The Happening is Coming: The Impending Infiltration of the New Right

Roosh has an excellent new video which chronicles just how much progress we’ve all made in the past few years, and how the credibility crisis is accelerating rapidly.

Toward the end of the video, he speculates on what their next move might be. Looking globally and historically, I disagree with his assumption that they’ll figure out some way to shut us all down. Doing so isn’t technologically feasible. It’s not logistically feasible. It would leave our large and growing audiences frustrated and radicalized in the wake of the purge, however it would be accomplished. It would risk a Streisand Effect of drawing even more attention to our messages than we already receive.

Most importantly, it would be unnecessary.

Silencing America’s New Right would be child’s play, and they have a wealth of experience in how to go about it from defeating and delaying Europe’s New Right projects for decades. Just when social nationalist political projects begin to gain steam in a given country, an alternative project emerges with startling rapidity, solid financing, and none of the backbiting and bickering that plagues authentic identitarian initiatives. Despite superficially appearing to be nationalist, they enjoy that ineffable “respectability” that the hostile elites only dole out to their fellow travelers.

They whip up a slick, well-organized, well-funded, and well-spoken populist campaign which leads the masses away from the authentic projects, then leads them around in circles until the mood passes. As rapidly and mysteriously as the project emerged, it vanishes, with the elites’ status quo firmly intact. That’s the archetypal pattern, though it made more sense in France to simply purchase and repurpose Front National than it made to start from scratch.

This raises two questions for authentic neo-reactionaries:

How do we distinguish controlled opposition from the authentic opposition? 

  • More Polished Leadership

True believers are selected for their fortitude, not for their congeniality. Somebody crafting a slick controlled opposition group to redirect nationalism wouldn’t select an unattractive man with a long trail of controversy and gossip which inevitably accompanies a man who’s been prominently involved in a marginal subculture for an extended period of time. If TradYouth ever receives a controlled opposition competitor, one can be assured that its leadership will be more attractive and polished than myself.

  • Morally Toxic Demagoguery

Supposedly, that’s what we have on offer. I don’t think it is, but there will be no mistaking it when it comes from the controlled opposition. It will be aimed at collateral damage targets. They won’t make arguments that Whites have a right to exist in Europe, they’ll make arguments that Islam itself is a vile creed to be attacked both at home and abroad to protect “Western Civilization.” Frustration about illegal immigration won’t be directed at the Jewish Lobby, the Chamber of Commerce, or their bedfellows in Mexico’s castizo elites. It’ll be directed at the migrants themselves, directing the anger away from the men opening the floodgates to the economic migrants themselves.

We have no monopoly on vulgar racial hatred, and the oligarchs are more than happy to leverage it to full effect when it suits them.

  • Culture and Optics, not Blood and Soil

They’ll steer the conversation in classical liberal and market-friendly directions to the extent that the situation allows, insisting that the West must be preserved not because Western (read: White) people have a natural right to exist, but because we have a bundle of Enlightenment/Mercantile values that “those people” lack. This achieves two prerogatives for the controlled opposition, shifting the conversation from identity to ideology and encouraging those frustrated about the invasion to cling to their classical liberal ideologies all the more strongly, falsely believing that the invaders threaten our “freedom” and “equality” rather than our women and cities.

  • Jew-Friendly Conspiracy Quackery

All you’ve gotta do to throw the vast majority of people off of the trail is take the exceedingly well-documented and abundantly obvious machinations of the Judeo-Masonic oligarchs and perform a Ctrl-H on the document to replace “Jews” with either a false or unfalsifiable abstract target. Alex Jones prefers “the elites,” David Icke prefers “the reptilians,” Leftists prefer “the 1%.” Get creative, and vigorously shadow box with this imaginary opposition to keep the audience entertained. If it’s not naming the specific oligarchs (an integrally “anti-semitic” act), then it’s not to be trusted.

How do we defeat the controlled opposition?

The first step is, of course, identifying them. The second step is to generally trust the judgment of those with the most backstory. The controlled opposition can buy whatever it wants to appear legitimate, but one of the more difficult things to buy is an extensive history of struggle. Most people don’t even consider this, and they’re eager to ditch the old worn-out leadership for the polished new leadership who are more attractive and (superficially) successful.

Stick with the devil you know.

Folks prefer roundabouts to four-way stops partially because folks would rather go around in circles than come to a complete stop and wait. When this process happens, and I agree with Roosh’s prediction that it’s coming, those of us in the old guard will do better for ourselves to shrewdly stick to a long-term strategy and wait the cyclical process out. With each iteration, people will gradually approach that tipping point in the credibility crisis where they will instinctively sense when they’re being played.

