The Trouble with Culture War

This was a piece of writing triggered by a video made by a fellow author here at WCR, Argent Templar. In his video (hosted on his excellent YouTube channel) he maintained the importance, like our own Alfred Miller/Tsar Alexander (same guy), of the Alternative Right’s role in culture and arts. This is a position I also hold, and as a musician and generally creative person, I have the personality and temperament for this.

If I am to suppose Alternative Right-wing ideology can be channelled through culture and arts, then what is the namesake of this post for? After all, basic themes of traditionalism like family, kinship, patriotism, heteronormative relationships, et cetera, are quite applicable and even widespread on more social-friendly websites like Tumblr. One needn’t look far before one stumbles across pictures like this boasting hundreds if not thousands of Likes and Reblogs.

The problem however, is that this and things like it, are surface-level manifestations of a generally “traditionalist” family, couple or community. Where I live, near the Devon countryside in the southwest of England, I can quite easily wander into quaint little villages and “old-fashioned” areas seemingly untouched by the vampiric jaws of the modern world. Everything seems nice and orderly — void of progressivism and Marxism. It’s quite a boon, really. Well… aside from the fact that this is not Tradition.

It all depends on how “extreme” you want to be. If all Tradition is to you is delicate paintings, classical music and racially homogenous heterosexual couples, there isn’t much wrong with that, but it is far from how “extreme” you could really be. We must define what we want; what we define as the ideal. The Alternative Right is not utterly joined on this issue — which I see as a kind of positive thing, but these divides will and do cause misunderstandings. One “Traditionalist” might cite Victorian England as being “Traditional,” where another (like me) would cite ancient Sparta as being “Traditional.” Clearly, Victorian England and ancient Sparta are, to a degree, polar opposites in their ultimate outlook. In their morality. In their juxtaposed extrapolations of violence and war. I needn’t go on.

And that is assuming one wants Tradition at all! Let alone defining what it actually is. There are many in the alternative Right who strictly aren’t Traditionalists such as the majority of the various capitalists and especially the assorted libertarians. The world of an Evola would differ greatly from the world of a Stirner, and yet I have seen the works of both individuals endorsed and admired by people in the Alternative Right.

The only real “glue” between the various hydra-like “heads” of the Alternative Right (the “body,” if you will) is a dissatisfaction with the contemporary modern, liberal, progressive, anti-white Western zeitgeist. But even there, how so? Some of us are actually in favour of totalitarianism; some of us are actually in favour of globalism. Some of us, in actuality, are in favour of collectivism.

To presuppose that there could be “Alternative Right-wing culture and art” seems to essentially draw too many things together at once. Any culture and/or art which derives from those of us in these spheres capable of creating it will only reflect us — the individual — as well as the close-knit communities of like-orientated individuals around us.

This is where things become dangerous. I will point out that one of the reasons the modern Left is a disaster is because it is, in its very being, vampiric. It only exists as a reaction against something. The modern Left can only sustain itself via knee-jerk reactions against the yesterday and the now, hence its “progressivism,” hence its “revolutionary” essence (moreover, the Left will always exist as it is fundamentally against half of human nature). We must not become the same thing lest we fall into the same trap. If we are to exist purely as a kick-back against the now, against the failures of contemporary intellectuals and politicians and so on, our only support is itself a sinking ship.

We must, therefore, position ourselves for something, not just against. And I hear fellow Alternative Right-wingers now: “We are for quaint villages, patriotism and heteronormativity!” But I say to you: “These are a given! The question is: what validates them? What provides them with life and value? What sustains those things? For that is what you ought to be for!

This is the only way to provide a stable foundation for our attacks; for any true, infallible opposition. This must be understood clearly. One must ask oneself “What gives the politics and the laws and the institutions I want life? What gives them support?” If the only answer you can find involves the shifting opinions and moods of fallible and short-sighted human beings, then I welcome you again to the twenty-first century West.

Our attacks against the mainstream, as well as the possible creative and artistic manifestations of the attack, must draw water from this well. From the beginning; from a stable foundation; from the original source. If you’re a clever one you can already tell where I am on this issue in regards to where that source is.

If we are to form any long-term external resistance against the present hellish epoch, then we must find common ground on what our resistance fundamentally is, as well as — to bring us on-topic — the way it presents itself in a culture war.

Advertisements
Adam

As a man among men, I can learn.

2 thoughts on “The Trouble with Culture War

  1. I guess for me I am less concerned with the actual content (with a few exceptions) then developing some sort of cultural presence. I really think whats critical is making some cracks in the prevailing orthodoxy… Actually I may just do a short video response to this.

  2. Artistic movements are never based on mass appeal. The arch Modernists of twentieth century like Ezra Pound and Wyndham Lewis shunned mass appeal. I understand why, seeing mass entertainment now. Television is mediocre so as not to upset the viewers’ bourgeois sensibility, while traditional art forms have been destroyed by standards that tout no standards (that unmade bed ‘art’ for example).

    The best thing reactionary or at least anti-liberal artists can do is create because they would be doing it anyway. Your warning in this regard is spot on.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s