A dissident framework reaches dramatically different conclusions from the mainstream right

A compendium of recent posts

I hate to be the bearer of bad news; it feels like half of this blog is spent criticizing the right wing takes that are propagated elsewhere. The direction of these attacks revolve around explaining that standard right-wing perspectives share the underlying morality of the left that they so bitterly complain about, rendering their criticisms toothless and ineffective; additionally they don’t understand the structure of the modern world, how power ultimately rests with the owners of the world’s central banks who use divide and conquer tactics on the basis of race, gender, and sexual orientation so the masses are too busy infighting to focus on their theft.

To be outraged by or even to spend much of one’s time on the latest battle in the culture war (regardless of its merits) is to miss the forest for the trees; such attention feeds and strengthens globohomo narratives as a whole as the reaction in their desired action-reaction-synthesis (or thesis-antithesis-synthesis) Hegelian dialectic.

But this is intended as a hopeful, educational attack against the right; their impulses for order, stability, the rule of law, transparency and justice are fundamentally correct impulses, especially in this age of ultra-priestly values; they are allies, and they need to clear their head of the endless streams of nonsense that prattle around in their skulls. So let’s go through the standard right-wing take as well as the dissident approach (from my perspective) to the issues covered so far in this Substack. The following also serves as a compilation for new readers of the Neofeudal Review posts made so far.

• Russia/Ukraine

  • Right wing take: Russia is standing up for Christian values against the decadent globohomo west.

  • Dissident take: The war is fake and both sides are controlled by the central bank owners.

    

    Igor Strelkov is an exception, a real Russian patriot

• Transgenderism

  • Right wing take: Transgenderism is evil and we must resist it with all our might.

  • Dissident take: Resisting transgenderism is destined to fail, just like resisting gay marriage or a bunch of other cultural war issues in the past, because it does not address the root cause of the problem, which is the push for egalitarianism rooted in Pauline Christianity itself (even if the people pushing it are secular, atheist, or communist).

    

    A beacon of conservatism

• Congress

  • Right wing take: we must work the system harder to increase populist representation in the House and Senate.

  • Dissident take: populists have never had significant support in Congress nor will they ever unless there is a transvaluation of society’s core values.

    

    Congress would be much better with Incitatus the horse as Senator

• Cryptocurrency

  • Right wing take: cryptocurrency is a great hedge against the abuse of fiat currencies.

  • Dissident take: cryptocurrency is as corrupted as fiat because of the nature of tether, which acts as a central bank. It prints funds from nothing just like the Federal Reserve does with dollars.

    

    Tether CTO Paolo Ardoino. Does this look like a trustworthy fellow?

• Government structure

  • (Far) right wing take: we need a dictator to institute law-and-order.

  • Dissident take: What’s needed is a two pronged approach; a law-and-order approach against radical leftists combined with a major focus on rebuilding the middle class. Both are required synergistically to be effective. Lee Kuan Yew in Singapore and Pyotr Stolypin in Russia are figures who pushed effective government structures in this manner.

    

    The Jewel Waterfall at Changi Airport, Singapore

• Elon Musk and Tucker Carlson

  • Right wing take: Both are heroes to the right.

  • Dissident take: they’re both compromised. While they both have some positive values, they are nowhere near hero worthy.

    

    Musk in a satanic Bahomet costume, which is also his Twitter profile image. So based; he will surely save us!

• Trump vs DeSantis

  • Right wing take: Split camps arguing passionately for one or the other.

  • Dissident take: They are both very flawed candidates and it’s hard to get excited for either, although on balance Trump is better.

    

• Resisting anti-white leftist trends

  • Right wing take: Trump or another figure will be able to figure out a solution to the radical anti-white leftism permeating society.

  • Dissident take: Negative anti-white trends are in such an advanced state that it may be impossible to effectively resist it, much like Julian the Apostate’s failed attempt to preserve Hellenism because the pro-Christian trends were already so far advanced. Also, material reality is likely controlled by the Demiurge, who is malevolent and enjoys torturing souls for unknown reasons.

