Popular Elitism: The Alt-Right and its Discontents


You have to hand it to the Alt-Right: they made a strange election-cycle that much stranger. Leaving aside arguments as to whether or not they gained intellectual currency because of or in spite of this cycle's strangeness, they certainly proved that anti-democratic thinking can be democratically rendered. Granted, elitism, as a movement, is always tough. There always comes the moment one has to determine by what authority we can even recognize who the naturally elite are or what constitutes quality. The Alt-Right would reject what is popular ipso facto, but does it then follow that what is unpopular is of high quality? If an unpopular tree becomes popular without anyone there to grasp this transition, is it still popular?

  The Alt-Right's antinomianism is like the Leftism that wants to spout diatribes against capitalism from an Iphone: it requires an initial paradox, the ultimate cleaving of which will announce itself in some future event (a new beginning to history rather than a long overdue end). Like Marxists who are ever enemies of a comodified world, so the Alt-Right fights with meme magic against big M Modernity; a pit into which the agents of cultural degeneration along with people who are just more annoying than others fall one and the same. The Alt-Right are like the people who complain endlessly about hipsters, only augmented into an entire ideology, to which Trump does not play Messiah but certainly acts for them as a bridge.

  The tendency to cast Trump as an enemy of globalism set to clean house and bring our boys back home is hardly unique to the Alt-Right sector of the Right, though they are unparalleled in their propensity for interpreting every single one of his standard modes of U.S. foreign policy precisely in such a way that he can remain the placeholder for the American aristocracy they so desire but have no means of culling from the crucible of western culture. The Left, over-eager in their Soviet paranoia to paint Trump as the next Hitler, far more authoritarian and irredeemably rabid in their thirst for violence, are wholly incapable of criticizing the Alt-Right with any clarity, as their fears and rages only ever maximize general interest in the narratives they concern themselves with (propoganda is sort of their forte). The Left can, at the very best, only hide their particular version of anti-semitism better, as something more economically grounded. Where they would understate the role of such variables in their anti-capitalist rhetoric, the Alt-Right, to a comical degree, flirts with, over-enunciates and beats us over the head constantly with a phantasmagoria of varying degrees of the Jewish question, reviving its narrative husks and antiquations, giving birth to ever more radical in-crowd significations. Alt-Righters identify themselves, not merely in terms of their irreverence concerning the subject of Jews, but in their ever creative ability to bring the Jews into conversations where they wouldn't have occurred otherwise, lest they fall anywhere near cucking the uncuckable cuck.

  Not punching Right, or rather, doing so late in the game, has greatly contributed to their identity crisis in the wake of Charlottesville as they struggle to figure out just what is to be done about the legitimate national socialists who count themselves among them. Of course, it wouldn't be very Right to exile anyone, as the group is already small. They march on(line), either choosing to count Charlottesville a victory or a deafeat, according to one's temperament; a victory in that it revealed the Left's hypocrisy to the public (or something), or a defeat in that it showed that the police and the state don't have a vested interest in protecting the rights of white special interest groups afterall. Of all the Alt-Right's misapprehensions, their understanding of just which parts of the state are allied with them is perhaps the most puzzling. Its as though their Emperor Trump is back in Rome while they brave the frontlines in a heathen-ridden Jerusalem.

  Their philosophy, more egregious than their confused politics, would see the task of a Nietzschean transvaluation of all values as simple as changing God to Odin and Christ to Thor, while the ones who remain more rigorously Christian see it fit to either deny the Second Vatican Council or read their own ideology into the Orthodox faith. It seems hard to distinguish to what degree their sociopolitical positions determine their views on religion and philosophy or to what degree the opposite is the case. With unbridled charlatanism, they swallow the literary Rightist turd whole with little discrimination, clumsily stumbling through the canon to which they feel they owe the most intellectually. It matters little if they've actually read their own canon of predecessors as long as they can reference the correct people and major works. On whole, they can't separate artists or thinkers from their politics. Unwittingly Hegelian, the Alt-Right dismisses every Hegelian as a Leftist shill. Their Guenonian/Evolian Traditionalism, to the degree that any of them possess it, is more of a moral and mythological fashion statement. The ethno-state they are always guaranteeing us would be better for everyone has no uncomplicated confluence to any nation in existence today and virtually no historical examples, given that marrying into other tribes was a common practice all over the ancient world; thus rendering the very concept a wholly modern invention that could actually accelerate the inner destruction of the nation. By its very nature, only an incredibly big government could ensure something so laboriously complicated as racial or ethnic uniformity. But big government is what they want, which could only maintain its resources through expansion, thus ensuring that the resultant ethno-nation states locked into a sovereignty death grip with the U.S. empire would be swallowed up into a far more ridiculous form of globalism than what we have now.

  After Charlottesville, some of the Alt-Right have stuck to the addage that 'right wing activism doesn't work.' This is true for the simple fact that activitism itself doesn't work. It is a distraction on a pathological scale, so unaware of its own inner mechanics that it cannot possibly allow one to see what is right in front of one: that real changes take place through cunning, through sacrifice, through the ability to lay aside emotional reactions--both from reacting and from the need to incite the other to react.

  There was much worry in the past that even if the Alt-Right were harmless, they could lead to something more directly stifling and coercive. However, their collusion/inability to distance themselves from Daily Stormer and company (with some exceptions) doesn't seem to have led to any real foreseeable threat that fascism/national socialism could ever come near to standing a chance in this country. It does, however, show that popular movements, even popular movements grounded at least in word on elitism, only ever end up looking like Charlottesville: a war of baboons.