What is our plan?

fschmidt is thinking ahead:

I would love to see someone start a reactionary/patriarchist forum. This seems like the logical next step.

Good idea, but my first thought was “the next step to what?”  What are we patriarchists and reactionary bloggers trying to accomplish, really, spending our time in this way?

I admit that I am a bit of a mystery to myself on this issue.  I’m not entirely sure why I’m doing this.  I would like to hear from my fellow bloggers what motivates them.  I suppose there are some personal/psychological motivations.  I spend a lot of time thinking about this sort of stuff, and my vanity demanded that I try to pass myself off as some kind of expert, as if my hobby needed to have an output to justify it.  Then there’s the ideological loneliness; the web was my only shot at finding people with similar beliefs to my own.  If these personal reasons are my real motivation, then I guess there is no next step for me.

How about changing the world?  Is that what we’re after?  At first glance, this seems pretty unrealistic.  I and the folks on my blogroll are going to defeat the media and academia and win over public opinion?

Perhaps the audience we’re trying to win over is more restricted.  Those who think that traditionalist subcommunities need to be working on separating themselves from the larger culture might consider that we’re doing theoretical preparatory work for these future communities.  (Perhaps we are trying to set ourselves up as a sort of intellectual class for them; religious communes would get intellectual guidance from us in a manner similar to how Marxist theoreticians give guidance to communist societies.)  Against this, one might object that the Amish didn’t need political philosophers to get their communities going.  However, they’ve also more or less cut themselves off from the world of higher learning.  If a community doesn’t want to do that, but does want to defy the established consensus, they’re going to need some sophisticated guides.  If this is what we’re after, the next step would seem to be making contact with some potential religious separatists.

Perhaps the subcommunities we’re meaning to help are just individual families:  moral and intellectual support for parents trying to raise virtuous children, and things of that sort.  If that’s the case, then the next step would be moving the content on our blogs in a more appropriate direction.  A disproof of the social contract theory isn’t going to help a father convince his children to be continent till marriage.  In fact, our wearing our radicalism on our sleeves probably gets in the way of our ability to help regular families, who think that only Nazis doubt the goodness of democracy.

As for myself, my ultimate political ambition would be to help put together Adam Webb’s trans-civilizational alliance against liberalism.  Given the time (which I don’t have), the next step for me would be to seek out some potentially sympathetic Islamists, Hindu nationalists, and neo-Confucians.  I suppose I might start out by searching out Muslim bloggers who are (unknown to them) philosophically close to me.  Add them to my blogroll, start commenting on their posts, try to win their respect, and try to convince them to see conservative Christians as allies.  Repeat with other groups.  Eventually convince them to go together on a joint web magazine to promote our inter-religious antiliberal worldview (something like First Things, but with more foreigners and fewer neocons).  The downside of this plan:  to be more palatable to Islamists and Hindus, I’d have to go pretty soft on some nasty persecutors of Christians, thus irritating Christian readers (presumably my current base readership).  Ultimately, whether or not this is a good thing to do comes back to my on-again, off-again arguments with Alan Roebuck about whether liberalism or Islam is the greater threat.

So there it is.  Right now, I’m not set on a long term plan for reactionary bloggery.  Is anyone else?

27 Responses

  1. I believe this blogger is on the right track:

    “I think we are now in the position of the Dwarves circa Sauron’s return. Driven from Moria, we must retreat to the Lonely Mountain, fortifying ourselves there and maintaining our traditions sight unseen. Our role is to simply persist, quietly preserving our values, passing them on to our children and grandchildren while awaiting the dawn. The analogy is not perfect (they never are): I don’t advocate total withdrawal. The marauding Flames of Udun must feel cold steel in their bodies hurled by those dwarves in Moria who still draw breath.”

    http://samsonsjawbone.wordpress.com/2010/07/27/339/

  2. Thanks for bringing this up. But even the discussion of a plan deserves to be done on a forum. As comments of a blog post, this discussion will soon scroll off into oblivion.

    I know from business that the initial business plan is rarely followed through. What matters is to move forward and to be willing to change direction as one learns more. So different people can have different plans. What matters is that if someone has a goal, he takes some action towards that goal. The biggest problem is usually inaction.