The Donald Trump campaign represents one such loop down the spiral toward an authentic populist revolt. Note how a large subset of the population have so completely lost faith in the mainstream media narrative that they’re outright immune to the attacks on Trump…regardless of how apparently damning or provocative. They don’t care about what the Beltway weasels at NRO say about Trump any more than an infatuated girl cares about the jilted ex-boyfriend’s accusations against her new heartthrob.

Trump is seizing upon a popular phenomenon which has been percolating for several years on the American right, and the phenomenon can be expected, like a hotspot volcanic island chain, to bubble up to the surface somewhere else a little farther down the line after Donald Trump’s political project has run its course. I have no special insight into whether he’ll blow it within the next few weeks or whether he’ll be a wildly popular two term President. What I do know is that where Trump’s at right now won’t be populist enough or identitarian enough to satisfy the Zeitgeist in the future, just as the Ron Paul and Tea Party movements are now quietly eroding back into the sea of political irrelevance.

We will defeat the controlled opposition by staying the course, manning our posts, and sticking to our particular variations on the overarching theme of faith, family, and folk against the Modern World and its Jewish oligarchs. We will be defeated by attempting to get too clever with our angles, eagerly hopping onto every new train promising forward motion which turns out to be  carnival trolley leading us in circles, and impatiently resorting to premature and poorly considered political aggression.

I reconciled to myself rather early on that this would likely be a lifelong struggle with dim prospects for perhaps partial success. While there’s some truth to the truism that visualizing impending success helps bring it about, it’s also true that our people, White folks, have an acute vulnerability when it comes to patience. While our opponents habitually think in generational terms, we’re more inclined to expect and demand instant gratification. We must account for and correct for that (likely congenital) defect in our nature.

I’m as stoked about how rapidly everything is moving along as Roosh is, but my feeling is that we’re at the early stage of a historical process which will require several more years of grueling activist labor, involving multiple false starts and setbacks, before we’re in a position to achieve even our most modest goals. A Greek proverb states that, “A society grows great when old men plant trees whose shade they know they’ll never sit in.” That attitude is how we’ll defeat the controlled opposition, by standing our ground and patiently struggling for truth, tribe, and tradition regardless of the obstacles or odds.



This is an important issue to address, probably the most important one in regards to the rise of patriotic dissent and the traction of the normal-peopleist movement. Throwing our lot behind controlled opposition could be all that is necessary to take the wind out of our sails, take a look at what a black eye the European Judeo-Left is wearing after endorsing the IMF/Wall Street agent Alexis Tsipras and the treasonous SYRIZA party.

The “Far-Right” UKIP type party that went into the coalition with SYRIZA, ANEL (Independent Greeks) is not even going to get enough votes to get into parliament, while the uncompromising Social-Nationalists at Golden Dawn will very likely get a double digit % votes today! Jews play the long game and work both sides, need to be vaccinated.

Matt Parrott

The debate over whether the masses could or would rule justly is irrelevant. The masses can’t rule, have never ruled, and wouldn’t wish to rule if power were somehow directly accorded to them by some automated direct democratic mechanism of some sort.

To put this in perspective, the current populist campaign is in favor of transferring power to a billionaire oligarch (Trump). That’s how populism always works. Populist outrage has historically proven effective in transitioning from one elite to another. Sometimes this is an upgrade, as it was in the transition from the Weimar Republic to the NSDAP. Sometimes it’s disastrous, as it was in the transition from the the czar to the Bolsheviks.

Populism and popular discontent are morally neutral. It’s like gravity or water, a natural force which we should attempt to intelligently leverage toward noble ends.

Thinking too romantically about this is dangerous, as we saw with the Iron Guard and plenty of others throughout history who allowed their romantic approach to the Church or King to thwart their noble and traditionalist projects. Conversely, pandering to “bread and circus” demagoguery is also a non-starter.

Elites ought to give “the people” what is best for them, not necessarily what they ask for. A noble and regenerate people can be trusted with a profound degree of latitude (freedom), autonomy, and self-governance, but there has always has been and always will be hierarchy in human relations. Sometimes it’s bad, sometimes it’s degenerate, sometimes it’s too strict, sometimes it’s too relaxed.

A pragmatic approach to hierarchy is what’s necessary.


Of course I agree with you that somebody has to rule. My point of contention with a certain stripe of “traditionalist” is that elites need to lead by example and have solidarity with the people, not become a clique of arrogant pricks with their heads in the clouds. Leaders need to be like Adolf Hitler or even (to a much less serious degree) Hugo Chavez, who embody the collective subconscious of those they rule for the sheer fact that they were once one of them, but distinguished themselves through their extraordinary will and merit.

The concept of the Labor corps that the Germans had in the Third Reich, where the sons and daughters of all the stations in society come together to share work and struggle as equals is a revolutionary one. That’s how you foster a united society immunized from both class struggle and capitalist exploitation.

