Simulacra and the Dialectical Defeat of the Right

The politics of the Postmodern era are characterized unilaterally as a continuous concession of the principles of the Right to those of the Left. The Right constantly appeals to logical argument and argument from common sense, but loses both political power and social standing, generation after generation. In this work, we offer our analysis of the main dialectical and metaphysical reasons for the Right’s continued defeat. We also provide an initial offering of methods to recognize and counter this dynamic.

We must distinguish between the perceptual value of reality and that of artificial, self-referential, or constructed realities; we call these simulacra. Although referring to things this way may seem sweeping, it is critical to understand that “reality” is defined by what we sense and perceive, both as individuals and as societies. Hence there is a clear distinction between authentic reality and that which is provided to us by construction or stagnation.

Simulacra come in two primary forms which we here differentiate on the basis of Being and Becoming.

Traditionally, we think of Being as a rooted state of existence, where all parameters of an entity are fully described. Yet, this is limited in its scope. A definition of Being is provided using observations about its nature. These observations necessarily use facts and terms that are themselves the result of a living and growing process. This set of relations that are created upon the election of a subject, we call a living chain of connection or Context. Attached living chains of connection to Being yield a state that presents a static image upon momentary observation. Yet, the reality of the thing being observed is always itself also Becoming, even if slowly, by continuing to interact with the observer and the observer’s growing world. Being exists in each infinitesimal moment, but the process of noticing it, experiencing it, and even describing it requires contact with Becoming. The two touch each other intimately, arriving at the other’s boundary. If you cleave them apart, they implode. To truly know something is to know the processes that render its Context.

Semiotic Simulacra

The Ancient Egyptian Language provides a high-quality example of a living reality transforming into Simulacra of Being and the ultimate Stasis. At one time, this language was standardized and spoken by millions of people yet all we have left of this culture today are dusty remnants and hieroglyphics. Modern linguists and historians have written libraries on these symbols, and even related them to sounds. No one alive today speaks Ancient Egyptian and so we can no longer truly relate the space of experiences encompassed and expressed by Ancient Egyptian to modern living languages, let alone the actual sounds and ways these symbols were used. How do we know what an Egyptian meant when he spoke the word for “fire?” Even in this context, the reader can note the emotional, experiential, metaphorical, and memory qualities of fire pressing in their mind. Ancient Egyptians can no longer relate these things to us. The experience or the contextual conception is the Becoming of words that bring language into Being, with new layers of meaning added as the culture grows and experiences new phenomena. The words and symbols can tell us some, but the spark of Life is gone, forever.

Another, somewhat lighter, example of Semiotic Simulacrum is the ironically named Society for Creative Anachronisms, wherein members dress up in armor and play at melee warfare. No matter the skill level of any SCA member, his skills do not represent that of the historical soldiery he pretends at. These men lived and died on the skill requisite to wield these weapons. The skills an SCA player displays are divorced from the historical, cultural, and psychological contexts that created the weapons he plays at wielding. For example, the construction of ancient armor was known at a practically biological level for the smiths that built and maintained it. Armor of ancient design evolved through transmission and learning, over hundreds or thousands of generations, each new smith folding the lessons of his life into the leather and metal, and later passing the new design on to his apprentice. When building a new set based on ancient design, modern armorers puzzle at the particulars of the design, not being able to understand it in its original Context. The true information that guided the original design lies somewhere beyond simple schematics or even modern simulation. It is lost forever. They are married, you see: the armor and armorer, the soldier and blade, the blade and the blood. To separate these things from who used them and just as importantly, why they were used, is to mutate what they are. Melee warfare as it is practiced by the SCA is frozen in time, a reference of itself, divorced from the nations, families and men that developed it.

Simulacra of Being have a counterpart in the Simulacra of Becoming. These emerge from the process of Annihilation as Becoming is cleaved from Being. Here, the living chain is completely severed from its origins. Being and Becoming transition into interchangeable forms of random choice. The roots of Being no longer matter, and any chain of context, no matter how well attached, cannot truly find a source or sink. Being becomes meaningless in reference to this new cyclical state of Becoming. In a way, the Reality itself of the realized state ceases to exist because no rooted state of Being can be attached to the most recent context.

We enumerate two types of Simulacra of Becoming: one by Contextual Decay (Entropy) and the other by Alchemical Transformation.