    I haven’t read Adam Webb’s book, but I am skeptical of political approaches because, from my knowledge of history, I think mainstream culture is doomed. So I am interested in subcommunities. I don’t see subcommunities as being a different approach from helping families because the best way to raise good kids, especially teens, is to bring them up in a good community.

    The liberal cultural center is being held together mostly by the wealth of the West. As long as people have enough to eat, they will be complacent. As the wealth disappears, as it will rather quickly, people will join different movements and Western culture will fragment. Many of these movements will be nasty. My hope is that there is at least one reasonable subculture.

    As an atheist, I have a special agenda. I want there to be a decent subculture that will accept moral atheists. I am sure that the better subcultures will be based on Christianity but I am afraid these subcultures will be intolerant about belief.

    I could continue writing and write a book on this topic, but this is just a blog comment. So returning to the forum idea, a forum would be a place to discuss ideas. I would start one, but I don’t think an atheist is the right person to do this. The forum should be owned by a tolerant Christian. Starting a forum requires very little effort and I would be glad to help in any way I can. I hope someone steps forward.

  3. “All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.”

    For over 200 years, tradition and classical Christian culture are under constant attack, while in the last 30-40 years attacks and accusations are becoming unbearable. These attacks were formulated and articulated in the realm of of philosophy first and foremost. These philosophical (better to say sophistic) attacks never had strong philosophical opposition from traditionalist side.
    Few openly traditionalist philosophers, like De Maistre and Bonald had to endure ugly labels ,like “enemies of freedom”, “obcurantist”, etc. Traditionalism already got labels like “irrational”, “obscure”, “repressive” from anti traditionalist side…and labels are very powerful weapons. Because of these labels and image, many traditionalists are afraid of open confrontation with opposite side, and are in the state of constant withdrawal. To counter these accusations, rational and articulated arguments are needed in the defense of tradition and truth. Because, after all, ideological conflicts have philosophical ideas as its basis.

    This blog represent philosophical articulation of reactionary and traditionalist thought, and is doing it superbly. This kind of activity is necessary.

    And a few more things:

    – Amish community (that Bonald mentioned) is relatively small and isolationist sect, without any ambitions of dominance in general society. Therefore Amish community is not threat to liberal system, does not represent traditional Christianity and is not under constant ideological attack.Tradition that reactionary school defend WAS civilization not so long ago. “Progressives” mostly formed their identity through opposition to traditional Christian culture from which they come to be. Therefore, they need to attack it constantly in order to confirm their own identity. They have to kill father (God, King, pater familias) in order to own mother (Earth, state, society) and to confirm themselves as authorities. In order to became authority they must destroy old authority.

    – This is not just political struggle, but cultural as well. Culture is also important aspect of spiritual life of community. Culture in the West was mostly traditionalist almost up until 60-es, and it was cultural revolution that lead to spiritual state of today. This is why most societies and traditions survived various political revolutions, but now they are collapsing because of cultural ones.

    – Is it all lost? Who knows really. But when one is in position to say or do something according to his possibilities, then it’s better to him to do something instead of feel guilt for not doing anything on behalf of things that he consider important.

  4. ‘Given the time (which I don’t have), the next step for me would be to seek out some potentially sympathetic Islamists, Hindu nationalists, and neo-Confucians. I suppose I might start out by searching out Muslim bloggers who are (unknown to them) philosophically close to me. Add them to my blogroll, start commenting on their posts, try to win their respect, and try to convince them to see conservative Christians as allies. ‘

    I suspect you’re going to run into the same language barrier that I did.

    There are probably quite a few like-minded Muslims, etc., who have two roadblocks:
    1- They are raising their kids and don’t have time to blog;
    2 – They don’t speak English.

    You already have Western Confucian on the blogroll here. That’s the way to do it. Western Confucian is an example of how Christianity survives dying civilizations.

    Western Confucian is actually a white guy who married a Korean girl. If you want to make sure that civilization doesn’t die out, find a lot of guys like him. A lot of them will be necessary; some will be married to other whites. If you could find a guy like that in Appalachia, a guy like that in the Yukon, a guy like that in Mexico, etc., you would be on the right track.

    As for patriarchy in Asia – it has some severe challenges, but the people aren’t as misguided as Americans. People recognize that civilization can’t survive the insane extremes of “progressive” sentiment.

