We the Vanguard Now

Some might say that the Alt Right was bad for Trump . . . that we made his brand toxic . . . that we would have helped him more by just shutting up or even endorsing Hillary . . . that our first rule should have been, “Do no harm” . . . etc.

But to think in this way is to misunderstand everything.

Sam Francis noted that with both the Democratic and Republican Parties, the elites are to the left of the voters. Left-wing intellectuals, activists, and operatives are to the left (often far to the left) of the majority of Democrats (your average labor-union worker, soccer mom, or Black American). On the other hand, the Republican elite (the bowtie brigade, religious leaders, and “conservative intellectuals”) are also to the left of Republicans. Indeed, the Republican elite functions to dampen or deflect populist energies—to make sure things don’t “get out of hand” and that American nationalism is always about tax cuts.

In turn, the Alt Right (long before we had the name) was totally alienated from Republican politics. Postmodern deconstructionists and former left-wing terrorists with academic sinecures have a place in the official Left. People like Sam Francis were personae non gratae in the Right.

2016 changed all this.

The Alt Right is deeply connected to Trumpian populism in intellectual, spiritual, and visceral ways—for, as everyone agrees, Trump’s victory was, at its root, a victory of identity politics. And it was a campaign that ultimately dispensed with “conservatism” as we knew it. Because of this fact, Trump was opposed by most all components of the mainstream Right—from the neocons to establishment operatives to goofballs like Glenn Beck. And these forces opposed him with such vehemence that they simply cannot share in his victory.

In this way, the Alt Right, far more plausibly than the “conservative movement,” can lay claim to being the new Trumpian vanguard.

Before Trump, the Alt Right could be criticized for being a “head without a body”; it was engaged in meta-political and scientific discussion, but lacked a real connection with practical politics and the hopes and dreams of average Americans. In turn, Trump’s populism—with its half-baked policy ideas and sketchy vision of the future—could be criticized as a “body without a head.”

Now we are the whole man. The Alt Right and Trumpian populism are now aligned much in the way the Left is aligned with Democratic politicians like Obama and Hillary. The American Right always lacked a true vanguard. In the form of “conservatives,” it had only a “rearguard” or "muffle” or “hall monitor.” We—and only we—can say the things Trump can’t say . . . can criticize him in the right way . . . and can envision a new world that he can’t quite grasp.

2016 wasn’t just a “weird election,” with a seemingly unelectable candidate who didn’t play by the rules. 2016 represents a paradigm shift of enormous proportions. We have been transfigured by it—and so has the world.

Points of Light

Leading up to the election, Radix Journal will publish a symposium, "The Meaning of Trump," drawing writers from across the Alt Right. This is Occidental Observer/Quarterly's editor Kevin MacDonald's entry.

---

The Alt Right has gravitated to Trump’s candidacy, and for good reason. Much of what the Alt Right wants will be difficult or impossible to bring about even with a president who is entirely on board with the idea that America should start thinking about the interests of its traditional White majority. But win or lose, Trump has already had a huge effect on American politics in a way that benefits the Alt Right:

• Trump has made statements on immigration that have been banned from polite society for 50 years — deport illegals, seal the border, end birthright citizenship, place a moratorium on Muslim immigration, and make immigration serve actual labor needs rather than a moral imperative (ideally with guest workers not given citizenship). He has deplored Angela Merkel’s policies in Germany and has made statements indicating he opposes the transformation of Western societies via immigration and multiculturalism (“Paris isn’t Paris anymore.”)

• Trump has unmasked the neocons. The neocons have dominated the intellectual and foreign policy establishment of the Republican Party since the 1980s. From the beginning of Trump’s candidacy, neocons have been leading the #NeverTrump movement, despite the catastrophic effects of a Hillary Clinton presidency on the GOP. A Clinton presidency would ensure a liberal/left voting majority into the foreseeable future given that she would amnesty millions of illegals and dramatically raise total numbers of immigrants and refugees. Clinton Supreme Court appointments would likely gut the First Amendment by enabling “hate speech” laws and they would gut the Second Amendment as well. No one on the right, from traditional “limited government”: conservatives to the Alt Right, would want this, and it’s difficult to believe that the Jewish identities and pro-Israel commitments of the most important neocons are lost on non-Jewish Republicans. The treason of the neocons will be long remembered in GOP circles and will compromise their influence in the future.