Entropic Simulacra

However, the natural formation of Being as it cleaves from Becoming can be interrupted in a form analogous and indeed very similar to Semiotic Simulacra. If the participation and evolution of naturally emerging Context becomes self-referential and no new Context is appended — in other words, the emerging State is not used, not participated in, in a living way, the process of Becoming collapses into a Stasis. In this case the process of Becoming is cyclical, continually pointing back to a copy of the same Being, and the essence of that Being decays leaving only superficial descriptions of the form. This is a process analogous to what occurs to a human mind or body if it is never exercised or exposed to new challenges. A slow winding down leads to diminishment of value, and a simulacrum of the original being appears, a demented patient, forever trapped in wanderings of his own memory; even the memory itself and at last his body decays into darkness. The person is known by the same name but their living essence is detached from the outer form we recognize long before death. This is a very typical way in which religions, creeds and races die.

There are numerous examples of Entropic Simulacra, many of which are political. Consider the following quote from the University of Northern Iowa’s Gender Identity Terminology page:

Woman (noun)

A person, who regardless of their sex assigned at birth, identifies as a woman.

Thus a woman is defined as a person who identifies as a woman. The form is defined by the superficial descriptions of the form.

This is meant to be a sincere resource for use but the absurdity of this offering should be clear. Womanhood is a deeply elemental and spiritually significant matter, that should set a clear life path from birth. This bizarre shibboleth depicts the undeniable fact that we are witnessing the rapid transformation of Western society into Entropic Simulacrum. Here we observe the mutation of sexual identity into a Stasis of Becoming. Human sexuality, one of the most fundamental elements of all biological reality and physically expressed Essence, is now an artificial reality (social construct, to use a Leftist term) for tens of millions of people. We invite the reader to consider carefully what the conversion of human sexuality into Entropic Simulacrum might mean for our species.

Alchemical Simulacra

There are many modern examples of Alchemical Simulacra, and most of them are visible in politics. One example is the Simulacrum of the American image that was forced on hundreds of millions of people following the events of September 11th. This was an intentional Alchemical transformation, using an artificial event to create a rootless and divided understanding of “America.” For a large portion of the planet, the following event took place: the story of “America” as a long historical chain of events ended, and became some frozen conceptualization of world police. Although numerous civil protests broke out, the U.S. Government unilaterally launched a series of wars with minimal or no explanation provided other than it was necessary for America as a whole to “fight terrorism.”

The experience of 9/11 and the result of Desert Storm are effectively unrelated, yet vast numbers of people provided unmitigated support for the resulting theater of death. Who or what was the America that undertook this enormity? There is no explanation — mass hysteria has been suggested. The truth is that hundreds of millions of people participated in an event that no single one would ever agree to. “America” the idea was recreated effectively overnight by using the energetic release and traumatic transformation of a terrorist attack and the engine of mass media to replace the living chain of context. This is Alchemical Simulacrum, a Simulacrum of Becoming. Note that a subsequent, mutated chain of Context was and is now added to the idea of America later. History began again, and the Simulacra transformed its current state into a new Being in which we are now living. Society did not later return to the original historical pathway, the rooted Living Chain of Context that originally defined America. In fact, most Americans cannot sincerely remember what “America” was before this. American history has since been reinterpreted through the lens of the nation as an exponent of military-backed internationalism.

The continuous creation of Alchemical Simulacra is the favorite means by which the present global Regime holds power. Their wholesale control over every outlet of public fact: the media, the universities, and corporate bureaucracy means that the public has no way of defending itself against this artificial simulation of reality other than to recognize and disengage from it. Indeed, insofar as we consider the typical modern Western citizen, there is no anchoring of reality. Being is perpetually in question, as the public dialogue continually reforms the root of fact, breaking the living chain of context and forcing previously known identity into a Stasis of Forms. Internal, personal creativity and spontaneity has been Alchemically replaced by a simulacrum of Becoming. We are told how to Become and in which superficial, consumptive ways it is possible. This artificially supervised, top-down controlled dialectic is how people understand themselves and all political reality in the modern world.

Responding to Dialectical Control

The same 20-year-old students who have spent their lives in preparation to attend elite universities to become members of the wealthy elite also assemble to attack and burn the universities down, shrieking about the evils of the very Capitalism they intend to lead. Afterwards, they happily take positions in elite corporations with 6+ figure annual compensation and complain from their ivory towers about the evils of the wealthy. YouTube is full of affluent “Communists” who enjoy immense wealth and privilege provided by their image as “Communists.” There is no contextual foundation; they are simply wearing skins of political simulacrum, and yet the Left sees no problem in this because their hypocritical nature allows for the shifting of frames for control.

Dialectical Forcing

If this seems too abstract, consider the public political space today: figures on the Right pronounce their singular devotion to antagonizing absolutes of one form, for example, the “pro-life” vs. “pro-choice” construct, but then announce they are the best version of another absolute of the Left’s framework, for example “anti-racism.” “We are the real anti-racists!” Or, “Blacks do better under conservative policies, we’re the real black activists!” Or, “Colonization is an inherent evil and they are the real colonizers.”

