#Conservative Revolution

[castilestateofmind]

"In Tradition, every authority is fraudulent, every law is unjust and barbarous, every institution is vain and ephemeral unless they are ordained to the superior principle of Being, and unless they are derived from the above and oriented 'upward'".

-Julius Evola.

[chaoticflames]

Ernst Junger

[relaxedstyles]

[queercodedangel]

This doesn't mean that there is no value at all in reforms. But it does mean that the benefits of reforms are fragile and can be reversed at any point because the fundamental power structures of class society are still the same.

You can earn as many rights as you want, as long as class society exists they are in the hands of the capitalist ruling class and can be taken away at any moment.

Read "Reform or Revolution" by Rosa Luxemburg for more on this topic. You can read it for free in the Marxists Internet Archive

[theorahsart]

As someone spending a lot of time reading about Revolutions at the moment, I wish this Conservative cadidate would stop using the word 'Revolution' every other sentence, its making me feel sick lol

lmao you're not starting a Revolution by rehashing the same old fashioned ideas and rhetoric that youve been repeating for 100 years and which has absolutely brought us into the fucking shit storm that is the current political situation.

"Conservative Revolution" ffs please stop. When will ANY ONE learn, NOTHING we are currently doing or have done IS WORKING its time to fucking brave and try something NEW.

[probablyasocialecologist]

While white-tailed eagles, bustards and cranes were also all much more common than they are today, some other now-ubiquitous species were much less common before the industrial revolution. Rabbits were still mainly a coastal species except in lowland England, and roe deer were found wild only in the north of Scotland and Eryri (Snowdonia) in north-west Wales. There were no grey squirrels, and brown rats were only introduced at the very end of the period. On the other hand, red squirrels and ship rats were still widespread, and pine martens and “Scottish” wildcats were also found in England and Wales. Fishers caught burbot and sturgeon in both rivers and at sea, where they also pulled in plentiful amounts of tuna and swordfish, as well as now-scarce fishes such as the angelshark, halibut and common skate. Threatened molluscs like the freshwater pearl mussel and oyster were also far more widespread.

[traditionaldream]

What they are trying to do in Europe.

Iran before and after the Islamic Revolution.

Never again, and not in Europe

[mingot-studios]

the only good conservative is a dead conservative 😎

[t-circled]

Is a violent revolution inevitable today in the United States of America.

[castilestateofmind]

"Myth is a reflection of the deepest layers of the soul. It is a cosmic mirror that shows us our place in the world and our connection with the transcendent".

- Ernst Jünger.

[suffercerebral]

the same chronically online leftists who talk about "building community" as a blanket solution to every issue, but always bitch about emotional labor or unpaid domestic labor don't realize that a foundational aspect of building community is volunteer work. lmfao.

[dailyanarchistposts]

Benoist and the European New Right

Besides Third Position fascism, the other major ideological influence on the National-Anarchists is the European New Right, especially the thinker Alain de Benoist. National-Anarchists have adopted his ideas about race, political decentralization, and the “right to difference.”

Benoist founded the think-tank GRECE, and has spent his life creating an intellectually respectable edifice for a core of fascist ideas. Like Southgate, Benoist loudly proclaims that he is not a fascist, but scholars such as Roger Griffin disagree. Griffin says that the New Right “could by the end of the 1980s be credited with the not inconsiderable achievement of having carried out a ‘makeover’ of classic fascist discourse so successfully that, at least on the surface it was changed beyond recognition.”[32]

Benoist extended the notion of an alliance of European nations with the Third World against their main enemies: the United States, liberalism, and capitalism. But against the fascists who desired a united Europe under a super-state, Benoist instead calls for radical federalism and the political decentralization of Europe. Roger Griffin describes this vision as:

The pluralistic, multicultural society of liberal democracy was to give way, not to a culturally, coordinated, charismatic, and, in the case of Nazism, racially pure, national community coterminous with the nation-state, but to an alliance of homogeneous ethnic-cultural communities ethnies within the framework of a federalist European “empire.”[33]

Benoist also incorporates many sophisticated left-wing critiques, sometimes sounding like a Frankfurt School Marxist. Today he denounces capitalism, imperialism, liberalism, the consumer society, Christianity, universalism, and egalitarianism; he defends paganism, “organic democracy,” and the Third World. He questions the role of unbridled technology and supports environmentalism and a kind of feminism.[34] He also rejects biological determinism and embraces a notion of race that is cultural.[35] Southgate follows practically all of these positions, which are not necessarily present in Third Position.

Because of these views, the European New Right is very different from the U.S. New Right, whose Christianity and free market views are anathema to the Europeans. The Europeans are closer to the paleoconservative tradition in the United States, and connect with The Rockford Institute, publisher of Chronicles.

