The male of the species
As the Alt. Right continues its white-water raft run into what remains of national consciousness in the West, both supporters and critics are beginning to dissect and label its component parts. Alt. Right, Alt. White, Alt. Lite; the ‘movement’, such as it is, is beginning to resemble a coffee menu. But there is still a tendency to treat the Left as though it were a monolith. The following is a sketched attempt to divide the enemy’s camp into separate tents.
I am English, and thus my four-part division of the Left is based on Europe and the UK, but it is broadly applicable to the USA.
As for the division between Left and Right, these terms are becoming as archaic as Coleridge’s description of all men as being either Platonists or Aristoteleans, but still offer enough descriptive resonance to make it clear what we are dealing with. As far as the Left is concerned, by their works shall we know them, and you will know them when you see them.
The Elite Left
This is the political class itself. In the UK, Peter Oborne’s seminal book The Triumph of the Political Class described, 15 or so years ago, how the main parties had effectively conjoined, with their policies on the most important topics more or less identical. Given that this is the case, is this hybridised party Left or Right, politically speaking? All three of the traditional main parties – and here I exclude UKIP – favour high taxes, a huge and highly paid public sector, more surveillance, open-door immigration, technocracy, massive management structures and tiers, the EU, the neutering of the police force, the policing of thought and language, diluted and standardised educational standards, a championing of minority and identity interests over majority concerns, and a range of other Leftist attitudes and implementations. There is no way, in terms of classical political divisions, that the governing class in the West can be described as anything other than Left and even far-Left.
In the USA, this phenomenon has also been noted. The last presidential election was supposed to be a staged dynastic showdown between Hillary Clinton and Jeb Bush, as realistic as a WWF bout and with Bush losing gracefully to Clinton. The GOP had absolutely no interest in winning. The Democrats are perfectly capable of doing the work of the globalists without RINOs (Republicans in name only) needing to dirty their wing-tipped shoes.
The media is a part of the Elite Left, acting both as contemporary courtiers and as part of the complex provisional wing of the Elite Left. They also intersect, and are indeed the foundation of, the second element of this Leftist quadrivium, the Cultural Left.
The Cultural Left
The culture of a country is not merely its musical tastes, cookery styles and television and cinema preferences. It also extends to its style of policing, its academic institutions, its management ethos in both public and private sectors, and its social and communitarian practices. In the media, the universities, and the public sector, the Gramscian long march through the institutions is all but complete, and radically favours the Left. If you hold Right-wing views in the UK, however mild, you will find it almost impossible to gain employment as a teacher, lecturer, journalist or public servant, and will endanger your job even in the private sector.
As mentioned, the media are at the forefront of the many cultural redoubts and beach-heads the Left hold in the West, and their main artillery is televisual. T S Eliot’s warning to Britain concerning the television, gleaned during a stay in the USA, was that it was not the content of programming that was the danger of the medium, but the habit of watching (Eliot wrote this in a letter to the London Times in 1950). Now, however, the two have been combined. British television, whether it is news, light entertainment, drama, science and nature documentaries or even advertising, is nothing but pure Leftist propaganda, policed, analysed and authorised with the thoroughness of Soviet kommissars or the UK’s old Lord Chancellor. At a subliminal level as well as overtly, modern televisual content stresses the desirability of immigration, multiculturalism, homosexuality and sexual deviance. Concomitantly, it thematises the failures of the white West and the desirability of its replacement with a globalised order.
The Pansy Left
As I recently explained to a very triggered British journalist (David Aaronovitch of the London Times), the phrase ‘The Pansy Left’ is not my invention, although it does serve my purpose. Aaronovitch was incensed that I had used the phrase, not recognising it as a term used by George Orwell in private correspondence. The Left in the UK, incidentally, is increasingly distancing itself from Orwell as various phrases and passages deemed unacceptable to the modern PC Left begin to emerge from his writing.
The Pansy Left is unmistakable and almost needs no introduction. You will know it when you see it. They are the strutting harlequins on every one of the many marches which regularly disfigure London, for example, with their crude placards and childish, garish clothes. They are the anti-intellectuals screeching and crying on every campus, no-platforming and banning and constantly reminding others about white privilege, slavery, and a host of other non-academic concerns. They are the generation of snowflakes, millennials, safe spaces, micro-aggressions and trigger warnings. You either march in ideological lockstep with them, or you are a racist and a fascist. The Pansy Left is the old Left but feminised and homosexualised, with classical education demeaned and replaced with fictional ‘social justice’ issues. They are fellow travellers with the Elite and Cultural Left, an entertaining caravanserai of zanies who, befitting their status as morons with perfect teeth, despise the various Western governments – discounting Trump and a handful of Eastern European visionary leaders such as Viktor Orban - without realising that they are all fighting on the same side.
The Malevolent Left
The Left as a whole is malevolent, but the ‘Malevolent Left’ refers specifically to the violent sector of the Left’s provisional wing. These are the Antifa, Black Bloc, the anarchists, the nihilists, Islamists, Black Lives Matter and any other of the violent splinter groups responsible for the violence often blamed on groups such as PEGIDA and the EDL. There have been many allegations that the Malevolent Left is part-funded by George Soros, and even backed in the USA by veteran community organiser Barack Obama. The Malevolent Left are the shock troops of the Elite Left, under-policed and left in the field to keep non-violent political participants who are of the Right in their place using a combination of intimidation and outright violence.
Although, as mentioned, the terms ‘Left’ and ‘Right’ are outmoded and purely nominal, they contain matrices which can be contrasted and compared. The Left tends to emote while the Right still trusts to Enlightenment reason. The Left has mastered the art of the ad hominem attack, while the Right prefers to go after arguments and ideology. The Left makes a totem of multiculturalism, while the Right prefers a conservative approach to pre-existing, individual national cultures. The Left utilises the working metaphor of the machine, seeing society as something to be tinkered with and made right in the manner of an engineer, while the Right prefers an organic working metaphor in which social conventions accrue over time as a result of human trial and error. The Left believes that classical education is disqualified by virtue of its canon having been produced by white males, the Right viewing this as precisely what has led to the triumphs, up until now, of Western culture. The Left sees biological reality as malleable and subjective, the Right as fixed and objective. To return to Coleridge’s division of men into Platonist and Aristotelean, if these categories as broadly viewed as idealist and realist, they may not be as archaic as they appear when applied, respectively, to Left and Right.
This four-part division of the modern Left is intended as a prolegomenon, a sketch towards a finished picture, but I believe it helps to isolate the various strands of the contemporary, toxic Left, as well as to show the areas in which the different quarters nest and overlap, as in a Venn diagram. I hope that it goes some small way towards fighting Leftist, Socialist, progressivist and globalist ideology, the greatest threat of the present century.