Similarly, the Right spends its time mocking the hypocritical nature of the Left’s stances, blind to the fact that the hypocrisy of the Left defines its control as the “creators” of reality and the Right as reactive inheritors of all the Left discards. This kind of virtue signaling continually empowers the Left to define values and select battlegrounds where distinctions between the Left and Right are drawn and ultimately where victories are won. This dynamic contributes to an overarching Stasis of values (“conservative values”) that reflects a past version of Being recently discarded by the Left, for the Right to defend.

The Right falsely sees this Stasis as a victory, insistently reacting in predictable and repetitive ways to the continued presentation of the Left’s inauthentic form of reality. As long as the Right allows the Simulacrum of Becoming to supplant true creation, we will forever be recursive to the framework defined by our enemy, and thus made out to be the grained-in Opponent and Spectacle of Evil that defines the boundaries of the Regime. The neverending cycle of signal and repeat produces a meta where we are controlled and predictable. The response of the Right can invariably be cast back into an antagonized reaction, enabling the Simulacrum to dictate the direction of the controlled dialectic. This is a form of roleplay, where the Right feels it must caricature the Left by presenting Forms it rejects. This is used by the dialectic to reinforce itself; in a very real sense this is a Stasis of processes, guaranteeing a controlled outcome. We call this process “dialectical forcing.”

Hate Speech as a Tool for Creating Alchemical Simulacra

We find another good example of a dialectically forcing neologism (there are many) in the phrase “hate speech,” a ersatz label that allows permitted forms of speech to exist within specific socially permissible guidelines. This neologism provides two distinct elemental powers to the Left: The first is the dialectical reactivity inherent to a rootless label, forcing people to react differently to the label and the situations it is applied to via mechanisms unique to each group. The second advantage provided by the “hate speech” label is the implicit position of power it grants to the originating authorities of the label. The Left’s authority to take up enforcement of a new application has a vast advantage in terms of power, while trying to use these terms or spin them around showcases the Right’s powerless position.

The application of the “hate speech” is implicitly unequal because it takes place within the scope of an Alchemical Simulacrum. We note that the reader may find many other similar examples where a schismatic event created an Alchemical transformation, followed by the introduction of dialectically forcing neologisms into the public conversation. In this case, “hate speech” is attached to Islamism and 9/11. The originating authority of this label was the globalist cucked U.S. Government working with think tanks NGOs like the Open Society Foundation during the first days of the Obama administration. The use of “hate speech” has been massively expanded, and enforced in many Western countries by criminal law.

The Regime and its allies are free to call out the violence of Islamists, anywhere they are found. This is because they control the Alchemical Simulacrum defining the relationship of Islamism to Westmen. This particular structure transfers the responsibility for Islamist violence to their victims anywhere they are White and transfers the criminality of the creed and its leaders to individuals (“bad apples”). Laws are passed that enforce the Simulacrum, and with each new passing of Laws, the Simulacrum is refreshed. At this time, anyone deemed Right cannot even point out Islamic violence or reject to their immigration without falling abreast of “hate speech” laws. The same “hate speech” laws enable Islamists to continue to agitate, even calling openly for the death of the West! Thus the position Right is always defined by the unrooted framework provided for it by the Left.

Synthesis of Whites into Islamism or an Amalgamation of Tradition: A Retrosynthetic Simulacrum

Their efforts were dismissed by the media as “service” to their husbands, signaling to Feminist sentiments that White and Western Traditionalist women were somehow ceding ground, held for women as a whole, to some universal amalgamation of the form “Patriarchy.”

Retrosynthetic Simulacrum of Being is created by taking up an amalgamation of opposition to the alchemical simulacrum, creating a grift and caricature of real living tradition. This type of reactive regression allows the right to constantly be the antithesis, creating less interest by women and men authentically seeking healthy family dynamics and attracting people more interested in the attention and confrontation of the Simulacrum of Being that traditionalism is being dialectically forced to. Despite this powerful reframing, the strategic advantage obtained through the “hate speech” label was not yet where the full dialectical forcing occurred. Virtually any response on the Right as a political entity will now produce a new advantage for the Left:

The comparison of Traditionalist marriage to Jihadi marriage creates a synthetic alliance in that these two groups have a common interest in the embracing of this practice. The unsupported implication is that their forms of tradition and roots of this relationship are similar, when the two cultures have essentially unrelated living chains of connection. It should be mentioned that this synthesis has been layered by the Left several times, actually with some degree of success: observe the presence of memes depicting the alliance of Muslim and Christian crusaders shaking hands and embracing against an onslaught of primitives (as if they don’t include vast swarths of primitive numbers) led by Jewish symbols or the meme of White Shariah.

