April has been a cruel month for Conservatism, Inc. They’ve increasingly had to come to terms with the fact that what has come to be termed the “alt-right” is a movement they can’t ignore, nor explain away using typical(and leftist) smears such as “racist!”, “Nazi!”, und so weiter.
Those that bother to engage us at all accuse us either of being evil and of not really defending “Western civilization”. Ian Tuttle writing at National Review perfectly encapsulates this view. Tuttle writes:
Furthermore, it’s entirely plausible that, where conservatives have endorsed policies — high levels of immigration, for example — that have ended up undermining certain “core Western values” (the importance of the rule of law, say), it was out of a commitment to other high-minded principles also in keeping with the Western tradition.
Tuttle and Robby Soave, who writes at Reason both betray a narrow view of the West. It’s one confined to “Classical Liberalism”, and confuses the ideological peccadilloes of its heroes as universal. Soave writes:
This is a terrible reason to support Trump, but not because the values of the West aren't worth protecting—they are. The sad! fact is that Trump adamantly rejects two of the most important legacies of the Enlightenment and Western society: free markets and freedom of the press.
Western Civilization, of course, did not start in the eighteenth century. Its foundations are in the Homeric epics which served as the fires that lit the mind of Western man from the pre-Socratics to the end of the Classical epoch. Western man has always defined himself in opposition to an other, the barbarian of Graeco-Roman times, the Saracen of the Middle Ages, and so on. Politics, as Carl Schmitt taught us is a never ending struggle around the friend/enemy distinction.
For our literal Whig historians over at Reason and National Review however, it is the “Liberalism” above all else that constitutes the tradition of the West. Speaking for myself, I do indeed reject Liberalism and its universalist and egalitarian strains that have, in part, led to the problems of our age. The reason we see “cuckservatives” as cuckolds is not because they haven’t defended “liberalism”, or “real rights”, or “Judeo-Christian values”, it's because they’ve failed to defend our, European people.
Classical Liberalism as defined and defended by Conservatism, Inc. holds within the seeds of its own undoing. As a cosmopolitan ideology, it cannot stop until it spreads its universalism from sea to shining sea. But here, it faces resistance. It must make an other, it must confront an enemy. Once it does, however, it takes on a new character.
Liberalism, however, cannot defend itself in such a conflict. It provides no identity for its adherents other than the sort of camaraderie one finds in the waiting line for the newest iPhone. It’s, by definition, an ideology for everyone, and therefore no one.
The question for the West and European man today is if he will survive. The “conservatives” who are only interested in conserving the liberal hegemony are no friend to European man. They might be friends to a stream, albiet a destructive one, in our history but they defend a dead end.
For us, we must choose a new way. As we grow we must be conscious of the new world we hope to build. Their eyes are not here, but to their shopping malls, ours should be to the future.
One of their Swamis once wrote a book “Up From Liberalism”, unlike him, though, we actually mean it.