• Trump has highlighted the chasm between the overwhelmingly White Republican voting base and the GOP donor class intent on globalist policies of mass immigration, free trade, and a bellicose pro-Israel, anti-Russian foreign policy. The pre-Trump GOP was dominated by a neocon foreign policy establishment and a pro-Chamber of Commerce, pro-big business economic policy. This party did not represent the interests of GOP voters and can’t be resurrected. Even if Trump loses, his energized supporters will be a new and important force within the GOP. Or they will support a new, explicitly populist party.

• Trump has unmasked the media. The media has always been liberal, but this time around, even much of the usual pro-Republican media has been hostile to Trump, and a survey by the Media Research Center found an astounding 91% of media coverage hostile to his candidacy. This feeds into the narrative that there has been a unified establishment that has opposed Trump’s populist policies favoring the middle class and the traditional White majority.

• Trump has put the Alt Right on the map. There have been numerous articles and commentary on the Alt Right because of Trump’s candidacy. The Alt Right has been the only identifiable intellectual perspective supporting Trump, although we understand that he is not one of us and would not attempt to do much what we would like to see in our ideal world. Much of the media coverage of the Alt Right was motivated by attempting to tar Trump as a “racist,” and after the election, win or lose, the media will likely attempt to put the toothpaste back in the tube by ceasing coverage. However, our increased visibility has meant a very large surge in support for the Alt Right. The future is bright, and a very large amount of the credit for that has to go to Donald Trump.

American Caesar

Leading up to the election, Radix Journal will publish a symposium, "The Meaning of Trump," drawing writers from across the Alt Right. This is Cecilia Davenport 's entry

---

The rise of Donald Trump is a world-historical event. Since Trump came down that escalator, we’ve been living in a strange historical interlude; it has almost been as if he restarted history, but simultaneously somehow sped it all up. I think we all feel that, to some degree: the Current Era, dating from June 16, 2015, has brought new oddities and miracles every day, to which we one and all continue to exclaim, “What a time to be alive!” But the interlude ends soon. The British historian A.J.P Taylor famously called the failed revolution of 1848 “the turning point in history when history failed to turn.” No matter what the outcome of the election, history will turn in November 8th.

Why Trump? No one else could have done what he has done. Whether consciously or not, he did as Machiavelli advises in Chapter IX of The Prince. In discussing how to come to power, Machiavelli suggests that the best course for a new leader is to come to power with the help of the great, and then betray them, turning out to be a champion of the people. Because of this, they will be all the more grateful, because they didn’t expect anything from you. The people then perceive you to be acting freely, even though you may have long-term self interest in mind. This way you appear as the savior and liberator of the people against the great. Notice that Trump says in every speech, “I didn’t have to do this, folks.”

Now, Trump came from the world of the oligarchs, even though he elbowed his way into that as well; a boy from Queens, muscling his way into the world of Manhattan real estate. But when he entered the world of politics, recall that, at first, the elites couldn’t believe it. It took months for it to settle in that this campaign wasn’t an elaborate prank. That disbelief gave way to the attitude most in that class still seem to hold towards him: hatred and fear. They hate him because he betrayed them. They fear him not only because he might succeed, but because they think him mad. Only a madman would risk all of the status, the money, the powerful friends, the influence! Our apolitical managerial class of oligarchs can’t imagine another reason to risk all of those things. For what? Ambition? Greatness of soul? “Love of country?” You must be joking. Their minds can’t grasp the higher things.

Donald Trump has shown himself to be a remarkably political man. He is illiberal in a serious sense; he does not imagine politics to be a game. He understands at a gut level that the stakes are life and death: not just the life and death of individuals, but of nations. Leaving aside the sheer Caesarian force of will it must have taken, time and again, over the course of these months, to continue to consistently raise the issues of immigration, national sovereignty, and anti-globalism, even in the face of new pressures and attacks at every turn—Trump has created and sustained a significant popular movement of support. They love him. And he warmly and repeatedly insists that he loves them too.

But can he govern? Is America redeemable? I certainly didn’t think so before the Current Era. But as Ivanka said at the RNC, “Come January 17, all things will be possible again.” Trump will have to govern as he ran, like a Caesar. Like Caesar, he excels at theatrics and spectacle, and he must use this to sustain popular support, which will help ward off backstabbings and impeachment. The Trump rallies should continue; indeed, he should abolish the White House press corps and eliminate the media middle man, holding his press conferences before the people instead. He must continue to take the “slings and arrows” of the oligarchs (or, at least, appear to) on behalf of the people. He must continue to be their voice.

