The long game of the European New Right

In 2007, Canadian political theorist Tamir Bar-On wrote a book with a provocative title: Where have all the fascists gone? In 2017, Bar-On’s question may seem to many readers no longer that perplexing.

Beginning with the GFC, the last decade has seen the most dramatic rise of far Right political forces in the Western world since the interwar years.

2009 was the breakthrough year for UKIP (the UK Independence Party) in European elections. It also saw notable gains for Rightwing parties from Norway, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, Slovakia, Finland, Denmark, Holland, Austria, and Italy.

In 2010, Jobbik, “The Movement for a Better Hungary” whose supporters wear paramilitary uniforms and rail against immigrants, the Roma people and “Jewish financial capital”, became Hungary’s third largest Party.

Last year, the world knows, Donald Trump’s brand of “America First” populism won over first the GOP and then the White House. Britain, led by UKIP, voted to leave the EU.

This year, Geert Wilders’ Freedom Party in the Netherlands failed to win the Dutch elections. Yet his Party increased its representation from 15 to around 20 seats, confirming Wilders’ as Holland’s second political Party.

All of these New Right Parties deny the tag of fascism, indelibly tarnished by the revelations after 1944 of the heinous atrocities of Hitler’s NSDAP.

Yet each of them, to different degrees, challenges established post-war divisions of Left and Right, just as the interwar fascists and “national socialists”. Each calls into question the basic legitimacy of parliamentary market regimes, as the interwar fascists did. Each hones in upon anti-immigration and anti-Islamic fears. Each plays up opposition to treacherous domestic “elites” as a key point of electoral appeal.

Each proposes the reclaiming of “sovereignty” in a sweeping national rebirth: an idea once more close to the very heart of interwar forms of fascism.

​

Today’s rise to mainstream political legitimacy of these parties, as well as the commonalities between them, bespeak common ideological inspirations, as well as the changing times.

Bar-On’s 2007 study of the European New Right thus takes on new pertinence in 2017. Where have all the fascists gone?, an almost unique study in the English language, seeks out and analyses in detail the ideological seeds of European anti-liberalism that are increasingly bearing electoral fruit in the second decade of the new millennium.

The book asks several questions that, as things now appear, have been asked far too little in the liberal West. Just how did the ideas of the European Far Right develop after the “zero hour” of 1945, in the transformed post-fascist world?

Was it reasonable to suppose that military defeat in 1944-45 would forever discredit the ideas of the Far Right that had commanded mass support in Germany, Italy, Spain, Romania and elsewhere?

Wasn’t it, on the contrary, always more likely that these ideas would go underground and bide their time, cultivating esoteric modes of expression whilst waiting for their moment to bid for renewed political power?

A New New Right

In Australia as in the US until recently, the term “New Right” described political supporters of the suite of policies known as “neoliberalism” or “economic rationalism”.

New Righters on this AngloAmerican model believe in the fundamental beneficence and efficiency of free market exchange. They oppose, at least in theory, any nation-State that would intervene in these markets. They oppose, in theory and practice, the organisation of workers in unions, progressive forms of income taxation, and automatic state provision of welfare and other forms of social insurance.

Instead, these “dries” espouse the selling of public assets and the removal of tariffs and other barriers to free trade. Their theorists envisage a world of open borders. Capital from any which “where” should be free to move from country to country, choosing local conditions most propitious for banking profits.



At the height of the 1990s’ euphoria about “globalisation”, thinkers of this New Right were forecasting the end of the nation state in a borderless utopia of “24-7” trade.

The European New Right (ENR) has different ideas and other sources.

Indeed, when its spokespeople are not viscerally anti-American—as almost all were, until 2016—they are deeply opposed to “liberalism” in any forms. They are thus deeply hostile to the kinds of economic cosmopolitanism espoused by Messrs Hayek, Friedman and their admirers, however much they share some political foes.

For the thinkers of the ENR, free markets are not the objects of celebration and faith, but of profound suspicion.

It is not the invariant tendency of these markets to produce growing material inequalities that troubles them. What the ENR thinkers contest is how unregulated free markets operate in almost complete indifference, or active hostility to local traditions, religions, communities, nations, and (in some cases) nature herself.

The AngloAmerican New Right have long proposed that markets inculcate in subjects a hardy independence of spirit and canny self-reliance, through the ongoing demands of competitive survival.

