The following is a brief breakdown of what I consider to be the values of Neoreaction. Since it is an intellectual movement without anything approaching an intellectual canon, I feel comfortable taking certain liberties. In the following summary, I describe problems to which Neoreaction has not been applied as problems to which it is appropriately applied. Since the problems to which Neoreaction has been rigorously applied to describe are few, and its very nature as an explanatory conceptual system is contested, I believe the liberties I take with what I call “Neoreaction” are entirely appropriate for working with a thought system in such chaotic infancy.
With respect to the use of the term “Neoreaction” at all, I have the following to say. Definitions (labels) short of platonic forms are never perfect, yet remain necessary to efficiently encapsulate ideas for effective communication. No person, object or idea perfectly fits into any label, but it is simply not feasible to unload ones’ life story and intellectual paths to everyone who asks “so what sort of ideas are you committed to”, or “are you right wing or left wing”? Insofar as such labels are simply requisite for humans to sustain fruitful intellectual exchanges with other humans, I would say that Neoreaction suits my purposes as a descriptive label.
As I mentioned my use of the term of “Neoreaction” is imperfect, and undoubtedly some philological purists would crucify my brief summary. Yet, in the spirit of Neoreaction, I opt for an exit from the ideology they conceive to be the sole constitution of the term Neoreaction, and propose my own.
At its core, I believe neo-reaction is an effort to, at least, rediscover, and at most, reform or remove, the sacred tenets of post-enlightenment Western civilization, as consummated in the form of globalist, progressive, and culturally Marxist, neo-liberalism. Neoreaction scrutinizes the inscrutable basic assumptions upon which mainstream Western thought has grown gluttonous and lazy. Such assumptions range from whether democracy exists, or ought to exist, to whether human races exist, and whether it is correct or desirable to consider all groups of humans and individuals therein “equal”.
As the excesses of the mainstream liberal order make themselves more apparent, ranging from the demographic disenfranchisement (by outnumbering and eventual replacement) of all ethnic-Europeans in their own homelands, to the increasingly narrow window of “acceptable speech” required to remain successful, or even un-incarcerated, in Western society, reactionaries respond with questions. In the face of an ascendance of an East which benefits from the technological sophistication of modernity unencumbered by the excesses of what Chinese bloggers call the Baizu “White Left”, the neo-reactionaries are formed of desperate souls with libertarian ideological origins, breaking into the engine room and trying to find the faulty components before the S.S. West falls off the waterfall and is lost forever, taking her faulty machinery and her occupants with her. This is the reformist style of Neoreaction, which may be juxtaposed with another, whose adherents consider the Neoreactionary project to be a desperate hunt for the exit to the S.S. West before disaster strikes. I see both projects as part of the same family, if for no other reason than because both the Neoreactionary effort to reform European nations, as well as the Neoreactionary style "exit", are considered equally beyond the pale by The Cathedral.
Regardless of its variant or degree, I consider Neoreaction important and valuable because it seems uniquely able and willing to touch most honestly on the greatest number of deficiencies that honest observers notice in the modern west, whose natures are held to be heretical to observe or discuss. Such heretical observations include the following:
- Libertarianism is the product not the cause of a healthy society. It also seems to only be the product of a particular kind of healthy society, that derives from a specific kind of culture from a particular kind of people with a particular kind of history. Unless the cultures, and peoples who share common histories that gave rise to these cultures, are preserved, the moral imperative of “liberalism”, which is quite unique and particular to a few peculiar societies, will die with them. Letting in millions of foreigners, whose histories and cultures will tend on the side of state interventionism, and who will demonstrate no interest in retaining or continuing the legacy of an indigenous history that is not their own, is counterproductive to say the least. It will lead to a permanently expanding, globalist state, acting against preserving any notion of indigenous founding nationhood. Open borders are not only inconsistent with libertarianism; they are the the single most destructive policy imaginable for a population that desires to bring about a libertarian society.
- Much of the confusion, terror, and censorious responses of established Western elites derive from their ever developing discovery that the most basic assumptions behind their world-view and sense of progress and destiny are in fact not shared by much of the world and may never be. That flooding people with money and technology does not produce individualist minded individuals with liberal democratic values and Anglophone assumptions about the nature of human progress, or a common notion of sanctified conduct. That in fact those things that seem regressive and backward, those things we thought were “left-behind” and were supposedly incompatible with “modernity” in a technological and economic sense, have gotten stronger since Fukuyama’s “end of history” philosophy and are becoming technologically modern and entirely consistent with “modernity”. That the likes of Saudi Arabia, or Iran and the inherent assumptions and desires of those millions who comprise these societies are simply not the same as the West and no amount of neo-liberal money throwing will solve this.
- Eastern societies have permanently dispensed with the western posturing and pretense that underpin both old style liberalism and the modern bastardized iterations of Marxist globalism ("deconstruction" of European cultures, unlimited immigration etc.) and yet are becoming more technologically sophisticated and powerful. Their major cities are homogenous, motivated, organized and have far lower crime and dysfunction than the “multi-cultural” West and its ironically termed "global", “open-minded” and "morally superior" "liberal values".