The conservative canard that it’s impossible to execute such a project is just an excuse to be a reactionary for reaction’s sake. It’s like that third positionist quote, “conservatives want to conserve everything, even injustice, while the Left wants to destroy everything, even the good”.

Matt Parrott

Setting aside all the abstractions and labels, my final point is that the relationship between the elites and the people should be like a good traditional patriarchal marriage, with a genuine and mutually reciprocated appreciation, loyalty, and service.

If that exists, then you can call it a monarchy, a dictatorship, a president-for-life, a poobah, or a prime minister.


Alexis Tsipras is the prototype for polished, well-funded controlled opposition. Tsipras helped neutralize serious threats to Jewish banking and western financial interests. These threats from the populist left might have endangered the entire EU and globalist project. If you compare Alex Tsipras to Illias Kasidiaris, Kasidiaris is much less polished. The difference is an example of the dynamic you’re taking about.


Tsipras’ private school table manners have an appeal to certain rubes and bourgeois types, but Kasidiaris’ bluntness and insistence at striking at evil without compromise inspires masses much more in these revolutionary times.This is the dichotomy the “Right” in America (paleo-conservatives and certain types of “traditionalists” like the Israel-pandering capitalist cucks at ‘Tradition, Family, and Property’) cannot grasp, probably because the latter requires being open to a “Socialist” theory of politics, that yes, the people can carry you to victory.

As social-nationalists/third positionists, we need to spend more time building substance rather than “respectability”. We also need to tweak our radars and be on the look out for the next Marine Le Pen or Alexis Tsipras running game on the public with the Jew’s media as their wingman. The polished turd is so compelling to vacuous people that even individuals on the “Alt-Right” were seduced by Alexis Tsipras’ lies, knowing full well he was a guilty establishment cultural Marxist.


God forbid we ever experience a “populist uprising.” The masses, especially the American masses, are the last people I want dictating social goals.


Who should be dictating social goals then, the pseudo-science of worthless kikes Rothbard and Mises? Self-chosen elites of capitalism? Men of the cloth, like Pope Francis? All of these groups had their turn and blew it. The folk are the only ones who haven’t, how could it be any worse?

I suppose this is where I part ways with the elitist-type of traditionalists on the internet. I would’ve much rather lived in working + middle class controlled Third Reich than in the white glove queer, Jewish, millionaire, and clerical coalition that ran the failed state known as Engelbert Dollfuss’s Austria.


Wait, wait… the “folk” haven’t blown it? According to what metric? The “folk” are slogging down sugar, shooting up insulin, and vegging out to football. They get what they deserve.

I believe in equality of dignity (we’re all made in the image of God), but certainly *not* in the equality of abilities and aptitudes. The “folk” are the *last* people who ought to be governing anyone, including themselves.


The people you speak of are not running things, they are imprisoned in this consumer capitalist system.

I don’t believe in the equality of abilities and aptitude either. I think objectively, the rancher and the craftsman are wiser and more honorable than the currency speculator and the ‘Kennedy’ in respects to the direction society ought to take.

Who do you think ought to run society, you and your extended family?


Regardless of whom Shotgun thinks ought to be running the world, my point of disagreement with you (probably because of our differences with respect to theology), is that social systems are powerless to mold and shape people.

If you believe that, then you share a foundational assumption with the alchemists and communists.

God alone shapes the heart of man, not education initiatives, drugs, psychotropic therapy, or systems of government.


As for me, I believe aristocrats ought to govern their locales. Those who have the means of production, the land, and ability to create the “good life” for themselves. Aristocrats (and monied interests) who have a theologian beside their throne, advising them.

I’m not fond of modernists who simply disagree with their Marxist brethren about the system of government we ought to have. I’m not fond of social justice warriors who simply disagree with their anarchist brethren about aesthetics and a few minor points of political theory.


“Regardless of whom Shotgun thinks ought to be running the world, my
point of disagreement with you (probably because of our differences with
respect to theology), is that social systems are powerless to mold and
shape people.

If you believe that, then you share a foundational assumption with the alchemists and communists.”

The direction of society is steered by organized groups of people. Men are generally accepted to be 50% biological, with the expression of this biology being 50% conditional. Communist 1970’s East Germany was as or more morally conservative than its Catholic Bavarian equivalent in many ways, and the legacy of this is seen today with East Germans rising up against the third world invasion while West German cultural Marxists and even clergy are endorsing throwing elderly people and working families out of their homes to replace them with foreign “refugees”.

The post Cold War Warsaw Pact communists, right or wrong on most things, organized society around collectivist principles. The West, including some of the different Churches who sided with Team America against the Soviets, engineered society to loosen and break the “Authoritarian personalities” collectivism creates, and instead replace them with atomized hyper-individualists looking for an identity in sodomy or consumerist pop culture.

“God alone shapes the heart of man, not education initiatives, drugs, psychotropic therapy, or systems of government.”