And what of us? We must become both Marc Antony and Octavian to his Caesar. In life, his loyal friend and advisor; in death, his champion and heir.

The Roman Republic needed Caesar to finish it off. There could be no Octavian without Caesar to clear the way. Just so, the Alt-Right needed Trump. Win or lose, history turns because of him.

Millenial Dawn

Leading up to the election, Radix Journal will publish a symposium, "The Meaning of Trump," drawing writers from across the Alt Right. This is Radix Journal's managing editor Hannibal Bateman's entry

---

It’s not morning in America, instead it’s been a long twilight for as long as I can remember.

My generation has been defined by great events we had no control over, from 9/11 to the 2008 financial crash. We’ve felt as if things just happen to us, that we’re life’s eternal moviegoers. We’ve had no consciousness but that gifted to us by our hallowed “media”, typically wrapped up in tropes from the boomer generation that have sapped our country like a swarm of locusts. We’ve been indoctrinated with every lie under the sun about race, about sex, about history and above all we were fed the big lie: Equality. Most of us were content just to dream, just to hope for some future that could be instead of the nightmare we’re hurtling towards. Many times it just felt like fantasy, the past too seemed like another world, even though it was just a few generations ago. Our grandparents remembered a world where Europeans could be proud of who they are, but we’ve never known a time when we weren’t blamed for every evil in the world. Then came Trump.

Like a bolt of lightning it was as if we could dare again. Trump may not be one of us, but he’s given our people something that we haven’t known in decades, pride. For those millennials who support Donald Trump it has awakened a fire that has long been suppressed. As the media and their lackeys among the younger generation become more shrill to their contemporaries, “RACIST, BIGOT, SEXIST!” The more many in our generation come to untangle the Gordian Knot of lies they’ve been sold. This election, as Richard has opined before, contains in it the seeds of being and death. When Trump says “We either have a country or we don’t” he's making politics existential and personal. Perhaps for the first time, many are realizing that America has been in the process of becoming nothing more than a global favela. Where we once put men on the moon, today we’re just content with out of this world bargains.

People who call themselves “conservatives” have shown themselves to be the eternal losers they are this election. Their “principles” are just a mask for cowardice, and as Peter Thiel out it their “Free Market” ideology is just a mask for decline. But the world coming into being by the left and it’s conservative enablers is not the only option. Trump is an ending and a beginning. Of what, it’s hard to say just yet but for my generation he’s given us a direction towards the way out of dystopia.

Regardless of today’s outcome, we have a new beginning.

Make Persia Great Again

Leading up to the election, Radix Journal will publish a symposium, "The Meaning of Trump," drawing writers from across the Alt Right. This is Arktos publishing's Editor-in-Chief Jason Reza Jorjani, PhD 's entry

---

As far as I am concerned, this is a one issue election. We are faced with a stark choice between giving our stamp of approval to the enablers of the Islamic State or taking the first step toward seriously confronting the threat of a coming global Caliphate. Demographic projections show a Muslim majority worldwide within the 21st century, and as someone who has both studied and taught Comparative Religion it is perfectly clear to me that the Islamic State and Al-Qaeda interpretation of the Quran is the accurate one.

During the tenure of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, the premature US military withdrawal form Iraq – where we should not have been in the first place – and orchestration of the overthrow of autocratic but secular regimes in the so-called ‘Arab Spring’ opened a vacuum for the rise of the first self-proclaimed Caliphate since the Ottoman Empire. With a view to destabilizing the Western-style Assad government, then Secretary Clinton worked to arm insurgents who became integral to Islamic State forces. Her toppling of Gaddafi in Libya granted the new Caliphate a transcontinental scope.

In the same period, Secretary Clinton failed to back the 2009–2010 uprising of the Iranian people against their Islamic government. While I was writing letters to her as a lobbyist for an Iranian human rights organization at the time, drawing attention to how so many young people were literally being butchered or shot to death in the streets, and tortured and raped in political prisons, Barack Obama was penning ingratiating letters to the Supreme Leader responsible for this repression in order to pave the way for his nuclear accord. Their policy was never about the threat of an Iran with nuclear weapons. Had the US backed the uprising, heeding an explicit call for American support from the Iranian people, Iran would by now be the greatest strategic ally of America and Europe.