The ENR, unafraid to draw on Marxian cultural theories, proposes that the commodification of culture in later capitalism cheapens everything, uproots individuals from their families and solidarity with their fellows, and destroys the differences between local, regional and national ways of life.

In the ENR optic, moreover, the floods of immigrants who have presented themselves at the borders of Western nations in the last decades are a symptom of the “globalist” system. They are the other side of the cheap imported consumer goods that have also flooded the West since the 1980s. To echo Alain de Benoist, one of the fathers of the ENR, he who remains silent about capitalism should also remain silent about the problems of immigration.

We are a long way from the New Right we are familiar with down under.

Virtually all sexual behavior is paraphilic to some degree, just what degree is the question. Paraphilias/fetishes are categorized, fwiw, in intensity from 1-4 by psychologists. A fetish for something rated at a 1 is "nice to have but you don't have to have it to proceed" in terms of sexual necessity, and is often socially considered quite normal - men that like to see their partners in corsets, like to have sex in public/dirty places like gas station bathrooms, or have particular interest in a woman's body part (a "tits man" vs an "ass man", toe nibblers, etc), for some examples. An extreme fetish rated at a 4 means that the person's paraphilia is the sole focus of their sexual desire, and this can cause real problems in relationships (this book has an example of a Christian couple that didn't talk about sex prior to marriage, and the lady discovered her new husband was a "Level 4" rated foot fetishist who only saw her feet as sexual objects in bed - it was like the rest of her body was an inanimate, useless thing to him, he wouldn't even touch her genitals because he thought they were weird.) D/s (and BDSM in general) is also a paraphilia, just like foot fetishism, dirty sex enthusiasts, and whatever else. It likewise ranges in intensity from levels 1-4. Someone who advertises on Fetlife begging for permanent ownership and to be kept in a cage like an animal 24/7 unless used would of course be an extreme example of a BDSM-oriented paraphilia.

I find it curious as a female dominant that you say that in BDSM encounters men are always binding and gaggling submissive women at their feet. The "cultural flip" of men being so strong and dominant in the boardroom then turned into a submissive pet in the bedroom, controlling women by day and being controlled by a woman by night is quite intoxicating and common to encounter in the BDSM community - it's virtually a cliche. Still, by stating this you seem to be underscoring an idea that I brought up earlier and you dodged by blaming porn saturation/addiction - specifically that men are apparently inclined to be violent towards and controlling of women (it's not worth discussing up that RL BDSM relationships tend to be extremely stable, trusting and respectful, as the overall argument is about seeing too many porn vids/rapecore vids, not the BDSM community as a whole.) I already brought up the fact that gentle lovemaking videos - or even just weird and interesting stuff - are equally widely available, and yet you're still advancing the idea that these certain BDSM videos are apparently leading men to abuse women in a widespread fashion. Well, then those videos must be more influential and attractive, right? We don't have a problem with legions of men demanding to give sensual massages to women in exchange for some sweet, sweet lovin' (maybe incels could capitalize on this, lol.) So, are you then saying that men by their natures are abusive, controlling assholes, and too much easy access to violent porn undoes whatever social conditioning normally prevents them from acting so?

I came from that background. In fact I think many who are conservative and gay have grown up in Christian / Catholic / Mormon households and it is familiar to us. We were rejected for being gay, christian, and conservative a triple whammy.

I'd suggest listening to youtube Gay Christian Network. Watch This Documentary. Tons of videos like this. There are several who do support the LGBT community and have their own churches. They just had a conference that was huge (once a year). I have backed away from it as they have become much to political for me with a liberal tint and Trump hate. But there is definitely Republicans and Democrats there. Checkout the other videos as well the full conference is online. IF you want a explanation of the bible and homosexuality Matthew Vine has a book. But Dr. Brownson is much deeper.

Many are wounded by their faith and the hatred they received the totally reject religion and become almost rebellious liberal SJWs. Some like myself become private about our faith (hell it's hard enough to find a conservative) and personal, often not the ultra religious types (It was another part of yourself that became closeted as some gays hate religion and conservative viewpoints). Some are super religious and from liberal accepting backgrounds (families) so I think it's easier for them in a way. I think there are many more liberal christian gays than conservatives. Because of separation of church and state some are closeted trump supporters. Peter Theil is conservative and Christian. Tony Campolo Pastor, Rob Bell mega church pastor famous for his Nooma videos, Jay baker son of Jim and Tammy (hes quite alternative), Hillsong Christian Singer Vicky Beeching, Singer Jennifer Knapp.