- The natural human impulse to find meaning and value in life through notions of genetic legacy and inherited indigenous culture are likely proving valuable and key to Eastern ascendence, at the same time that such legacies have almost been permanently stripped from indigenous Western children under such parochially Western doctrines of “civil societies”, “anti-racism”, “cosmopolitanism” and “multi-cultureless”. When Saudi Arabia, or Dubai, exploit the benefits of Western created wealth and technology, they don't spend their money flagellating their indigenous populations with a guilt complex about their histories of conquest and genocide.
They don't use their past sins as some excuse to disenfranchise their own progeny by outnumbering them with voters from different societies, and giving the newcomers the ability to permanently reform what it means to be a part of the ancient indigenous group. They shore up their notion of collective nationhood, identity, and ambition, to revitalize their existing ethno-cultural communities, like all sane societies in history have done. Places like Dubai benefit from outnumbering themselves in their own geographic landmasses with rich foreigners, without these foreigners ever posing a risk to the indigenous populations' unique and exclusive identity, history and state representation, since they nor their children nor great grand-children will ever be "Emirati". Rather than demonstrating a pathology in these nations, which will continue their ancient heritages and be recognizably consistent with their genetic and cultural histories centuries from now, it demonstrates a parochial suicide complex in the West that will render them an inconsequential footnote that sacrificed the legacies of their children to a materialist god of “globalism”, that the “globe” saw as alien and absurd.
- Western first principles and moral dogmas, like there being zero difference between population groups of humans, that multi-racial/multiethnic societies are unquestionably desirable, and that ethnic awareness is socially destructive, are not universal principles, or the inherent trajectory of humanity, but culturally specific Western hang-ups holding back the wellbeing of ethnic Westerners in the face of an ever more prosperous and powerful Asia. (Not to mention that these dogmas may permanently destroy Western peoples, to no discernable benefit to humanity as a whole)
- The Worship of victimhood, “anti-racism”, universal human fungibility, are “deep” products of Christianity that have perhaps even more power in a modern secular/atheist West than it ever did through formal religious practice. These deeply held convictions are thus vestigial leftovers on the way to modernity, a modernity whose benefits the east has proved capable exploit without being stuck with the vestigial deadweight. The West may be better off for doing the same.
- Europe had to implode its indigenous and healthy diversity in terms of culture, myth etc. to achieve modernity. East Asia and the rest of the world was able to take Western modernity and its benefits, while retaining the benefits of their indigenous ways of life, producing societies with a sense of collective purpose, cohesion, and duty along with the technological sophistication that the West once thought could only function within a particular, Western/liberal cultural paradigm. Essentially the rest of the world could take what worked and leave the rest, while the west was stuck with the stagnating and damaging cultural pretenses that they needed to tolerate to get to modernity, and the layers upon layers of universalist (but actually parochial) “values” that were once required for modernity but no longer are.
- The states of Asia will continue to be primarily populated by the peoples they are supposed to serve and govern, whereas the states of the West will provide no such service to the indigenous peoples in whose interests they were supposed to operate. Modernity in terms of technological and economic progress, and individual prosperity, does not require unlimited immigration or the consequential dissolution of the people within modern states, as Asia demonstrates. This is merely an astonishing treason and defect in the parochially Western state suicide impulse.
- Cultural Marxism, SJWism, anti-racism/anti-white identityism, rather than a sacred model upon which the future world would be built, are in fact parochial vestiges deriving from an unrecognized Christian ideological legacy, that create obvious social degradation in the form of fractured societies and identity politics, with no observable benefit, and thus are rightly discarded by the East.
- The doctrines of Cultural Marxists, culminating in the Frankfurt School and post-modernism, are not great universal truths operating from outside any paradigm, but are merely pathologies that the West can either dispense with, or wait to be taken over by the East that will establish a different global moral lexicon, while the West finishes off its indigenous populations with weaponized guilt.
- At current rates of immigration there will not be a “West” to speak of. The mad doctrines governing the West to bring in foreigners to be victim-worshiped, and eventually outnumber indigenous Westerners will destroy themselves in time, as Western societies cease to be “Western” in any meaningful sense beyond geographic positioning.
- Those descending from non-Western groups living in the Western world selectively deploy the Western ideology of universalism, when it comes to universalizing the artifacts (abstract and physical incl. the Western university, Western technology, European art, European languages) of Western culture and disassociating them from the modern progeny of those who produced that culture. These same protected groups retreat under the Western (Christian/guilt induced) provision for ethnically defined claims to culture and ethno-cultural separationist identity when it comes to keeping their claim to any cultural artifact derived from any non-Western culture, whose descendants may reside in Western states.