Benoist’s main intellectual formulation is the “right to difference,” which upholds the cultural homogeneity and separateness of distinct ethnic-cultural groups. In this sense, he extends the anti-imperialist Left’s idea of “national self-determination” to micro-national European groupings (sometimes called “the Europe of a Hundred Flags”). The “right to difference” has influenced the anti-immigrant policies of Jean-Marie Le Pen’s National Front in France, and a number of GRECE members joined this party, even though Benoist himself rejects Le Pen.[36]

Benoist has also influenced U.S. White separatism. Usually based around the demand for a separate White nation in parts of Idaho, Montana, Oregon, Washington, and Wyoming, this became a popular idea in White Nationalist circles starting in the early 1980s.[37] This decentralized regional perspective was matched by decentralized organizational schemas which emerged at the same time. Louis Beam advocated “leaderless resistance,” and the “lone wolf” strategy for far-right terrorism,[38] while Christian Identity Pastor Bob Miles started referring himself as a “klanarchist.”

Inverting language, Benoist claims that he is an antiracist. Racism, he argues, is a function of universalistic ideologies like liberalism and Marxism, which purportedly wipe out regional and ethnic identities. He says “Racism is nothing but the denial of difference.”[39] But Taguieff, a keen observer of the European Right, identifies a “phobia of mixing” at the core of this form of racism. It is part of the “softer, new, and euphemistic forms of racism praising difference (heterophilia) and substituting ‘culture’ for ‘race.’”[40]

The influence of these New Right ideas on the National-Anarchists is explicit. In Australia, the National-Anarchist group is for all practical reasons coextensive with “New Right Australia/New Zealand” and at one point they claimed that “New Right is the theory, National-Anarchism the practice.”[41] In Britain, Troy Southgate has been involved in New Right meetings since 2005.[42] But while Benoist claims that he does not hate immigrants, repudiates antisemitism, and endorses feminism, the National-Anarchists show what New Right ideas look like in practice: crude racial separatism, open antisemitism, homophobia, and antifeminism. The “right to difference” becomes separate ethnic villages.

The New Right also has had a limited influence on elements of the Left intelligentsia. In the United States, the influential journal Telos (known for disseminating Western Marxist texts into English) moved rightward in the 1990s as its editor showed sympathy for Europe’s New Right and published Benoist’s works.[43] It continues to publish Benoist, and explores the thought of Nazi legal theorist Carl Schmitt. Many Leftists now consider the once venerable journal anathema.[44]

[anarchistfrogposting]

Hi! I have been reading a bit lately about the Tate brothers and how what the left needs to do is to create alternative masculine ideals and figures. Is that our method of fighting this? Do you have any specific ideas about how that would look and how we should go about achieving it?

The thing is, an alternative masculine ideal already exists. There are strong and supportive men who are attentive and respectful partners and fathers, helpful members of their community, and many, many men who work the soles of their feet off leveraging their privilege to defend those who can’t already. These men are decidedly masculine.

At this point in time in society, there’s a shift happening. Feminism is gaining sway and the directionality of society is beginning to move against patriarchy. At the same time, the improvements that women are seeing in their rights across the board; to vote, work, seek equitable legal recourse and participate in society as a whole; are changing the role and position that men traditionally had in society. Since men were and are told that their role as a man is to uphold the patriarchy - to be the sole breadwinner or the dominant and domineering figure in their household, relationships and communities - this generated and generates a considerable amount of anxiety. What they are told is their role by patriarchal values and what the shift toward feminism represents are incongruous. and that’s weird and scary.

Grifters like Tate use (and deepen) that anxiety by presenting themselves and their image as an image of desirable masculinity. They then use that anxiety to make people buy into their scams. They, and conservatives like them, channel that uncertainty into projection; misogynist and sometimes even outright violent attitudes towards women and sometimes even other men they deem to have threatened their masculinity.

“The masculine ideal” is just an ideal. It is completely unattainable because masculinity is not a stable nor tangible concept. That uncertainty and confusion over what a man actually is is the exact reason why the rhetoric of people like tate/peterson/rogan (whatever) is so successful; all of these men are in a constant state of peril; the smallest thing could completely invalidate their entire identity in an instant. This is what it means to say that the patriarchy hurts men too.

The destruction of the patriarchy will fall on shifting societal attitudes to a point where it is abundantly clear to men that their masculinity is defined by themselves only. Masculinity is a socially constructed category with no clear boundaries, so If gender is an internal experience all it means to be masculine, then, is what men consider to be an expression of their own masculinity. There is literally no limit to what that could be.

[akonoadham]

[little-candy-store-of-horrors]

Happy birthday girlypop who never said all that 🥳