The reason that Clinton and Obama backed, even engineered, the rise of theocratic Islamic governments in the Arab world but betrayed Persians seeking to overthrow an Islamic theocracy is that within elite policy-making circles it is well understood that the young generation of Iran has finally understood the truth about Islam and that if this regime falls Iran will become a bulwark against Islam on a global scale. Such an eventuality terrifies Saudi Arabia, Hillary’s largest campaign contributor. As a member of an Iranian opposition think tank, I am privy to information and analyses that suggest Clinton has plans to work with the Saudis to extend and intensify the repression of the Islamic Republic as a catalyst for further fragmenting Iran into tribal microstates. This is their response to the specter of an anti-Islamic Greater Iran. They have even co-opted Crown Prince Reza Pahlavi for this purpose.

It is not enough that Clinton and the Saudis have facilitated the destruction of irreplaceable Parthian-period archeological treasures throughout Greater Iran, especially in Kurdistan, not to mention the genocide of the Kurds themselves, who together with the Persians, form the backbone of the Aryan nation of Iran founded 2,500 years ago by Cyrus the Great. Donald Trump will, at the very least, not stand against the Iranian Renaissance. When this movement triumphs, he may also have the courage to join tomorrow’s Neo-Zoroastrian Iran in the world war against those who will inevitably attempt to establish a global Caliphate.

Survival?

Leading up to the election, Radix Journal will publish a symposium, "The Meaning of Trump," drawing writers from across the Alt Right. This is Piero San Giorgio's entry.

---

I am what they call a "survivalist". As I explain in my books, I strive for an autonomous and free life for me and my family. I would not usually be concerned by the US presidential elections as any party would only accelerate the world demise into collapse and implosion.

This time is different.

Trump, is a sign of the possibility to – if not avoid, as the president does not have much power anyway – slow and perhaps even reverse the process that will inevitably lead to the collapse of the global economy, the social chaos and wars that will emerge and possibly the destruction of western civilization and the White peoples (or certainly massively reduce them in number and relevance). Even if Trump marginally loses or if the election is stolen or if some event precipitates chaos – the governing "elites" might prefer war and chaos to forfeiting their power – what the Trump campaign will have meant is that the people, abandoned by the financialized economy of Wall Street and the corrupt politicians of Washington and their minions in Brussels, the people forced to self-segregate to avoid crime, mixing and outright invasion from minorities (soon majorities in less than a generation), the people mocked and humiliated in the media, in the movies, by self-appointed pundits, by feminists, by so-called intellectuals… all these people realize that they represent a considerable part – perhaps the majority still – of the citizens and thus a considerable power.

A power with the ability to win with reasonable and peaceful argumentation, a power that refuses wars of conquest for foreign interests or wars to hide the failure of the current establishment and that could trigger nuclear annihilation, a power that will have to be reckoned with whatever happens, a power that will not accept humiliation and defeat, a power that might even fight if pushed beyond the current mental retrenchments. This alone, the awareness and the consolidation of this power is a major turning point in American and world history. History never stops, defeat and destruction are not inevitable, despite what many would like us all to believe. Trump will have achieved the recognition that we matter, that we can change history and he may well win, he must win. Then the real change could happen.

American friends do the right thing for your sake, for the White people’s sake, and for the world’s sake!

The Return of the Great Man

Leading up to the election, Radix Journal will publish a symposium, "The Meaning of Trump," drawing writers from across the Alt Right. This is Occidental Dissent Editor Hunter Wallace's entry.

---

Donald Trump has made politics great again.

I can't remember ever being riveted by a democratic election. Trump has kept us on the edge of our seats for over a year now. It goes far beyond politics. Trump has a love of life, a daring quality about him, that reminds me of Mussolini. As Thomas Carlyle once said, we are now accustomed in the West to being governed by the Duke's bailiff. No Duke of any sort, in any aspect of national life, can rise to be a leader.

I think we all looked at Donald Trump and instinctively knew "this is what real leadership looks like." This man could be a Caesar, a Duke, or a King. You can see this in the way the White masses responded to him. Trump stood on the presidential stage and the worms our system usually produces wilted in his aura. Everywhere he goes he is met by adoring crowds who deep in their bones are feeling the sentiment, if they can't quite yet articulate it or bring themselves to say it, "God Save The King."