The trap is at last set for the Right. If Westmen stand up and claim that their interests should not be comported with Jihadi interests, they will be labeled as “racist” by the Regime for rejecting this synthesis or “hate speech laws” could even be used against them. They will also be rejecting their new “allies.” If Westment agree with the comparison, they now inherit all the antipathy accorded to Islamists and will be labeled as “terrorists,” called out by mass media for needing “hate speech” suppression of White Traditional values as a proxy for actual Islamist violence while being saddled with having to maintain this new “alliance.” If the Right says nothing, the false claim stands unchallenged, where it can be built upon later by “academic” research. If the Right tries to accept some aspects of the synthesis while rejecting others, it can be caricatured as “racist” by the victimhood structure of the Left. The dialectic is now absolutely forced, and the Right as a whole has lost its initiative. Globalists know that the Right will react in one of these ways, and now enjoy a temporal and strategic political advantage.

Finally, this particular incident of dialectical forcing is typical of the Regime’s methods involving Islamism: a long history of successful dialectical campaigns has created an inward-facing metaphysical advantage for the Regime: A tie of sympathy to the dysfunctional Islamist group is inserted by pointing out behavior that is superficially similar to the hated Traditionalist Westmen, making their regressed form of egalitarian traditionalism seem the only viable option while also using Islamists as a proxy strongman against Europeans in the streets. The hollow nature of Islamism (having been a simulacrum in its inception) creates a vessel for supporters of the Regime to fill with empathy, thereby allowing Islamists to be seen by the Regime variously as either a politically expedient victim group or a potential violent solution via anarchoterrorism. Islamism is a useful cipher for the Regime to program and use at will, because it does not generate its own living chain of context and has long lost its creative potential, with the inverse of low replacement rates being their rapid primitive expansions, which is a sign of decay rather than health in an apex.

Defending against Simulacrum and Forcing

If absolutely nothing else, each individual allied with the Right must take the following as a Mandate:

Learn to recognize the operation of Alchemical Simulacra within modern society. Stop engaging in the Narrative provided by the Regime and letting them control the topics of discourse. Stop arguing to equate things within the Simulacrum using its own moral framework. Spread these concepts and this lexicon to make others aware that are engaging it, which circumvents the “silent” option in the last example. Start learning to create without using the framework provided by the Left to evaluate creation.

Too long has the Right defined itself as the antagonist of creating new forms, providing an edifice of pompous social recursion, simple financial grift and public attention seeking by pointing out enormities committed by the Left. The Right cannot simply continue to collide with the current narrative in the role of antagonist to the Left’s dialectical framework. We must foster a willingness throughout our sphere to utilize and recognize formative processes to ultimately create new forms, i.e. ideas of authentic thought, authentic spirituality. This can only come by reestablishing our relationship as a people to Essence, and in so doing, rebuild an authentic living chain of connection.

By Essence we mean the processes that produce forms, rather than the forms themselves. The authentic cycles of life, death, and adaptation must again become the root of our Practice on the Right. Rerooting to Essence, in turn, must necessarily be generated with new context, with new conceptualization and broadening of language that leads to new action. This point cannot be belabored enough: new frameworks will walk in line with new action.

To make a concrete comparison: in yoga or martial arts, there are poses or “asanas,” and vinyasas are asanas in motion. To find Essence, we must look at the underlying processes that govern all human bodies for which both asanas and vinyasas flow. Authentic Right-wing action will be found in regaining the ability to create new asanas and vinyasas in flows and poses inspired by the past without endless retread of those already available. Finding that center and making it whole and true is the challenge of the present generation. We would also like to point to the importance of contemplation over signaling, less repetitive signaling that drowns out anything of substance. Like Aikido, participating in a confrontation by letting your enemy’s own momentum take them down instead of cushioning their fall or giving them a weakened point of attack.

Every person on the thinking Right should recognize the value of past glory while also placing equal value on new legacy with new contributions to thought, or at the very least, not reinforcing the modern dialectic. Less talk and branding, more attention and contemplation. At last be our own form of Alchemy, a healing of artifice and a breaking of the endless controlled cycle of Simulacrum by a rerooting of authentic reality. We must embrace the positions of Creators and the Actors upon the world, not the responders or acted upon. If the Right continues to define itself by retreading where society has been, then the Left will be free to continue to define itself by deciding where society is going.