They say as generations go by, the younger generation grew up with Gay is ok and are much more accepting, many leave the church when they grow older.


{Documentary}_

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QImNx1JA3BI - Documentary on Being Gay and Christian (experiences)

{Deep Dive into Bible Verses - Theology}__

Matthew Vine

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ezQjNJUSraY

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_8ZgSHK6tdA

Dr. James Brownson (Deep Dive Theology)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k1f0KD-B0Z8

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kKOTNneoOpU

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9kONByDAXko

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yt-a0BiAEVs

{Videos}___

https://www.youtube.com/user/GayChristianNetwork - Videos why its ok to be gay and christian, Speakers Keynotes from Gay Christian Network Conference 1,500 Attendees

{Books}_

http://www.amazon.com/Torn-Rescuing-Gospel-Gays-vs-Christians-Debate/dp/1455514306 - Justin Lee (biography about being gay and christian)

http://www.amazon.com/God-Gay-Christian-Biblical-Relationships-ebook/dp/B00F1W0RD2 - Matthew Vines

http://www.amazon.com/Bible-Gender-Sexuality-Reframing-Relationships/dp/0802868630 - Dr. James Brownson (deep dive theology)

{Forum / Gay Christian Message Board}

http://www.gaychristian.net

{Find a Gay Affirming Church}____

http://www.gaychurch.org

google is your friend. Here you go. These should be enlightening. Welcome to the new world.

https://www.pnas.org/content/112/50/15468

https://qz.com/1057494/the-biggest-myth-about-our-brains-is-that-theyre-male-or-female/

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2019/feb/24/meet-the-neuroscientist-shattering-the-myth-of-the-gendered-brain-gina-rippon

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-00677-x

https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2018/06/male-female-brains-biologically-different/563702/

https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg24132190-100-how-neuroscience-is-exploding-the-myth-of-male-and-female-brains/

https://www.amazon.com/Gendered-Brain-neuroscience-shatters-female-ebook/dp/B07HMDQGC1

https://www.amazon.com/dp/1524747025/?coliid=I2KGHYWISV5VO&colid=FS53FQ4NBELE&psc=1&ref_=lv_ov_lig_dp_it

https://www.amazon.com/dp/0316534617/?coliid=I2S4L8XMUQZW4T&colid=FS53FQ4NBELE&psc=1&ref_=lv_ov_lig_dp_it

I am actually OK with the trans/ gay/ bi all being rolled together for the sake of this question - because none of the above are mental "illnesses or disorders". And all the "conversion therapies" are pure snake oil, complete bullshit.

I know from the research I've read that gay/ bi sexual orientation is mostly biological in origin, there is an excellent book that details the science on this Gay, Straight and the reason why, the science of sexual orientation. I think transgenderdness also has biological origins, but I dont know for sure to be honest, hopefully a trans person here knows more as I dont know all that much

As for whether I'd take a "straight pill" if ever such a thing came on the market, no fucking way, not even when I came out initially and not now

Being online too much has definitely had an ill effect on my ability to comprehend complex passages or maintain focus on well-written books. So, I understand. A dumbed down version would read something like, "Secular, Modern, Progressive-Socialism doesn't get rid of elites it just removes tradition, the sense of place and history and the common set of values from a society."

​

Or, yknow, for context you could pick up the book and work your brain back into a non-goldfishlike shape!

​

​

>this has the be the STUPIDEST thing I have EVER heard.

Then you haven't been listening to the liberals very much.

You see reality backwards. Let Jason Riley help you out:

Please Stop Helping Us: How Liberals Make It Harder for ...

📷https://www.amazon.com/Please-Stop-Helping-Us-Liberals/dp/1594038414In Please Stop Helping Us, Jason L. Riley examines how well-intentioned welfare programs are in fact holding black Americans back. Minimum-wage laws may lift earnings for people who are already employed, but they price a disproportionate number of blacks out of the labor force.

https://www.amazon.com/Pilot/dp/B079VGH95V/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&qid=1519887433&sr=8-4&keywords=heathers

Coming in June 2018. Preorder yours because it's the current year!

https://www.amazon.com/Yes-We-Can-Meme-Progressive-Left/dp/1521793573

https://www.amazon.com/Born-Guilty-Compensation-Subject-Retaliation/dp/1727631625/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=born+guilty&qid=1562861517&s=books&sr=1-1


I guess the truth is racist according to this article that is a shit fucking article.