The great fear is that Trump would dispense with constitutions, liberal democracy, the buzzwords like "freedom" and "equality," the -isms and -phobias which are our most cherished values, and govern as an "authoritarian." Conservatives used to believe that every country needs a Father. Now they fight sexism and misogyny!

I can picture Donald Trump looking down on the dystopian state of this country from Trump Tower. As a builder, he grasps the problems: the hopelessly corrupt political system, which produces "leaders" who are mere body servants of the oligarchy; the hostile elite in the

#LyingPress and universities; the buzzwords which have led us to our present national paralysis; the terror that ordinary people feel who live in fear of stepping on the tripwires of political correctness; the disintegration of our borders; endless wars overseas on behalf of places (Donetsk?) and countries (Iraq?) no one in America gives a rat's ass about; the looting of the middle and working class by globalization; the spineless, pathetic cucks who are a faux opposition; the rotting cities, etc.

I was really struck by Trump's comment that he knew this would be "a journey to hell." He knew the enormous risk he was taking by going to war with the globalist establishment. He was risking the #LyingPress destroying his reputation, his brand, his family and his business. There was a real possibility that he might even be assassinated before it was over. Just think of how many times his back was against the wall and a lesser man would have folded. And yet, he leaped into the abyss out a sense of duty and for the glory of victory.

We haven't seen Donald Trump's kind in a really long time. He is setting an example for others to follow. That's what I like the most about him.

Which Way MAGA Man?

Leading up to the election, Radix Journal will publish a symposium, "The Meaning of Trump," drawing writers from across the Alt Right. This is New Alternative Right Editor Colin Liddell's entry.

---

We on the Alt-Right should never be naïve about politics, but many of us have crossed the line into pure shilling and simplistic cheerleading with Trump. I know I have.

What is really going on here is “the system” addressing its own failings through the unlikely medium of a reality TV star, property mogul, and ex-pussy grabber.

The active participants in this are mainly the globalist elites themselves, with the real tensions being between simplistic, old-style globalism and an evolution of that – imperfectly embodied in Trump – which seeks to modify and ameliorate its excesses by mixing in careful dosages of identitarianism, civic nationalism, multipolarity, and common sense.

The recent FBI bomb dropped on Hillary suggests that the jury is at least split on which way to go. The Global Elites tend to be busy people wrapped up in their affairs, but they also have finely attuned senses, and many of them can hear the whistling of the large meteor hurtling towards them, as Richard Wolstencroft observed in his article at our site, “Why the Globalist Elite Should Drop Hillary and Support Trump.”

The amount of debt sloshing around, the plight of Deutsche Bank, the instability of the EU, the cut-to-the-bone interest rates and sluggish or stagnant growth everywhere, Middle East tensions, and the constant hollowing out of the best societies is breeding a sense of looming dissatisfaction, danger, collapse, and even WWIII.

The early money of bumbling through this mess by doubling down on “the old formula” through a Clinton Presidency is now being replaced by the late bet of bumbling through by opting for Trump and thereby allying Globalism with elements that the Alt-Right approves of.

Are we really turning a corner with a Trump presidency or merely propping up a collapsing system for another few years? That remains the most important question.

What's Wrong With Libertarianism?

I was recently asked by a journalist to comment on the decline of libertarianism. Here are my comments:

---

1. Voters under 30 tell pollsters they love legal weed, love gay rights, hate war, think the welfare state won't be around for them. So why, in your view, did they bail on libertarians this year?

Gary Johnson is an obviously terrible candidate, but I think there are deeper reasons for his inability to capture people’s imagination. (Ron Paul never had an “Aleppo moment,” but he wasn’t much of a politician, either.)

Perhaps there is room enough only for one “anti-establishment” or “radical” candidate in each election cycle. So many of us supported Ron Paul in 2008—not for the “legal weed” and not just for his antiwar stance—but because he was the candidate of a new beginning, a dramatic “reset” after the Bush years. Bernie Sander captured some of this energy over the past year, as did Barack Obama in 2008. But in 2016, Donald Trump is the real candidate of “change”—the person who (we hope) will fundamentally transfigure politics as we know it.

Johnson and Weld present themselves as “liberals without the socialism” and “conservatives without the nationalism and religion.” They think this is the best of both worlds, but in fact, it is the worst of both worlds.