    This topic deserves more careful thought than I can fit into my schedule this morning. Let me sketch out a draft and I’ll get back to you.

  5. A ministry of truth and encouragement is a benefit in and of itself.

  6. Maximus is calling for a similar plan at:
    http://www.inmalafide.com/blog/2011/03/07/the-fear-of-manning-up/

    But in fact Deezee has been way ahead of the game for months:

    http://jjdurden.blogspot.com/2010/02/getting-started-on-taking-action.html

    http://www.the-spearhead.com/2010/02/10/turning-the-tide-an-object-lesson-in-waging-the-war-from-the-front-lines/

    So, basically, I would advise Bonald and Deezee to put their heads together.

  7. I think our play should be:

    #1 – Attack liberalism as a worldview.
    #2 – Create traditional conservative segregated communities where these values are celebrated and done.
    #3 – Changed lives (our lives reflect traditional conservative worldview).
    #4 – Conservative influence on many, various spheres and professions.
    #5 – Political action against liberalism.
    #6 – Political action for conservatism.
    #7 – More knowledge (thought), talk and action.

  8. I am unaware of any movement that transformed Christendom–i.e., Western Civ, if we must use the secularized term–by setting out to do so.

    What did Christianity mean to do? Save souls. It couldn’t stop the Empire from falling; but it built a new one, while trying to save souls. (And arguably, when this new civilization stopped working in saving souls, it too fell.)

    What did St. Benedict mean to do? Save his own soul. But the order that St. Benedict founded preserved civilization and helped form the nucleus of a new society.

    What did Charlemagne mean to do? Reinstitute the Holy Roman Empire–and he had a lot more power than we are apt to have. His empire fell apart pretty darn quick after his death.

    Any noble civilization, it seems to me, is built upon a web of desires and aims and habits and institutions and grace and tradition and families and people so unspeakably intertwined that they cannot be built by man. If I recall correctly, it was De Maistre who said that man cannot make nations–and I think he was correct. God creates the beautiful things in history, not man.

    But this doesn’t mean quietism, to my mind. I think we should aim to do things–but our concern should be first, ourselves and our families (if we have one), second, our friends and local community (if we have one), and at a far distant third we should work for larger things. We must be concerned for today, and God will take care of the morrow; concerned for things we may actually control, while not deluding ourselves into thinking we can build what only God can create.

    So I agree with those who say our role is simply to persist, or those who say we should care for families and help form sub-communities. I think the most important thing we could do to help form them is by doing what is in our ability, if we can, to help our own families. Perhaps we can try to contact like-minded people in our own areas; a sort of traditionalist network would be nice, through which people could meet and try to work out to behave truly well. Our focus should be on trying to root out our own bad thoughts, as intellectuals–but principally with an aim to reforming our own lives.

    Theory must be integrated with practice–(thanks for promoting that essay, alcestiseshtemoa)

    I just think that as soon as we start pursuing the goal of saving Western Civilization, rather than doing what is in our power to save what people we can, our efforts are likely to be fruitless.

    (Apologies for my perhaps oracular style of writing; I drop into that when writing hastily.)

  9. I agree with you strongly about the importance of communities, but I have to confess that I think any attempts to build an atheist community will be doomed. Every successful sub-culture, small community, etc, of which I am aware, has been based on some religious ideal.

    People come together to praise God, fundamentally–at least, it seems so to me. I don’t know history as well as I should like, so perhaps you could give me some counter-examples.

    I’m not trying to ask hostile questions, btw, I’m just wondering how you plan to constitute an atheist community. I’d be happy to hear advice on how to constitute a Christian community as well, after all.

  10. Anodos,

    I think the work by de Maistre that you are referring to is his Essay on the Generative Principle of Political Constitutions and Other Human Institutions.

  11. […] Altar are well worth reading. (As is the blog itself, of course.)  Recently, they have included a discussion about what traditionalist bloggers are ultimately aiming to do and another centered around liberal Reggie Perrin’s critique of the blog. […]

  12. Anodos, where did I say anything about building an atheist community? This isn’t my goal. My goal is a tolerant Christian community with traditional values that will accept atheists with traditional values.

