By Andrés I.
Let’s try to think about what happened after WW II concerning the general Occidental intellectual field. It is a complex task and a really varied phenomenon, but we can observe some elementary and essential issues: the French right-wing worldview (what Germans call die Weltanschauung) –led mainly by Charles Maurras– was completely undermined, not only for being assimilated to the general insulting epithet of “fascist stuff”, but also for belonging to monarchical conceptions. It was reactionary even in relation to the revolutionary Nazi-fascism far-right thinking. Also, the fascism is undermined in all its ideological expressions and local tendencies (Degrelle, Primo de Rivera, Codreanu, and so on), but not only that, even the classical Marxism was put into question too.
It will come to a new kind of leftist ideological matrix built by new French academics: the new academic leftists like Michel Foucault, Gilles Deleuze, François Lyotard, Simone de Beauvoir, Jacques Derrida, and so on. But not one like Sartre: he was a too-old intellectual figure, a so classically Marxist thinker -despite all of his uncanny lexical paraphernalia- and in 1968 he was seen as an ancient figure from the past. Young people clamored for another kind of ideological speech. And they founded it. They found a more exciting ideological discourse by reading and studying boring Hegelian and Phenomenological stuff extracted from canonical German Philosophy such as Bergson, Merleau-Ponty or Sartre.
All those new thinkers have their own differences, but they took a common substratum from the reconversion of classical Marxism into a post-structuralist one. This phenomena could only come from a kind of Europe that was financed by the Marshall Plan. The time of a new neo-Marxist and certainly “liberal” Left had come to us. Why do I say “liberal” in this case? Because it will substitute the class struggle idea with that of the sexual and individual liberation alongside the free market of drugs and the family’s destruction, which will be denounced as a kind of “bourgeois prison” by some nihilist and radical feminists. The gender ideology will emerge as a creepy intellectual virus. Another important aspect: in the end it is not incompatible with a capitalistic market as the classical Marxism was.
That’s the point where French ideological reconversion intersects the USA’s own ideological intellectual process: The encounter of post-structuralist Left with the Frankfurt School. Today we will not take this specific topic into analytic account, but as we know, the Jewish Frankfurt School movement migrated to the USA during the Nazi period prolifically expanding in New York and California academia. There is a specific figure in which we are interested: Herbert Marcuse, the New Left’s Father as it is said. On the other hand, some French intellectuals like Foucault, Derrida and Lyotard will widely succeed in the United States’ academies. In fact, Derrida introduced a wide-ranging theoretical set of conceptual tools –such as deconstruction– that keep feeding leftist intellectuals and activists to this day.
This new intersection, this ideological and philosophical meeting of ideas between Post-structuralism and the Jewish Frankfurt School in the United States will produce a new neo-Marxist cultural background in which sexual liberation will come to rebellion, the family will be driven to ideological disintegration, the Church besieged (both Catholic and Protestant), masculinity will be put into query and the women instigated to furious umbrage against men. A general cultural nihilism will set among all of us. A new and radical phase of decadence had come and set in among us. Not only the stunning and nice traditional (North) America suffered these consequences, but all America (also the South), and, of course, western Europe. The European East was kept behind a literal iron wall, so a merging and powerful nationalist identity kept on beating underneath the communist regime. Nowadays we can see that most of the truly interesting nationalistic movements are coming from the East, such as Jobbik in Hungary. In fact, those folks preserve their national identity much better than us because they were not submitted to the ideological postmodern stuff (except economically).
In next articles we will analyze specifically all of these topics, but now we must ask ourselves what this New Left means and proposes to us as our cultural enemy.
The New Left ideology proposes that Nations, Homelands and sacred loved Traditions are “social constructs”. It is cognitive relativistic: it seems that all points of views depend on a solipsistic and individualistic subject, and worse, they are all intrinsically equal. It asserts that sexuality is a mere subjective option, leveling all tendencies as the same, or even worse: all those tendencies above heterosexuality. It states that Christian faith is oppressive and responsible for the worst crimes in human History and against humanity. It states that “History” is not to be written with capital letter (“H”), and instead of that it proposes the notion of narration. It has declared war against God and all transcendent notions and concepts. It wants a New World Order where individuals keep living in the Immanence’s lap of Evil, surrounded by a radical egalitarianism and all human and moral issues leveling.
The answer is: are we going to allow it…?