A plethora of opinions are
being expressed about the future of the Alt-Right in light of the
God-Emperor-Ascendant's disavowal. The Left has been emboldened; sensing a
chink in the armor, the hasbaresque trolls are already out in force, doing what
they always do, proclaiming inevitable victory and the imminent arrival of the worker's
paradise rainbow unitopia while attempting to demoralize their enemies
by making absurd statements that push the current media Narrative.
But nothing has changed. Richard Spencer didn't create the Alt-Right, he merely provided a nickname for an alternative right that has been around since William F. Buckley purged the John Birch Society. Hillary Clinton didn't speak it into existence. Donald Trump won't speak it out of existence.
Nothing has changed. Conservatism still hasn't conserved anything. The wall still has not been built. The melting pot is still a self-serving immigrant myth. The United States is still a white nation founded by and for whites, as even Slate admitted yesterday. The Alt-Right will remain a potent and rising force throughout the West because the ebb and flow of historical patterns, patterns that scientists and historians developing Structural Dynamic Theory have traced back as far as ancient China and Rome, are still observably playing out through events today.
Consider what Yuji Aida wrote in the Chicago Tribune:
But nothing has changed. Richard Spencer didn't create the Alt-Right, he merely provided a nickname for an alternative right that has been around since William F. Buckley purged the John Birch Society. Hillary Clinton didn't speak it into existence. Donald Trump won't speak it out of existence.
Nothing has changed. Conservatism still hasn't conserved anything. The wall still has not been built. The melting pot is still a self-serving immigrant myth. The United States is still a white nation founded by and for whites, as even Slate admitted yesterday. The Alt-Right will remain a potent and rising force throughout the West because the ebb and flow of historical patterns, patterns that scientists and historians developing Structural Dynamic Theory have traced back as far as ancient China and Rome, are still observably playing out through events today.
Consider what Yuji Aida wrote in the Chicago Tribune:
Americans are proud of their melting-pot
heritage. But as blacks, Hispanics and Asians gradually come to outnumber
whites, that ideal will fade. Like the Soviet Union today, the United States
will have to deal with contentious ethnic groups demanding greater autonomy and
even political independence. That could prove to be industrial America`s
undoing. Many Americans, however, feign ignorance of the problem, partly
because of the official ideology. The United States sees itself as a
pluralistic, multi-ethnic society with a single national identity based on the
principles of freedom and democracy. In fact, discrimination is rampant, but
the illusion of equality is vital to maintain a sense of unity. Nonetheless, it
is only a matter of time before U.S. minority groups espouse self-determination
in some form. When that happens, the country may become ungovernable.
That was written not long after
I returned from Japan, in 1991. The failure of the official ideology, the
fictional nature of a "national identity" based on principles and
propositions rather than genetics and language, was already obvious 25 years
ago. As for the irrelevance of the individual actors, consider an article that I wrote back in 2004 about
Tolstoy, Prechter, and socionomics:
It is
easy to mistake Leo Tolstoy's massive book, "War and Peace," for a
novel. It is not. Instead, it would better be considered the world's longest
satirical polemic, in the vein of Jonathan Swift's "A Modest
Proposal." From beginning to end, Tolstoy's classic work is intended to
illustrate the arrogant incompetence of human understanding and the inability
of human reason to explain even the simplest of social phenomena.
With unrelenting precision and distinct overtones of mockery, Tolstoy dissects the notion that men dictate events. In one specific example, he examines, with minute detail, the four specific orders Napoleon gave to his army prior to the battle of Borodino:
With unrelenting precision and distinct overtones of mockery, Tolstoy dissects the notion that men dictate events. In one specific example, he examines, with minute detail, the four specific orders Napoleon gave to his army prior to the battle of Borodino:
These
dispositions, which are very obscure and confused if one allows oneself to
regard the arrangements without religious awe of his genius, related to
Napoleon's orders to deal with four points – four different orders. Not one of
these was, or could be, carried out ...