    I think intellectuals overvalue intellectual debate. What matters is what happens on the ground. The only practical place to take action in America today is in your local church. And the action to take is to encourage your church to disengage from mainstream culture and to become more focused on the church itself as a community. Political issues like gay marriage should be ignored. Instead your church should focus on things like what it can do to make the marriages of its own members as stable as possible. Your church should focus on practical issues of its own members.

    This whole religious angle is new to me. I grew up in a liberal atheist home. I gradually became disgusted with modern culture and joined the men’s movement and started studying history. From history, I realized that religion is the only hope, so I visited my local churches to investigate. I chose Eastern Orthodox Christianity because it seemed to me to be the most traditional form of Christianity, and now I regularly attend Greek Orthodox Church. I am reading the Bible now (Old and New Testaments). It is long, so it will take me a few months to finish. When I am finished with the Bible, I plan to discuss my views with my priest and see what he thinks. He seems very intelligent, so I am hopeful.

  13. Ah. Thanks.

  14. Sorry I meant “I think our plan should be:”

  15. Hello Anodos,

    This all sounds wise. If I understand correctly, you would say that our blogs fit in as “trying to root out our own bad thoughts, as intellectuals–but principally with an aim to reforming our own lives”. It does certainly help there, especially with the discussions with other traditionalists.

  16. Exactly–and much more concisely put.

  17. Christian organizations need a branding campaign to fight all the atheist and homosexual propaganda thrown at Jesus and the Church in popular culture.

  18. Oddly, this question is well-timed for me. I finally got my site (http://restorus.org) under control; it’s been remodelled and rebranded to serve as a staging ground for the right. I’m going to continue to write (more often than once a week) while keeping the site open to others who might find it useful. There’s an ability to have a forum or discussion board, but I think having active users and traffic are an important prerequisite. I made the decision to completely revamp, as opposed to stick with the standard blog format for a few reasons.

    First, something like it really doesn’t exist. There are right wing news sites, a few blog hubs that are considered right wing in some circles, and discussion sites, but I haven’t seen any sites really dedicated to serving the far right by pooling multiple contributors together in a meaningful way. And by meaningful, I mean providing a platform for intellectual growth – be it discussion, articles, research, and so on.

    Second, we’re knee deep in revolution and misery. Revolutionary periods such as 1789, 1848, 1919, 1945, and 1969 generally result in a backlash of some kind. The people who aren’t persuaded by the revolutionary message start looking to the right for answers. I’m searching for answers and so are others; my goal is to provide a place that aids people in that search. I believe that the truth sets people free.

    Third, the left currently seems to have a monopoly on web technology. Google, Twitter, the open source crowd all spread democracy through their executives, developers, and websites. They reach a large audience because they know how to. Granted, there’s a lot of unwarranted hype about Twitter revolutions and Facebook bringing down Egypt – the presence of a given technology doesn’t bring people together, but people using that technology to access information and colleagues can create networks that didn’t exist before. I know a little bit about web development and promotion (and I’m sure others like Moldbug, who if I remember correctly worked for a software company during the dot com boom, know more). There are systems that can expand our reach and presence, we just need to use them effectively. My site is built using the master’s tools, so to speak. It’s integrated with media, it takes advantage of the Open Graph Protocol (http://ogp.me) to provide more visibility in social media circles, it enriches data with RDF (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resource_Description_Framework) to allow search engines and programs to find it more easily.

    I’m not sure how well this kind of thing will work. It’s a gamble, and dependent on community interest. I’m working to make it easy and painless for people who prefer to stick to their own blogs but don’t mind a site like mine pulling their feeds.

    At the end of the day, I’m really just tired of watching the world burn. I don’t imagine that a group of right wing writers can change things, but I sometimes wonder how I’d feel if I didn’t have some kind of answer or guidance. My beliefs could be wrong, but at least they explain things. There are people who have no explanation. I suppose that’s about as ambitious as I’m willing to be: help a few people make sense of things, including ourselves.

  19. Hello Mark,

    I’m glat to hear Restorus is back up. I just got an account. Bringing “multiple contributors together in a meaningful way” sounds like a valuable thing for the far right. Perhaps you can help me understand how your new design will help with this. (I’m afraid I don’t know much about web design.) The only difference I see with a normal weblog is that you have to get an account to make comments. I do think tighter collaboration and joint projects would be good things, but I’d like to hear how you think this could be done.

