Select Page

Masking racism

“Arguing that you can’t have racist views since you appreciate other cultures, or even have a partner or friend of a different ethnicity is about as valid as saying you can’t be sexist because you like women and are married to one. It just doesn’t work like that. And exoticism is a thing too, not seldom used to mask or justify racist attitudes.”

A Christmas letter

A Christmas letter

So, there are a few claims that are common in the Alt Right, among the reactionary conservatives, fascists and nazis that I would like to comment a bit on. And this is written with quite a bit of fury behind.
 
First of all, you claim that you are the only ones who care about tradition, that the left and liberals want to destroy all traditions and do not even recognize or care for their own nation. This is of course utter bullshit. While there may be extreme examples to point to, the absolute majority of people love their country and their traditions, celebrating them at every festivity, both with national, local and private traditions, even feeling pride and peace with it. And we want to continue to do this. A few minor things change in the celebration of them, but that is as it has always been. Most traditions are quite young to begin with, even if we don’t realise it, extending not very many generations back, especially in the shape and form we have grown up with.
 
And I’ll tell you what else my quite communist ancestors cared about: Seeing their children and grandchildren grow up in a world where not only the rich would be able to vote and to afford education and health, believing that great potential lied in the poor too – a great capacity for achivement, and great intelligence, hindered by poverty, and thus unused by the country, and worse, exploited and repressed by people with far less capacity, just lucky enough to be born into their roles. My grandparents were so poor that they couldn’t afford a flower bouquet for their wedding, and no wedding photo was ever taken. And they worked damn hard, both ruining their bodies before they were 30, all very politically active as Christian communists, deeply rooted in their traditions, working to create a better world for everyone. And they, alongside of other like-minded, against all odds, managed to change our society for the better, at great cost and sacrifice. And now you argue to remove the basic right to vote for everyone, arguing that the things that has made our country so great are evil, pissing on their sacrifice and legacy. It is an utter disgrace.
 
Another of your arguments is that since perfect equality is not achievable, it leads to obsession with smaller and smaller inequalities, and therefore is not something we should strive for. Of course this is not what we are seeking to begin with. We understand perfectly well that perfect equality is not possible. What we want is for everyone to have a fair chance at a good education, health and a decent life in dignity. Things that have been refused and fought against by the elitist reactionary conservatives for ever, and you now seek to remove again, in the places where it has been installed…
 
And the sheer hypocrisy of it all truly infuriates me. Seeing your insincere and false display of support for assaulted Jews, and then turning around and to others argue that the ultimate goal must be for all foreigners to return to their homelands, and argue that even those *born* here, but with foreign origin, should be deported if they commit crime, even publicly supporting and seeking political collaboration with a party deeply rooted in the neonazi movement, with such members even now, a party which has argued that Jews living in your country are not part of the same nationality, but are no problem as long as they are not too many, a party consequently strongly opposed by… Jews.
 
So, fucking shame on you, you quasi-intellectual, arrogant, sly, two-faced and dishonest hypocrite! And Merry Christmas.
On reactionary conservatism

On reactionary conservatism

In these conflicted times with a hodgepodge of various authoritarian ideologies ranging from far left to far right, there is a little noticed growing of interest in reactionary conservative philosophy that borders on fascism and which also has a distinct overlap with it, with fascists and reactionaries mingling and debating their ideas on fora, reading the same literature with works by e.g. Spengler, Schmitt, Burke and Evola, but also modern fascists like Donovan. All of it commonly masked under a cover of admiration for beauty, history and culture.

Getting a grasp of these very radical ideas takes a bit of work, but is very important as we need to recognize that it is just not some quaint grumpy old man’s desires, and all of it would have very far reaching although conflicting and conflicted implications, both for society, but also for the individuals, for you, in your home, at your work even at leisure activities, with fundamental and extreme changes, and removal of hard earned rights and freedoms that people have struggled over and died for, for centuries, and which have been debated for millennias in e.g. Greek, Roman and medieval philosophy, by e,g. Aurelius, Epictetus, Seneca and in the Kitab Sirr al-Asrar, even parts of both the Bible and the Quran.

Some of those fundamental changes which reactionary conservatism commonly seek at national, municipal, even at small organisational level in companies and even “clubs”, and in your home, are the following.

