to talk about awakenings. Such as how certain people are “woke” and others by converse implication are not. To be woke is to have stepped outside of the cage formed of these taboo lines, to see reality clearly, and to recognize that we are passengers on a sinking ship that is guided by crazy people called Leftists who are aided by other types of mental defectives. Awakening means finally seeing reality out of the carefully-constructed illusion that civilization creates, and which ultimately dooms it.
For this reason, I suggest the Alt Right embrace is troll nature. For my role in the process, this means speaking plainly and clearly with logical fact about the necessity of identity, the failure of diversity, the terminal spin of democracy, the need for a family-centric society, and advocating for a future where the West not only beats its temporal problems but restores itself.
This will never make me popular on the Left, but they want to control me and destroy me, so that does not matter. Open war is upon us, and we either act in acknowledgement of that, or de facto accept our existential misery and self-destruction.