THE PARASITE POLITICS OF THE ALT-RIGHT

The Alt-Right has pioneered a particularly 
ineffective form of entryism.

by Colin Liddell

Around 270 million years ago the humble, non-parasitic flatworm managed to learn a new trick. Somehow it discovered that just by sticking around in the gut of whatever animal carelessly ate it, and then living off the nutrients flowing through there, it could maintain itself as a living entity instead of just being food.

Cue the tapeworm, in many ways the most vile and loathsome of all the parasites.

In nature there are millions of parasites. In fact it’s estimated that around 40 percent of animal species are parasites.

None of these species started out that way. In every single case they became parasites because they couldn't cut it as free-living species. Each parasite was effectively the loser of its group, and—by the then unamended laws of nature—should have become extinct. But instead, in each case, it found a way of "hacking the system" and creating a new sub set of natural law that allowed it to survive.

The analogy of the parasite is appropriate to what we see in American identity politics, especially with regard to the Alt-Right, which, with the Yang bucks meme, has finally and undeniably revealed its total conversion to "parasite politics."

Trotsky, pioneer of Alt-Right tactics 

Parasite politics, however, is not just limited to the Right. In fact, traditionally it is much more of a Left-wing thing, which is why we have the word "entryism." As a conscious political strategy, it seems to have been invented by that World-famous ice-pick holder Leon Trotsky in the 1930s. This is understandable, as even at that time unemployable, unwashed Trotskyists and other assorted Left-Wing freaks must have realised that their ideas—basically sharing the money and the women that they clearly couldn't get on their own merits while tanking the economy—had an extremely limited electoral appeal, so they decided to go undercover and subvert causes and parties that had a wider reach.

In fact the Socialist Worker's Party (quintessential Trotskyists) in the UK does nothing else, and will jump on any bandwagon, sending its members to join popular parties or campaigns, where they will try to network and push each other into positions of influence.

Right now the Labour Party has been partly hijacked by hard leftists like this, organised by that party-within-the-party, the so-called Momentum Group. Working nefariously behind the scenes to grasp control of the Party, they will keep their heads down come election time, when Labour's image as a reliable, old, moderate centre-Left party that only wants to give a boost to the NHS will take centre stage.

In fact, these constant secret agendas across the entire political spectrum are one of the main reasons why people in the UK have come to deeply distrust politicians.

The basic problem we have in the UK and America is that neither country has what could properly be called a truly democratic system. Two-party systems modulated by oligarchical control of the media is right down there with North Korea when it comes to functioning democratic input. The ways in which the genuine populist uprisings of Brexit and Trump have been boxed in, watered down, and delayed have been eye-opening.

BNP demonised despite vast, inherent popularity

Anglosphere two-party systems have elements of democracy, but they are fundamentally undemocratic and intensely so at the micro-political level, the level where healthy, new political growth should be taking place. This environment makes it extremely hard for small, radical political entities to enter the political ecosystem.

But, unlike the hard Left, with its frankly dangerous and unworkable ideas, the nationalist Right in the West has always had a lot going for it. By and large, its policies would not destroy any country it took over. In fact, such countries would be strengthened, as we see in the cases of "near-Western" countries like Hungary, Poland, and Italy, where the nationalist right has made inroads into government and generally improved things.

Traditionally the masses get a lot of criticism from the radical intellectual right, but actually most of the common people "get it" and instinctively support nationalist Right policies. This is a secret that the establishment has not always been so good at keeping. Back in 2006, the mass-market Daily Mail even ran an article highlighting the popularity of such policies, revealing the inherent popularity of almost every single plank of the platform on which the British Nationalist Party was then standing. In fact the only reason many people didn't vote for the BNP was because of a successful establishment and mainstream media smear campaign that demonized them, combined with an electoral system that made any vote for a third party a "wasted vote."

The Mail article stated:

A majority of people back the British National Party's policies, according to a poll released today. But the YouGov survey found that many people disown the policies once they are associated with the BNP.

The poll comes ahead of local elections next week when there are fears the BNP could make an electoral breakthrough.

It found that 59 per cent of people supported a halt to all further immigration to the UK - one of the BNP's main pledges - when they were not told of the far-right group's association with the policy.

Among those who were told that it was a BNP commitment, support for the policy was only 48 per cent.

And 52 per cent of those who took part in the survey agreed that all immigrants should be denied the right to bring further members of their family into this country. But when told it was a BNP policy, support fell by 9 per cent.

Overall there was 55 per cent support for BNP policies until people were informed of the party's stance, when backing dropped to 49 per cent.

More than a third of people, 37 per cent, said they would seriously consider voting for the BNP's policies in an election. But identifying the BNP with the policies caused support to fall by 17 per cent.

Even the BNP's most hard-line ideas gained the backing of tens of millions of Brits, with a third supporting the stance that non-white British citizens are inherently "less British than white people" and 48% supporting the idea of "encouraging immigrants and their families to leave Britain."