  20. Bonald,

    I’d be happy to explain more. However, I’m away from away from my computer until Monday morning. I’ll be sure to get back to you as soon as I can.

  21. Bonald,

    The site currently resembles a blog because with one person, it’s hard to have much more than a blog. The site runs a heavily customized version of Drupal. It differs from a standard blog because it has the following features:

    1. Workflows. The software is equipped to allow article workflows to resemble news articles or peer review systems with ease. I thought this might be an asset later; bringing together a group of writers could raise questions of what counts as a correct method of research – especially if the site serves as a medium to bring members of the far right together to collaborate on research.

    2. A distinction between authors and users. Normal publishing software automatically assigns content ownership to whoever posts that content. If an article is emailed or imported (with permission) from an author who doesn’t have an account, it can be published in a way to recognize it as their work. This has two benefits to users. First, it allows multiple authors to be assigned to one piece of content. Second, it automatically inter-links authors with their content – meaning that each piece of content contains reference to the author and each author page contains a list of content they have ownership over.

    3. Easy publishing. At least for me, I find the publishing process to be easier than WordPress and other blogging platforms. When you decide to add an article, you work off of a template – photos, teasers, etc. all have a place and fit together.

    4. The site plays better with others. Standard blogging platforms are written to be search engine friendly since search engines are how most sites are reached. My site’s software is even more friendly to search engines. (I’m still very green with technology like RDF, so I won’t tender an explanation… I went with a platform that offered RDF because when Best Buy added RDF to their site, the search engine crawl rate increased by 40%.) Writers can set Open Graph meta tags to indicate that content is an article, a blog, an item about a politician, etc. so that when readers share these things in social networks, those networks can identify what type of content it is. Items “liked” on third-party sites have begun showing up in Facebook’s search results because of this. It is (or should be) relatively easy to broadcast material from Restorus to social networks through RSS, sharing buttons interacting with Open Graph, or through applications that allow visitors to reach the site through the interface in third party sites.

    That’s the site in a nutshell as it exists now. You spotted the issue with commenting; I had planned to retain the Disqus commenting system, but it was costing me some functionality in other areas. Some things work differently on my computer than they do in a live hosting environment.

    It’s basically a news site without an editorial staff. I’m partial to it over other alternatives because it can be built into more pretty easily; adding a wiki, a discussion board, photo galleries, and your standard social media features like status updates, customizable profile pages, and personal messaging are all possibilities. I’ve kept it simple since I’m not sure what people will want assuming that they even want to use the site. It’s very much a work in progress.

    After thinking about it, I think a discussion board would be an extremely valuable addition. I don’t think I have the traffic for it to be used very often, but it will at least provide a space for people to discuss what should be done in terms of the site or politically. At least it will abase my guilt – long-winded comments seem worse on blogs than in forums. I’m also going to work to modify the commenting today.

  22. Last post: a forum is being set up at http://restorus.org/forum

    Posting is currently disabled as I get profiles to behave, but updates will be posted there.

  23. Whew! back to some sanity. I accidentally happened on IEETs website where I argued with Hank Pellissier and some of his brethren, man are these people sick. I think it would be good to flood their websites and blogs with alternative opinions,albeit, he stopped posting my letters when he couldnt refute my answers. I am still dumbfounded that there are actually people in the mainstream that think like this , and they are referred to as Intellectuals.

    Whether you like it or not, when it comes down to it,the second amendment to our constitution is the thing you should attempt to preserve most , because without Samuel Colts equalizer, you are no longer equal.

  24. Dude, why did you do that to yourself?

    Actually, I’m grateful that somebody’s trying to engage the nuts.

  25. There is no perfect plan and every civilization’s beginning has the seed of its destruction in it. Theorists have been trying to come up with a plan to save the West for decades with zero practical results. Get busy now, no one on the Interwebs has the big solution nor will they.

    People tend to get the kind of government they deserve, and most long-lasting change will happen only through individual action. Currently, it seems as though everyone is waiting for a leader to come along and tell us how to change everyone else. Wrong on both counts.

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

%d bloggers like this: