Counter Signal – 2 – The Bannoning

Progs called conservatives ‘fascist’, and conservatives call progs ‘fascist’.

Yep, again and again, ‘fascist’ is used as some epithet or insult.

Why is everyone is anti-fascist? People on the left and people on the Right and people on the Top and people on the Bottom all call each other ‘fascist’.

So, elitism is fascism, populism is fascism, liberalism is fascism, conservatism is fascism, socialism is fascism, libertarinism is fascism. Everyone accuses the other side of being ‘fascist’, and everyone denies that his side is ‘fascist’.

In fact, I’m the only true fascist, and I think all of humanity should just call me FASCIST and be done with it.

Anyway, why is everyone so fearful of the term ‘fascism’? I think it’s because the truth is triggering. They fear and hate fascism because no ideology came so close to addressing the core essence of power. Is fascism dangerous? Yes. It’s like fire is dangerous. Electricity is dangerous. Nuclear power is dangerous. Things of great power and truth are dangerous. So, fascism is something we need to be careful with. It’s like the ring of power in Nibelungen. It’s like Excalibur. Mismanage it and you end up with WWII.

But just because something can be misused dangerously and disastrously doesn’t mean that its power is untrue. If anything, it means it is all too true. It’s like what Frankenstein learns of fire. It is good and bad and bad and good. But it is great power.

So, why are people so afraid of fascism? Because it gets to the CORE of what it’s all about: Power. Deep down inside, the Left must know this because it got obsessed with neo-Nietzscheanism via Foucault. It’s like APOCALYPSE NOW where Willard comes face to face with the true source of power as explained by Kurtz(though Coppola copped out and took out a lot of Kurtz’s philosophical musings about the power.)

Especially with the fading of Marxism, the Left needed to fixate on something new and compelling. With Leftism, the theme was Justice. Violence and struggle for justice and equality. A war on power to create a world of equality.

But eventually, the rhetoric changed to Power. Black Power, Brown Power, Gay Pride(a kind of power). EMPOWERMENT. Also, the Left came under the spell of capitalist egotism, celebrity, and megalomania. The Left came to admire Star Power, that of Elvis, Dylan, Beatles, Stones, Hendrix, the great Auteurs, and etc. It lost interest in the little guy, like in the film MARTY with Ernest Borgnine as ordinary Joe, a kind of Ralph Kramden with better temper.

The Counterculture was odd in its contradictions. On the one hand, young people found older people bigoted and repressive. They called for equality and liberation. But Liberation also meant the exultation of Star Power, the Icon, the Rocker as god, and etc. The older generation never revered pop stars like the boomers did theirs. Sure, the older folks love Sinatra and Como, but they weren’t about to wet their pants over them. And older generations respected presidents, but it was the boomers who had the myth of Camelot. The Counterculture was enthralled, enraptured, and eye-ball-popping about their pop heroes who were worshiped like gods. Deadheads worshiped Garcia. I saw them bawling like mad when he died. “Jerrrrrrrryyyy”!!!

Of course, this power-worship was nothing new in Leftism. The French Revolution led to the cult of Napoleon who was revered as a Promethean figure. And Marx came to be revered as modern Moses, and Lenin and Stalin became like gods to worship. And as Paul Johnson wrote in his book on 19th century, a lot of the 20th century obsessions began there. Wagner was like a god to many(though much of this wasn’t necessarily leftist.)

Still, the intellectual discipline and dogmatic rigor of Leftism demanded that leftists be good dutiful obedient commissars. Follow the Party, obey the Moscow Line, repress one’s egotism for the Working Man. Socialist Realism. Overt personal ambition or experimentalism was condemned as adventurism and formalism.

But the counterculture left became so into drugs, rock music, sex culture, and hedonism that it rebelled against both the Right and the Stalinist Left. And some took cues from Dylan who went electric. Images of Che and Mao were juxtaposed with those of rock stars and movie icons like Marlon Brando and James Dean. Charisma became a thing.

BONNIE & CLYDE was romanticized as a revolutionary movie even though it was about a glamour couple who went around shooting regular folks. Nihilism seeped into Leftism… or Leftism was breaking out of its repressed shell. Just as Victorianism repressed sexuality, Leftism repressed what the fight was really about. It was about Power, not justice and abstract ideals. Nietzsche had been right.

Of course, the post-Marxist Left continued to use the terminology of justice and equality against repression, tyranny, oppression, exploitation, privilege, and etc. But the more we look at it, it’s a naked struggle for power for power’s sake.

And this is why people fear fascism. Fascism was to power-politics what Freudianism was to politics of psychology. Freud may have overstated the case, but he believed that powerful subconscious and biological forces were flowing underneath consciousness with its pat morals and manners. Fascism said the core element of history and society is the struggle for power. History is a story of Power.

Marx would have admitted power is crucial to understanding history. But he thought this problem would be resolved, and utopia could finally result from dialectics of class struggle. History, according to Marx, is about the upper classes using their power to exploit the classes. This will eventually lead to capitalism that will eventually destroy itself but ONLY AFTER having created a giant industrial society full of wealth. When capitalism destroys itself, the workers shall inherit the wealth and share it equally and be happy and etc. So, in the end, Justice trumps everything in Marxist theory. In contrast, fascist theory says Power will always be the core theme of life. After all, we are organisms, and just look at nature. It is a never-ending struggle of survival and territory and advantage. It is about the use of power by various organisms to gain ground and survive. And every advantage has a disadvantage. Birds with wings can fly, but their upper limbs are useless for anything but flight. Snakes lack limbs but have poison. Since humans are organisms, they too struggle for power. This was made all the more evident by the discoveries of Darwin and Wallace.

Fascism did with history what physics did with matter. Fascism peered into the nuclei of history and found the struggle for power. This wouldn’t have been alarming to pagans such as Greeks, Romans, and Germanic barbarians who were familiar with the way of power. But the justice-heavy themes of Christianity and Islam that came to pervade much of the world were afraid to touch upon the true nature of man.

And the Enlightenment, though anti-religious, shared something with Christianity in its lofty view of mankind. Since mankind had brains that could reason, history could and should be about remaking society on the basis of the loftiest ‘ideals’. No wonder we still hear the elites yammer about ‘western values’. Now, there is surely a need for higher ideals, morality, reason, logic, and etc. But are they the core of life? Maybe if humans could be like the body-less spirits in 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY that travel across stars with their ‘thoughts’.

But in truth, humans are animals with bodies with all sorts of organs and material that developed before brains or along with brains. And organisms ensure survival and even supremacy by competition and game of power.

Now, if we only act on the basis of power, we’d be like apes or wolves or lions or hyenas, and who wants that? We do want morality and even spirituality and idealism, BUT, they are mere addendum to the organism-ism that is, at its core, about the will to live, will to survive, the will to power. Some animals act in terms of solitary power. Some act socially. Humans act macro-socially, but there are limits to scale of human interaction. It’s like a wolf pack. There’s a limit to the viability to a pack size. 10 wolves in a pack can work well. But 100 wolves in a pack wouldn’t function well, and it would naturally break into separate packs. Likewise, the viable limit for macro-social-organization seems to be the Nation. Empire tries to stretch beyond that, but all empires have failed and fallen apart and broken up into nations. Also, the nation is most stable with an overwhelming majority that allows unity and trust and cooperation. Sweden worked better as all-Swedish. It is falling apart with ‘diversity’ that is turning Sweden into a mini-empire of incompatible races and cultures.

Anyway, just as one could use Marxist theory to understand history without being a Marxist revolutionary or diehard communist, one could use Fascist theory to understand society and history without becoming a black shirt or brown shirt.

And the dirty secret of the Left is that, in a way, they’ve been doing this without even knowing it. Their emphasis on EMPOWERMENT is sub-fascist. Sure, they try to mask their power-obsession with rhetoric about White Privilege, i.e. blacks want black power because they are oppressed by white privilege. Or Jews obsess about Jewish issues ostensibly because of ‘Nazis’ and’anti-semites’. But such rationalization is specious because, in truth, blacks want power for power’s sake, and so do Jews. Power feels good. It’s like someone wants to be rich to be rich. The likes of Soros may argue that they made a ton of money just so they could do good works, but who’s kidding whom? Soros loves money for money’s sake. And his agendas all come down to empowering globalist oligarchs like himself by breaking down national barriers that stand in the way of globalist penetration. He’s not breaking down national barriers for the good of the masses. It’s for the power of globalist oligarchic class consisting of his ilk.

Rapper may bitch about the White Man, but their real theme is “I want the power, the ho, the dough, the bling, the ring.” And look at what the Russian communist elites did once communism fell. They tried to grab as much loot for themselves as possible. In a way, communism was less about justice than a game theory of power where politics would be shared so that no one would be the new tsar to hog it all.. but then Stalin came along and amassed all the power in the state, and then later, the insiders in the state gained most of the loot once the game theory of communism had run out of steam.

Fascism is difficult for people to face because they don’t want to peer into their souls and see the ‘real me’. They don’t want to find the Gordon Gekko who spells it all out. Now, fascism doesn’t say power alone is enough or that life should be about nihilistic greed and self-aggrandizement. It doesn’t praise the likes of Gekko. It doesn’t say everyone should try to be like Emperor Nero.

But then, Freud never said people should just take their clothes off, have massive orgies, and act like Lena Dunham. Rather, he was trying to come up with a healthier blueprint for a society that is founded on the truth of sexual drive as the essence of human nature.

In a similar vein, fascism says that society must be founded and managed on the understanding that humans are organisms in a struggle for power. Fascism says that the most potent kind of power among humans is social and national and racial. Radical individualism atomizes. Universalism is too confusing, too grandiose, too impossible. Also, identity is key to national unity and stability since it clarifies who is ‘us’ and who is ‘them’. This all works best on the national level.

Many point to Italian Fascism and National Socialism as proof of fascism’s failure, but the great paradox is that they failed by violating fascist principles. Both began to overstep national interests and went into imperialist mode, thereby raising the ire of other competing tribes.

Fascism is a theory of how to interweave the various elements of society and humanity to arrive at maximum power and survivality for the race or species. Fascism rejects dogmatic conservatism and traditionalism that sticks only to conventions and received wisdom. After all, science taught us that new things will be discovered, and history never remains the same. Fascism rejects radical leftism that fixates on narrow definition of ‘justice’ and ‘equality’ as the end all of history when history will always be a struggle for power. Also, a fascist will say leftists are merely repressed fascists whose repressed will-to-power emerges as moral supremacism and virtue-signaling. We see that in Sweden’s conceit of itself as a ‘humanitarian superpower’.

Why are young ones really attracted to punk music culture? Because of nice themes of justice and equality and being nice to fellow men? No, they are drawn to the display of power, rage, and machismo. Punk’s ‘garage marxism’ is useful for justifying what they REALLY want: sense of empowerment and badassness. If antifa types really care for the little people, they should be volunteering to take care of the elderly and lonely. Instead, they indulge in macho-power-thuggery and lamely try to justify their penchant for brutality by invoking ‘justice’.

If the Age of Reason/Enlightenment was overly optimistic about the power of reason as the lofty guide to future history, the Romantic Era was overly optimistic about the power of the irrational. In some ways, Romanticism is a precursor to fascist thinking because it addressed the power of emotions and the sublime blend of animal passion and spiritual transcendence(like in the Christo-Pagan music of Wagner), but its obsession with beauty and poetics prevented it from delving into the true dark soul of the human organism. It overly idealized and aestheticized the irrational.

Even the dark novel of FRANKENSTEIN was rather rhapsodic about this ungodly power. Fascism that emerged in the 20th century used the power of reason to delve into the power of unreason. It was a rational undertaking to understand the dynamics of the irrational soul of man; and mankind will remain mainly irrational(and the GLOB and Progs operate on this basis since they are invested in manipulating people with images and sounds than persuading them with reason and logical arguments. Why should we have ‘gay marriage’. Oh, look at those colorful ‘rainbow’ flags. Aren’t they lovely? One would have to be a ‘hateful homophobe’ to not get on the homo bandwagon and sing along to Village People”).

Just like a Freudian begins the discussion on the basis that ‘you wanna do it’, the fascist theorist begins on the basis that “you want the power”(or wanna be associated with the power). A fascist would be like Mel Brooks in this scene except talking about power than sex:

The ‘leftist’ GLOB and Progs are so full of shi*. According to their professed logic, they don’t want the power, or at least not an excess of it. They say everyone should have a fair portion of power and no more, and this goes for themselves too. They are into ‘equality’. Yeah, that must be why George Clooney wants more and more. Or why Bono can’t wait to get his hands on millions more. That must be why Oprah is worth billions. That must be why Hollywood is into raking in more and more. And that George Lucas the Libby Dib. He’s been telling us that he has yet to make his Personal Films because he has to make money first. But 100 million isn’t enough, 500 million isn’t enough, 2 billion isn’t enough. and 5 billion isn’t enough. I’m not saying those who want lots of money and power are ‘fascist’, but only fascist theory understands what they are really about.

Why is it that those who yammer about ‘equality’ never want to be part of the working class? If given a chance between being a starving artist and gluttonous pig, they almost always choose the latter. And Obama is likely to cash in big just like the Clintons. I wonder how much of his wealth he will invest in the ghettos of Detroit or give to poor Africans. All their ‘progressive’ talk is just that. Talk. What they really want is power. They want it and when they get some, they want more and more, like a Wall Street tycoon with 10 billion want 20 billion and then 50 billion.

As for the ‘leftist’ ‘losers’ who aint got much and don’t have a chance of getting any, notice they prefer to hang around rich cities and live off crumbs. If they really care about the have-nots, why not go to some depressed town and try to do good work? No, they wanna be ‘creative’ and leech off places that has the dough, status, prestige, and glamour. (Bernie-Sanderism is appealing to y0ung progs not because it offers equality but promises privilege of doing whatever and being funded by the state. Sanders’ Kids want the state to pay for their tuition even if they major in the most useless studies. It’s the privilege/power of being spoiled brats that attracts them to Sanders.) Also, it’s interesting how these ‘leftists’ have as heroes and role models the rich, the famous, the popular, the glamorous, and etc. I mean when did you ever see a ‘leftist loser’ bitch that Springsteen or Jay-Z is too rich? Which Libby-dib ever complained that Oprah is too rich? Oh, they will say, the fact that a black woman can be so rich sends a positive message, right? What? That one black woman should hog so much while so many black women got nothing? Some ‘leftism’.

If ‘leftists’ are all about concern for the powerless and ‘little people’, why are they so obsessed with famous movie stars, rock stars, rich athletes, and celebrities? Why did all those pussy-hatters have to stand there mesmerized at madonna’s narcissistic speech? Surely anyone with sense knows madonna and ashley judd are soul-damaged morons… but wait!! They are famous people, so they must be ‘cool’, and that means they must be right and worth listening to. So much for equality and concern for ‘little people’. They’d rather listen to the egotistical vanity of rich bitches with entitlementality.

I suggest we change the poem dedicated to the Statue of Liberty written by Ana Lazarus, a socialist Jew who wanted to raise money for the podium, but by doing so she altered the intent of the Monument which was a gift from France only to commemorate our independence in 1776.

France was an ally during our revolution against England and helped fund it. Our revolution also resulted in the French Revolution.
Anna Lazarus poem:

Not like the brazen giant of Greek fame,
With conquering limbs astride from land to land;
Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand
A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame
Is the imprisoned lightning, and her name
Mother of Exiles. From her beacon-hand
Glows world-wide welcome; her mild eyes command
The air-bridged harbor that twin cities frame.
“Keep ancient lands, your storied pomp!” cries she
With silent lips. “Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!”

REVISION:

“Like the Bronze giant of Greek fame,
With conquering limbs astride from land to land
Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand
A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame
Is the imprisoned lightning, and her name
Goddess of Liberty. From her beacon-hand
The air-bridged harbor that twin cities frame.
“I rise from ancient lands, with Aryan Grace
Give me your brightest and Fairest,
Your strong and talented who know the meaning of being free
Keep the Oppressors and the wretched refuse at your shore
Send me the Brightest people with Golden hair to me
I lift my lamp beside the golden door”

Or we can ask that this poem be moved to nearby location since it was not part of the monument gifted by France

Is there a way to webcache the r/altright’s best posts? Like the AMAs?