    

    Julian presiding at a conference of sectarians, Edward Armitage, 1875

• Owners of modern society

  • Right wing take: The owners of modern society are the ultra-high networth billionaires, mostly hypocritical leftist like George Soros and Bill Gates, who coordinate through groups like the World Economic Forum.

  • Dissident take: The owners of modern society are a few families who own the central banks of the world, and Soros and Gates are among their higher-level lackeys. This situation came about because Jews were treated as an errant cousin religion by Christians and were allowed a special monopoly as money-lenders for centuries, a profession which Christians were forbidden from entering. Multinational groups like the WEF, Bilderberg Group, Round Table, Trilateral Commission, and The Council on Foreign Affairs merely coordinate the strategies of the central bank owners.

    

    Evelyn de Rothschild pointing his finger at Prince (now King) Charles’s chest. Which one looks like he has the power in this relationship?

• Collapse/accelerationism

  • Right wing take: Things are going to come to a head and society will collapse under its dead weight; then the real men can pick up the pieces.

  • Dissident take: There will just be a slow grind down to a lower and lower quality of life with no one-off event trigger of collapse, although the aggression against whites will intensify as America transitions to a one party state.

    

• Dating and marriage dynamics

  • Right wing take: It’s inexplicably hard to date in the modern era and it’s sad how difficult it is to keep a marriage together.

  • Dissident take: Marriage and divorce are dramatically slanted against men in all sorts of ways which leads to unhappiness both by the husband and the wife; dating problems are a result of unleashed female hypergamy by our overlords to make family formation more difficult.

    

    Cat Stevens and family; he figured out how to have a patriarchal marriage long before anyone else in the west

• Diet / obesity

  • Right wing take: People are fat due to low willpower, easy living, and eating lots of fast food.

  • Dissident take: Most of the cause of the obesity epidemic is the ubiquitous use of seed oils in most prepared foods while eating out, declining testosterone levels, poisoned food/water and the completely unknown synergistic effects of chemicals in the environment.

    

    Fat power!

• Liberal talent

  • Right wing take: There is nothing to value at all about liberals and they should be addressed as a group, like rooting against the other team in a football match.

  • Dissident take: One can acknowledge the talent and positive values of opponents even if one shares strongly divergent political views; doing the former does not devalue the latter, in fact it strengthens the maturity of the argument and helps to steel-man it.

    

---

Are these explanations needlessly demoralizing, regardless of accuracy?

Short answer: no.

Longer answer: Western civilization is in a rather precarious position at present, and it’s better to explore difficult ideas even if it is more black-pilled and depressing than consuming hopium. The Q movement (a government operation styled on the Soviet’s Operation Trust) was always loathsome for this reason.

But I’m not trying to doom-post without cause; life is hard enough without piling on needless grimness. None of this writing is a call to passivity and despair. Rather the hope is that a sober assessment of how bad things are will ultimately lead to a push toward a partial transvaluation of the egalitarian values as the root cause of these problems. This critical insight is so far removed from the vast majority on the right that they are in no position to resist globohomo effectively today even if they want to.

Also, I hope some of these analysis and predictions are wrong — if so I’ll be somewhat embarrassed, wipe the egg off my face and update my worldview accordingly. As referenced in the preface to the large Neoliberal Feudalism philosophical essay, “The presented framework should be judged by its predictive value for future events and how well it illuminates current and past events, based on an attempt to understand the perennial laws that govern material reality and human nature.” I’m not perfect and the current iteration of these beliefs has taken many years of trial and error, and I’ve gotten a lot wrong over the years (much less so these days, unfortunately; it seems the black pilled take is almost always the correct one).

Lastly, I’ve recently updated each post in the Neoliberal Feudalism essay with many new images, charts, and figures. I’ve come to appreciate the importance of visual aids in conveying messages on Substack, and I hope to continue making iterative improvements so my writing gets easier and more fun to read.

Thanks for following.