And it was not Napoleon who directed the course of the battle, for none of his orders were executed and during the battle he did not know what was going on before him. So the way in which these people killed one another was not decided by Napoleon's will but occurred independently of him, in accord with the will of hundreds of thousands of people who took part in the common action. It only seemed to Napoleon that it all took place by his will.
And it was not Napoleon who directed the course of the battle, for none of his orders were executed and during the battle he did not know what was going on before him. So the way in which these people killed one another was not decided by Napoleon's will but occurred independently of him, in accord with the will of hundreds of thousands of people who took part in the common action. It only seemed to Napoleon that it all took place by his will.
In the
second epilogue, Tolstoy goes on to brutally abuse both specific and universal
historians, demonstrating how their explanations of various historical events
is not only inevitably contradictory, but often constructed on base premises
that do not withstand a moment's reflection. Tolstoy further underlines his
case by the choice of the two heroes of the novel within the polemic, Pierre
and Kutozov, both of whom achieve their respective dream of inner peace and
Russian victory only by submitting their will to the great forces moving around
them.
This is not, as one skeptic
rather amusingly put it, "a reliance upon the inevitable forces of history
and the methods of material production". (That did make me laugh; though.)
Marxism is the groundless and
unquantifiable application of incorrect economic theory to the future. Cliodynamics is observing what has
already happened and is happening today, then drawing rational conclusions
about how the various patterns and cycles observed will play out next. At the
moment, I'm reading Ultrasociety, by Peter Turchin. It is an excellent
book, and although its primary subject matter is largely tangential to these
patterns of history, a passage I read yesterday struck me as entirely apt.
There is a pattern that we see
recurring throughout history, when a successful empire expands its borders so
far that it becomes the biggest kid on the block. When survival is no longer at
stake, selfish elites and other special interest groups capture the political
agenda. The spirit that “we are all in the same boat” disappears and is
replaced by a “winner take all” mentality. As the elites enrich themselves, the
rest of the population is increasingly impoverished. Rampant inequality of
wealth further corrodes cooperation. Beyond a certain point a formerly great
empire becomes so dysfunctional that smaller, more cohesive neighbors begin
tearing it apart. Eventually the capacity for cooperation declines to such a
low level that barbarians can strike at the very heart of the empire without
encountering significant resistance. But barbarians at the gate are not the
real cause of imperial collapse. They are a consequence of the failure to
sustain social cooperation.
There is more, considerably
more, than this restatement of what John Glubb and Edward Gibbon and Polybius,
and other historians have noted would appear to indicate. But the point is, the
eventual significance of these events will be determined by how well they flow
with the historical patterns, not the opinion of any one individual, not even
the God-Emperor Ascendant himself. The fate of the Alt Right does not depend upon one of its
media-christened figureheads, but upon its willingness to align itself with the
observable patterns of history as they play out.
Because, as we know, our enemies are in the apocryphal position of King Canute, desperately attempting to hold back the waves with their false narratives and outdated theories about the way the world works. But everywhere, their narratives are failing. I just received translations of the 16 Points of the Alt-Right into Mandarin and Romanian last night; the Romanian translator added:
Because, as we know, our enemies are in the apocryphal position of King Canute, desperately attempting to hold back the waves with their false narratives and outdated theories about the way the world works. But everywhere, their narratives are failing. I just received translations of the 16 Points of the Alt-Right into Mandarin and Romanian last night; the Romanian translator added:
I
recently got in contact with the ideas of alt-right. The logic behind it is
clear since I am from Romania and I myself seen what happened to my country,
even after it entered the European Union. It lost all its industries, even the
strategic ones. Also, we lost much of the workforce to other countries. As
alt-right correctly points "free trade" requires completely
destroying the country.
Being correct, and providing an
operative, accurate predictive model upon which people can rely, will trump
monkeys dancing in front of the media every single time.