Though I’m not a libertarian, I do respect its intellectual tradition, and I’ve profited over the years by reading Murray Rothbard, Hans-Hermann Hoppe, Tom Woods, Sean Gabb, Lew Rockwell, et al. They offer a radical vision of the world. Johnson and Weld, on the other hand, are simply another face of the existing system: “low-tax gay marriage” or “leftists for capitalism.”

2. Why did Trump, not Paul, capture the antiwar energy on the right?

The GOP primaries proved that populism easily trumps (left-)libertarianism.

Clearly, public opinion is against further Middle East wars. That said, successful candidates must be antiwar for the right reasons, and the public (and especially Republican voters) generally distrusts liberal pacifists and wimps. While most Republicans engage in symbolic “dick measuring” by talking about bombing various Middle East countries, Trump can authentically express his exasperation with the Iraq war and talk about sensibly working with Russia precisely because everyone knows he’s tough and resolute. “Only Nixon could go to China,” as the saying goes.

We forget now that the 2016 Republican nomination was Rand Paul’s to lose, as he was set to unify his father’s movement with the mainstream GOP. Paul lost big because Trump monopolized the populist energy; indeed, Paul was anti-populist. For the run-up to 2016, he engaged in all sorts of weird outreach to Black Lives Matter and the grievance industry—in other words, he was trying to appeal to the people Middle Americans hate most. When his poll numbers collapsed, Paul attacked Trump as a “racist” and went on The Daily Show presenting himself as the liberal’s choice for the Republican nomination—a truly idiotic strategy!

If Paul had amplified and echoed Trump (instead of attacking him), Paul might very well have earned the Vice Presidential nod. As it is now, Paul’s political career seems to have hit a wall.

3. How hobbled do you think libertarians are by their immigration stance?

That’s a bit like saying, “How hobbled do you think Catholics are by the their dogma?” In other words, you can’t have one without the other.

Yes, I know, there have been libertarians strongly opposed to mass immigration (Rothbard and Hoppe, most prominently), but this has always been a rather eccentric position. For immigration is ultimately a foreign policy; foreign policy is the realm of the state; and libertarians hate state power. Libertarianism is derived from a vision of a pacific world order, in which all humans are united through consensual relations and, as it were, collective individualism. It is a profoundly Christian worldview (even if most libertarians today are atheists).

Anyway, libertarianism is fundamentally inconsistent with nationalism and national identity. Most human beings on planet Earth are nationalists (of some kind) and have a strong sense of national identity. So you could say that libertarianism is hobbled by human nature.

Radix Print Series

Radix is proud to announce our exclusive series of limited edition prints. 

Designed by graphic artist Apex Dexter, they are meant to be displayed, collected, and treasured.  

Each new print will pay tribute to Alt Right ideas, heroes of the past and present, and visions of the future.   

Each design will be limited to a collection of 100 prints— individually numbered and signed by the artist. No more will ever be produced.   

These prints are produced through the process of Risography, an analog-digital hybrid technology that bridges ancient and modern—combining craftsmanship and authenticity with contemporary digital graphic design.

They are printed on 100-pound paper, with soy-based inks applied in multiple passes. 

A Dancing Star

28.00

Quantity:

Add To Cart

Deportation Force

28.00

Quantity:

Add To Cart

Accelerated Consciousness

Leading up to the election, Radix Journal will publish a symposium, "The Meaning of Trump," drawing writers from across the Alt Right. This is the first essay.

---

Jesus Christ, it was said, will come again to separate the wheat from the chaff. Indeed, he will “burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire.”

Before the summer of 2015, I never would have believed anyone who told me that, one day, Donald Trump—the real-estate tycoon, reality star, and celebrity (in the best and worst meanings of that term)—would come to starkly divide the conservative movement, revealing friend and foe . . . come to transfigure the foreign-policy consensus and the bogus “Left and Right” it implied . . . come to bring a new existential quality to politics, which used to be about meaningless “hot buttons” and now is about nothing less than survival . . . But this is what has happened.

I also never would have believed that such a man would— unwittingly, most likely—advance the movement and ideals to which I’ve dedicated my life, and become a screen onto which we projected our hopes and dreams. But Trump has done this and more.