- The absurd inconsistencies surrounding the West and the absurd privileges it grants its non-indigenous population (who are soon to outnumber the indigenous western peoples) does not assist true liberal universalism, or any liberal western values, and does nothing but deracinate, and atomize the progeny of those who produced Western civilization.
- This deracination and atomizing stems from the schizophrenic Western cathedral stripping its indigenous peoples of any ethnicity, cultural identity, or legacy, while the vastly more numerous non-Western peoples, including those in Western society, continue to identify with and enjoy the association with their ethno-cultural legacies as humans have always done.
- The absurd phenomenona of deracination and atomization is a case of one generation of Westerners (boomers) destroying the entire civilization they inherited, and upon whose framework they built their prosperity, and in the process are denying their descendants the same birthright by permanently destroying their ethno-cultural inheritance, not to mention their demographic ability to determine the course of their own states in which they will become ethnic minorities.
- Essentially, those pathologies of anti-racism, cultural Marxism, progressivism, post-modernism etc. that are eroding the West, and are furiously protected by the Cathedral, are suicidal and will cease to exist anyway. The job of the Neoreactionaries would then be to uncover and remove these pathologies, before the peoples of the West are destroyed along with these pathologies, that are programmed to destroy themselves.
As a final note I would hope the neo-reactionary would desire to not just preserve the people of the West, but those (possibly) desirable aspects of it, like a notion of universal humanity, human rights, and meritocratic individualism, that may (possibly) be reliant on the existence of Western peoples to survive themselves. Should those apparent virtues prove irredeemable, however, the Neoreactionary would have the gumption to dispense with them.
To return to my preference for “Neoreaction” as a terminology; a self defined neo-reactionary is usually, this far, a distraught libertarian, not a born collectivist, or traditionalist. The term thus grants the wielder of the term a degree of analytical distance from the (perhaps) objectively true deficiencies of, or necessary operations required to, correct Western society. It appeals to those who can observe the true problems of the 21st century West, yet who remain simply uneasy with the motivations of movements against western modernity, which are more brute consequences of its failings, than dialectically sound and skeptical responses to them. This allows the neo-reactionary to accommodate logical tensions, and perhaps preserve those positive aspects produced by the Cathedral and its preceding heritage (such as modern science, medicine, the improvement of human material wellbeing, and [perhaps] a recognition of some place for a notion of common humanity etc.) in a way that would simply not be possible for committed ethno-nationalists, and primitivists.
I believe that the dialectical distance provided by Neoreaction will attract the sorts of people who will be most willing and able to honestly interrogate the problems to which movements like the alt-right, identitarians etc. are reacting. Finally, being the desperate pursuits of distraught observers whose natural inclinations took them to libertarianism first, and whose intellectual foundations derive from libertarian roots, the foundations of the movement are altogether more innocent and less suspect than many others. I do not believe the spirit of neo-reaction is one of anger, or at least anger tempered with dialectic and skepticism, whereas I am not sure the same can be said of many alt-righters, and identitarians. Their anger is legitimate, but not suitable for the purposes of the neo-reactionary.
In more pragmatic and strategic terms, Neoreaction fulfills an urgent need. Unless an alternative to Marxism can be established, which finds roots in the academy, there is going to be no chance of winning the cultural war that is now spitting distance from reaching the point at which the permanent destruction of European cultures, peoples and nations becomes inevitable. It has now become a race against time to ensure that when the last outposts of genuine European nations and peoples, like Poland, in which the children of these peoples are not yet destined to become outnumbered, become rich enough to start absorbing Western ways of thinking and behaving, that there is an alternative to Cultural Marxism in the academic thought dissemination stream that will not lead to their permanent dissolution and supplication to guilt complexes.
This needs to be a system of thought that is sufficiently comprehensive and memetically virulent that it proves capable of countering Cultural Marxism on its home turf, the academy. It needs to be a system of thought whose consequences of adherence, include the survival of ethnic European nations and peoples, and a future in which ethnic Europeans do not inevitably become minorities in their own countries. It needs to be a system of thought in which victimhood and offense are not the highest virtues attainable in society. It needs to be a system of thought that speaks to some other deeply held natural human instinct, more naturally than Marxism misguides the instinct of compassion. It needs to be a system of thought that teaches students to analyze and construct, rather than deconstruct. It needs to be a system of thought that provides a notion of "progress" that is not comprised of Marxist dogma. It needs to be a system of thought that allows the vain, young, and impressionable to be recognizable by the tropes of “intellectual”, and “radical”, without necessarily being Marxist. It needs to be a system of thought that can alter the political and metapolitical landscape so fundamentally that the Overton Window passively drifts right rather than left. Finally, it needs to be a system of thought that is so highly amorphic and customizable, that it can function in numerous disciplines at once and adapt to wherever it is required. The best hope I have found for such a system of are present within the fledgling traditions of Neoreaction, and archeo-futurism. That is why I subscribe to these ideas for now, though mountains of work remain to be done for them to prove their worth.