  • A society should only change when it needs to do so in order to defend its institutions. All other changes are unnecessary or a threat to its stability.
  • Society has already failed and the Western Civilization is deep into a decline that will end it. We must, in the words of Evola “ride the tiger”, and wait for the complete and inevitable breakdown and prepare ourselves in various ways so we remain standing strong in the ruins, ready to restore proper, “natural”, conservative civilization (GNON).
  • An honour and duty based society needs to replace the proclaimed “self-focused” one, rooted in spirituality, religion, mysticism and tradition, to the degree that honour, and in particular male honour, should be defended with the threat or use of violence.
  • Elitist rule and removal of the right to vote for everyone, especially those of low education, those of little understanding of society, and those of low intelligence. In this, reactionary conservatism is fundamentally undemocratic.
  • Meritocracy. No one is born with any value or deserves any respect for simply existing (except for King and aristocracy). Your value comes from your achievements and contributions to your society and group only. And those merits are the only consideration for your functions and rights in society and in your group. Your opinions have no value whatsoever without such proven merits.
  • A return of the aristocracy and the elite as noble ideals for the masses to aspire to.
  • A logic- and knowledge based management of society, with no room for emotional or compassion driven decisions.
  • Nationalism as foundation for the nation, preserving and enforcing tradition and culture, with far less room for norm-breaking and sub cultures.
  • A national normative morality that is distinctly less allowing towards individual freedom of choice.
  • A separation of ethnicities and cultures into different nations, believing mixing them inevitably leads to conflict.
  • A reversal of migration, with the returning of all immigrants and their families to their birth countries.
  • Beauty and spirituality over science, function and financial consideration, applied to e.g. architecture and city planning, but also for the support of art and culture.
  • A society where the individual is deeply bound by duty to their employer, city and nation, with more restrictions on individual choice and decision.
  • Clear, binary gender roles with separate duties.
  • The father as leader of the family, the business leader as a father to his employees, the mayor as a father to his city, and the king as a father to his nation.
  • A virile masculine manhood with a preparedness and readiness for violence, to defend his honour, his family, his city and his nation, even tested through ritual violence and rites of passage.
  • A feminine womanhood, returning to the primary role of mother and supplier and the associated traditional tasks of raising children, supporting the husband, even wearing of dresses and no male clothing, like pants.
Public safety in the past

Public safety in the past

Funny. Reading one of the most renowned reactionary bloggers talking about how things used to be so much better, how we used to feel safe (when we were kids) but now worry about our own walking to school (Yes, it is different being a parent and not a child…), and how all men used to be proper virile men, I come to think of the contemporary protests in the press when they built the Grand Theatre in Gothenburg, in the late 1850s. It was the first official building outside of the city moat, and the press protested fiercely as by going there it would expose the fine folks to all sorts of dangers, and with the harsh elements threatening their health and clothing. It was thus doomed to fail as people would just not want to go.

This theater, which the brave, fine people would not dare to visit in the late 19th cent was built a 100 meters outside of the city moat. Time for all of us modern snowflakes to man up.

Fulfilling the ultimate prophecy

Fulfilling the ultimate prophecy

“There lies great danger in any religion that promises end of the world and restored Paradise, as they essentially, at their core, are death cults, with acolytes waiting for and wanting an end, with a deep longing to see events unfold that trigger this apocalypse, even seeking to actively create or trigger those events, to bring on their saviour and a new, better world to replace the one we live in.

It is a very fundamental, human desire for a better world, but a mutated exploitation thereof, which instead of making this actual world we live in better, requires for the ‘true believers’ to fulfill the ultimate prophecy by making the world worse, to instigate cataclysmic violence and evil, so that the divine will, in reward of their sacrifices, steps in and gives relief to the faithful martyrs. And this drives reactionary extremists at all levels, be they terrorists, neo-fascists, corporate leaders or top level politicians.

This can be balanced by a requirement of proving one’s humility and kindness to become worthy of entering paradise, but too often is not, and especially not against the unworthy unbelievers, who to the fundamentalists are almost everyone, but a very select few, with only those deemed worthy being shown respect and kindness.”

Our root state of being

Our root state of being

“About 20 years ago I witnessed an episode that has stuck with me ever since, as I thought it was such a poignant example of the complex and contradictory nature of the human soul.

While browsing rental videos at the store around the corner I overheard a middle-aged man talking to the clerk, asking if the thriller he was holding in his hand was any good, and the clerk answered; “Oh yes, it’s fantastic! You have to see it! It is brilliant!” The man then asked if the clerk thought it’d be suitable for his young daughter’s all-girl birthday party, to which the clerk responded “Hell no! They cut fingers off of little girls in it.”

Similarly, I remember the documentary I saw about the travelling cinemas of India, where the owners for the last 70 years have been driving their buses across India showing big screen Bollywood movies to people in villages who have never seen a movie or even read a book before. In such villages violence is extremely rare, and in some cases the cinema owner was struggling as these people were so shocked by the comparatively mild violence they saw in the movies that they literally felt physically ill, and in some villages everyone walked away, incapable of continuing watching.

This has stuck with me ever since. It is interesting how we can condition ourselves and what our “root state” of being is. There is a potential hidden there, if hard to reach.

This of course also has some interesting consequences and follow up questions:

First of all, since that root state is always under threat from those already conditioned to the use of violence, protective counter-violence will likely always be necessary, and in order to preserve that root state for as many as possible, others will have to submit themselves to a conditioning for threat and use of violence, serving as police or soldiers, thereby, and by necessity, choosing to become less sensitive to it.

Second, while according to research, movies and games do not directly cause us to commit crime, it quite clearly can function as propaganda, and desensitizes us to the use of violence, while it also, at the same time, can sensitize us to the threat of the same. And, large parts of the world has been doing this for the last 60-70 years, with ever increasing brutality, exposing even young children to it.

Third, what are the effects of large scale conditioning of the citizens of a society to the threat and use of violence? Those effects are bound to be of great interest for exploitation by political and particular financial forces, as fear. e.g. can be used both to control people, to pacify as well as to instigate them, and to boost sales of various forms of protection, and to motivate temporary and permanent infractions on the citizens’ freedoms and rights.

Photo by Amit Madheshiya