People often say these days that there is no such thing as left and right in politics, that it all comes down to narrative spin, frame games, and that, ultimately, both sides are pawns of the ruling cabal, and that the very concept of left vs right is a ruse to keep the masses divided. There’s certainly some truth to this. After all, what really differentiates Boris Johnson from Keir Starmer, or Tim Stanley from Owen Jones?
The idea of the “Uniparty” presupposes unity and not difference. The house always wins, though it allows you a bit of Punch and Judy theatre to keep you entertained during your enslavement.
This past week I’ve had cause to mull over this concept after a post I made on Xitter went viral during the French riots:
As tens of thousands of less-than-polite replies swarmed into my notifications, I realised two things:
Not everyone who supported the destruction was of immigrant stock.
I despise this worldview more than I realised.
There was that moment, like the cop in The Usual Suspects dropping his cup when he understands who Kaiser Soze is, of the jaw-dropping realisation that French communists who are as white as Joan of Arc actively want their heritage torn down if it means society can be more “equal”.
Those rampaging imported hordes are not an embarrassment to the French left. They’re not squirming at the failure of multiculturalism. They’re applauding it and exclaiming, “Behold my creation!”
As a values system, it is as far from my own as possible. It isn’t a superficial difference. It isn’t merely a matter of cosmetics or choosing one football team over another. It is an ontological chasm that cannot be bridged.
To me, an aesthetically pleasing Neo-Renaissance building, resplendent in lovingly painted murals, has an inherent value because it speaks to the higher and transcendent. To them, it is an indulgence, a symbol of repression and extraction, and no more valuable than a pile of rocks and wood.
Although I’m not French, I want the French people to survive and thrive in their great nation. French Communists believe their own people are not much more than bandits and bullies, and justice is long overdue, but has arrived in the form of millions of foreign berserkers.
Where, exactly, is the conversation supposed to begin here?
It is fitting that France is home to the most repugnant forms of leftism, because that is where all of this began. Britain likes to tell itself a narrative that the British people simply don’t behave like the French; we’re not prone to riots and revolutions. However, you could equally argue that it just means the British State is better at containing dissent and presenting false options, which is why concepts like left and right often seem worthless.
If terms like left and right seem flimsy and inadequate, then perhaps it is more accurate to refer to order and chaos. The merging of radical leftism with Third World “bodies” is, to my mind, chaos incarnate. There are people on the far-right who like to lean into Third Worldism, seeing potential in the critiques of neoliberalism and Zionist power. It seems radical and edgy, but it is no less naive than the distraught French woman who stands powerless as her boutique shop is looted by the very people she sides with.
It is a profound misunderstanding of the metaphysical gulf preventing any dreamed of alliances or tactical fantasies. I am highly critical of the Zionist influence of American foreign policy and the slaves on the British centre-right who run cover for it. Yet I am under no illusions that Britain’s Islamic population are going to thank me for my support by going home.
Similarly, and it’s profoundly unfashionable to say, I’d rather have a drink in a pub with a Reform UK supporter or a Tommy Robinson fan than anyone from Labour or the Green Party. I may find them gullible, and some of their ideas moronic, but at least we are beginning from a similar place.
The assumptions of the French far-left are nothing short of insane, and having browsed literally tens of thousands of their vitriolic posts, I’ll sum it up here:
The French State is inherently oppressive and exploitative. Its architecture, sculptures and art were funded by money extracted from poorer (non-white) people, and it is morally justified to tear everything down and begin again. The immigrants destroying France are simultaneously no less French than anyone else, but also victims of historical oppression that benefited the Europeans.
In short, they want your civilisation destroyed and you beaten down and replaced.
It is an existential issue, and that doesn’t change because we like seeing Ana Kasparian owning Ben Shapiro on Xitter.
Mainstream Western punditry said the “unrest” was caused by economic hardship and the cost of living. This is, of course, convenient, but it should not be discounted entirely. Despite France having one of the world’s most generous welfare states and a retirement age of just 62 (rising to 64 next year), living standards are declining, as they are everywhere else in Europe. Many people, particularly in America, would point to those welfare states and early retirements, but right now, energy shocks from Forever Wars, inflation, and rampant debt are the issue.
Whatever the solution to these woes is, using the Third World as a weaponised biomass to level the country isn’t it.
A White French woman who struggles to pay the bills is still not in the same lumpenproletariat as the foreigners because she is not a foreigner, and because she is White. She will plead for mercy to the men whom she supported and offered ideological succour to, like a mother’s milk, as they throw her aside to loot her high-status trinkets.
Even in a true crisis in which the state falls, who or what will have the will and organising principle to sit behind the big desk in the Élysée Palace? Transsexuals? Feminists?
To my mind, Third Worldism represents the permanent end of our civilisation.
A few years ago I wrote an essay on the Oceangate submarine disaster called “Too Heavy For Superman”, drawing from the Flaming Lips song.
The lyrics speak to a problem: people assume Western genius and organisation can perform miracles and overcome any problem (in that case, lifting a poorly designed submarine off the ocean floor, miles deep, alongside the Titanic).
Even if it hadn’t imploded immediately, we still couldn’t lift it back up within 72 hours. Sorry, it can’t be done; there are hard limits.
Likewise, we can overcome bankruptcy and bank runs, failed systems of government, and we can lose wars. We can replace broken logistics lines and increase crop yields with cleverly designed fertilisers.
But Third Worldism represents demographic oblivion, cultural erasure, and removal from institutions of power. Sorry, we don’t come back from that; we can’t lift it off the seabed; it just stays there with the crabs. We can heal a cut in the horse’s hind leg, but we cannot unshoot it.
I see the arguments that, well, this is just the French and the French love to riot. I’ve watched France riot and fail to elect a Le Pen for most of my adult life. But each time, the destruction is a little more severe, a little more sadistic, and a little more alien. There’s an assumption that with sufficient police brutality and increased militarisation, the forces of order will hold the line in the end.
Yet it’s also like watching waves come and go, eventually sweeping away a sandcastle. Maybe not this time, maybe not next year, or the year after that. But one day, unless the forces of order genuinely confront uncomfortable realities about the problem’s severity and its existential nature, it’ll be too heavy for Superman to lift.
Tell everybody
Waitin’ for Superman
That they should try to hold on best they can
He hasn’t dropped them
Forgotten or anything
It’s just too heavy for Superman to lift
It feels like we may be approaching an apocalyptic battle between what remains of the Christian egalitarian morality, and the solar morality of the superman.
There should be no holds barred in this battle because it is literally a battle for the future of the human species.
I will buy this 'cost of living crisis' excuse when a large chunk of the population ditch their 'Luxury Beliefs'