Peter Kellner, the chairman of the YouGov polling organisation that carried out the poll, commented:

The results demonstrate that the BNP is tapping into some widely-held views, but that the party suffers from a negative image. If the BNP were able to erase this view, it could make significant gains in the upcoming local elections. This may explain what is happening in certain localities where the BNP now polls strongly.

So, the potential for growth was clearly there, as it is in any other Western country undergoing the poisons and toxins of multicultural globalism.

But the problem the BNP had was twofold, namely infiltration and disruption from the establishment and an electoral system that made it hard for them to consolidate gains and build "virtuous cycles."

Nit-pick all you like, but Italy is
winning. America not so much.

In Europe, by contrast, things were a little different. Most notably, in an obvious post-war attempt to "depolarise" societies and force a culture of "consensus politics," many of the countries there instituted proportional representation systems. This made it possible for smaller, radical parties with a winning message to build support, infrastructure, and funding—and then grow! We see the results today where nationalist parties are now running or contending for power in such countries as Hungary, Italy, Germany, France, Austria, and others.

Of course, these are seldom out-and-out ethnonationalist parties, but who cares as long as they protect borders, turn back the boats, and tackle the question of low birth rates, which is the fundamental driver of demographic churn and globohomo dysfunction. Americans are a million miles from the healthy policies being implemented in parts of Europe.

The key difference between White identitarianism in America and Europe is that in most of Europe the nationalist right exists as free-living political entities, whereas in America it is forced to live in the dark and adapt to its extremely poor prospects—in great part self-inflicted—by becoming a low-grade parasite.

After decades of hibernation, the radical right in America began to wake up around ten years ago through the phenomenon now called the "Alt-Right." At first it limited itself to being an intellectual and metapolitical movement, but then there were voices that it should try to exist IRL as well. But how could this have any meaning in a political system dominated by America's two-party system? The phenomenon of Trump offered a fleeting hope that this problem was not a problem after all—and the Alt-Right clambered aboard.

Rather than a purely parasitic relationship, there was in fact more of a symbiotic relationship between Trump and the Alt-Right, with the latter weaponising social media, undermining the former's opponents, and boosting his signal. But that was only on the political and tactical level. On the ideological level, as we have increasingly found out, Trump was very far removed from what the Alt-Right wants or wanted.

The failure of metapolitical entryism.

In retrospect, the Alt-Right realised that rather than the ideological symbiosis that it thought existed with Trump, it was in fact in a parasitical relationship, where it drew energy from Trump but had no input on the direction that he followed. Even worse, it then realised that Trump was taking measures to purge the parasite from his boomer, Israel-o-philiac, Neo-Neocon gut.

This was because unlike the relatively successful Leftist entryism in the British Labour Party and the American Democrat Party, the Alt-Right didn't put "boots on the grounds," i.e. get people into positions in the GOP or the Trump campaign. Instead, as lazy NEETs, trustfund babies, and keyboard warriors, they merely attempted metapolical entryism. In short they "phoned in" their parasitism, which turned out to be a total failure.

In the sad aftermath of this, some elements of the Alt-Right and the Identitarian Right learned the correct lesson, and correctly decided that the key point was to exist as a free-living political organism, something that pushed them to place greater stress on optics, morality, and even street presence in the decidedly difficult conditions that have now been created.

Those emotionally drawn to bad optics—through a love of Naziism, lack of social skills, or just pure ugliness—decided inevitability to double down on the parasite strategy and try variations of it.

The Golden Rule: whatever this major
fuck-up does, do the exact opposite.

While some advocated actual infiltration of the Republican Party, others started looking to the Dems and a repeat of their failed metapolitical troll strategy, with the result that we now have most of the "rump" Alt-Right (all puns intended) jumping on—and possibly dooming—the Presidential campaign of Andrew Yang. Yes, America's most LARPy and signally White nationalists, many of them still rolling out the Hitler schtick, are literally supporting a Leftist Chinaman! Even funnier the Chinaman has started to notice, and is taking measures to distance himself from them.

So, what does the tapeworm gain from its life as a parasite, and what does it lose?

Let's be clear this is one of the most Faustian bargains ever made, although on a level so low and petty that it doesn't have any of the nobility and tragedy of Christopher Marlowe's great tale.

From nestling in the guts of a bigger, free-living entity, the tapeworm gets a flow of low-grade nutrients, some body warmth, and access to the alimentary canal of its host for breeding purposes. But at what cost? Well, it loses its capacity to exist on its own, evolve into something higher, or for people to even distinguish it from the actual shit of the bigger beast. In short, it loses its identity—hardly the ideal model for a supposed identitarian movement to follow.

The rocky road is always the right one, and the only way for White identitarianism and the American radical right to evolve, grow, and to make its presence known, is to exist outside the alimentary canals of its enemies, rivals, opponents, and the other big beasts. As for those who show a preference for the parasitical lifestyle, deal with them as you would deal with all parasites—flush them out!

"White pride," 2019 (colorised)