In 2012, if I learned that someone liked or voted for Mitt Romney, that would have told me nothing important about him. It could have meant he was a GOP goofball, Cuck, neoconservative, or Mormon partisan . . . or it could have meant that he was an identitarian, so worn down he found Mitt’s somewhat decent immigration stands to be admirable in comparison to what was around him.

The same could be said if I learned that someone hated Mitt Romney. For one could hate Mitt Romney for good reasons from a variety of perspectives across the political spectrum.

How different it is with Donald Trump.

To learn a man’s opinion of Trump—or, more specifically, his attitude towards Trump—is to learn, effectively, everything one needs to know about him. Trump separates the wheat from the chaff. To borrow another Biblical metaphor (this time from the Old Testament), Trump is the ultimate shibboleth. He reveals to us the people who—however confused they might be—care deeply about Europeans in North America and around the world and those who actively oppose us. And he reveals those who, like the Cucks, are willing to sacrifice their race is some Grand Signal of Moral Virtue.

I write this as someone who fears that, were Trump elected, he could turn into a great disappointment, with a hilarious POTUS twitter feed but not much substance. But what’s key is what Trump represents—and that is the dawning of European identity politics in the United States.

Eight years ago, as Barack Obama was poised to become the U.S.’s first non-White president, I attended a private meeting of the Alt Right (interestingly, this was around the time the term was invented).

In a panel discussion, Louis Andrews, my predecessor at NPI, noted that the election of Barack Obama was, from our perceptive, a thing devoutly to be wished. The problem with George W. Bush was not just his terrible policies, like the Iraq war and the “ownership society” that generated the housing bubble and stock-market crash. It was that Bush, as a Texas-accented Anglo-Saxon from a privileged family, gave average White people a false sense of security and a false consciousness:

“We are still in charge! We’ve got one of our own in the White House. The liberal media hate him so much, he must be great!”

Barack Obama, on the other hand, looks like his policies; indeed, he looks like the racial and cultural dispossession of White people—what Alex Kurtagic memorably called The Great Erasure.

Why not, Louis argued, vote for Obama? Why not do our part, however small, in accelerating an identitarian consciousness among White Americans? This was a variation on the Leninist “the worse, the better” strategy, and I found it quite cogent. (It’s worth asking: Would the Trump phenomenon have arisen were it not for America’s First Black President?)

How different it is with Donald Trump.

Even if a President Trump might disappoint, who could deny that he has been an overwhelmingly positive force in advancing European identity politics? Who could deny that, even if he loses, Trump will have, from our perspective, already won? Who could deny that Trump has been the very opposite of the safety valves and false starts—the McCains and Romneys and Cruzes—that have been worse than the Left in blocking European racial consciousness?

Supporting Trump requires sacrifice, even up to the point of being physically attacked, as we’ve seen in San Jose, Richmond, and elsewhere. I’ve heard stories from people working in corporations, law firms, and even bastions of the “conservative movement” that merely being a Trump fan is a firing offense. And Trump has, Jesus-like, made his campaign a self-sacrifice: after this intense year and half, there will never be another luxury golf course or condominium complex branded with the name “Trump.” He has given this up for us.

It is said that “the day of the Lord so cometh as a thief in the night.” Trump, too, has come as a shock and surprise, totally unpredictable yet necessary. And he is a savior of sorts—a savior of an older America that, we must be honest, cannot be revived and probably existed only in the imagination. But Trump will be remembered not as a savior, but as a prophet—announcing and barely glimpsing a new politics, a new people, and a new kingdom.

No matter what happens on November 8, it has been Great.

Trump—Only the Beginning

TRUMP: ONLY THE BEGINNING#Trump #MAGAx3 pic.twitter.com/Cg361anjYL

— Radix Journal (@RadixJournal) November 2, 2016

Cult Classic (Podcast)

The Wicker Man

To celebrate Halloween, Dr. Frederick Kerr and Hannibal Bateman join Richard to discuss The Wicker Man (1973), the cult classic about the beauty, majesty, and horror of Paganism and the contradictions of Christianity.

(The Wicker Man) (1973)

(The Dunwich horror)

(Excalibur)

(Conan the Barbarian)

Mark Brahmin, "The Riddle of Conan"

Worst of The Wicker Man (2006)

Johann Georg Hamann

Christopher Lee

Diane Cilento

Britt Ekland

Jesus Died For Me T-shirts

Julius Cesar and the Wicker Man

Madeleine Albright's blood sacrifice of Iraqi children