This is just National Review-style “conservatism” with religious drapes. Even if we were going to argue from a theological perspective, which you’re right I don’t share, the catechumen process is a confirmation of what you seem to be dismissive about.

“As for me, I believe aristocrats ought to govern their
locales. Those who have the means of production, the land, and ability
to create the “good life” for themselves. Aristocrats (and monied
interests) who have a theologian beside their throne, advising them.”

Then prepare to be overthrown by Bolsheviks. You’re essentially saying you support plutocracy as long as there’s a priest around to bless it.

If we lived in a feudal society, your system would make sense, everyone works their piece of land and reaps what they sow: perfect meritocracy. In the current stage of human development, however, things are way more complicated than that.

“I’m not fond of modernists who simply disagree with their
Marxist brethren about the system of government we ought to have. I’m
not fond of social justice warriors who simply disagree with their
anarchist brethren about aesthetics and a few minor points of political

I am equally not fond of classical liberals trying to synthesize their conservatism with Jesus, IE, Calvinists whose rationalization of usury and capitalism ushered in the era of Jewish power. I’m definitely not fond of country club elitists that think society should be organized based on name and arbitrary rank rather than objective merit.


I don’t know man… it seems like you take a naive “swipe” at history from a perspective I’m not fond of. Instead of going through and correcting you on each and every point, I’ll just say that, as long as we’re voicing our “druthers”: you can enjoy your National Socialist utopia without me.

…I’ll find a hypothetical medieval society and sit back on the plantation while watching your technocracy implode.


I don’t want technocracy per se, but I won’t condemn every single modern innovation or idea as evil either. Modernity does not exist in a vacuum and it isn’t autonomous, it is a tool that can serve to subvert morality and mankind, but it can also be used to reaffirm our heritage, or tradition, or God’s grace, or however your worldview conceptualizes the forces guiding man and society.

And by the way, the Nationalsocialists drew great inspiration from positive aspects of Medieval society, such as Walter Darre’s updated version of the tenant farmer system (but also shared aspects with collective farming) that was very successful. All I say is that things aren’t black and white, and that not every single tradition is self-evidently valuable or above critique.

I get the feeling that you lean towards romanticism or nostalgia at the exclusion of being down to earth. Who says you’re going to be the one drinking lemonade watching others toil on the plantation? You could be in for a surprise when the society you believe will be your dream come true ends up resembling Pol Pot’s Cambodia in its 21st century adaptation.


Let me know how the “people” treat you once they magically revolt. I love my terra and will labor on it, in it, and around it, even if it’s not required..if that’s my “surprise”, then so be it. At least it’s not a guillotine.

You and I have different worldviews; yours smells very bad to me…but I’m just a stick-in-the-mud romantic and my worldview has never been attractive to the midlanders.


I don’t see why you’re not fond of my perspective. I don’t base my views on theology, but I don’t see how dreaming about overseeing a plantation can possibly be reconciled with the Beatitudes either.

Todd Lewis

Since your sympathetic to national socialism in what way would your alternative be similar or dissimilar to historical national socialism?

Fr. John+

Shotgun, YOU get on the Donald’s Cabinet- you can be Minister of Verbal/Poetic culture, and someone gifted in this area, could be Minister of Music/Liturgical Culture- hmmmm. lol.

Matt H. can be minister of War. Yeah, that’s the ticket….

Oh, and Ann Coulter can be “the Stephanapoulos” for Trump. Or Ambassador of Israel’s ‘award’ of $3-6 billion, annually- NOT. [STAMP!] Stopping that gaping fiscal wound… now, that would be an ‘Economy boost,’ right there. Yup.


Don’t forget the sleepers that have been with the Alt Right from the beginning. They have been pretending, working, earning credibility. They will step forward for leadership at the crucial time when one path will politically organise the movement along the lines of founding principles and another path will politically organise along the lines of the misdirection.
Europe was strong when it was a Christendom – when there was a unity of Church and state. The Church was the foundation and order of the ethno state. It was the Church that anointed kings. Government [ which had a representative / democratic element ] had to legislate on the basis of Christ law and the social teachings of the Church. The Bretton Parliament, for example, the oldest democratic and self governing parliament in the world was strong because it was guaranteed by the French monarchy. [ Destroyed by the Jewish/masonic French Revolution and the Bretton language itself outlawed for centuries ]
It was the Christendom that successfully repelled the Muslim invasion from the East and fought the Reconquista in the West. It was the Christendom that made war on the Kaliphate in the Middle East in order to reclaim nations that formerly had been the Christian East in Byzantium. It was the Christendom that placed the synagogue and the Jewish state within a state under laws crafted to restrain their predations upon the Gentile population.

Matt Parrott

Agreed about sleepers, and agreed again about the power of Christ.

Though we must remain clear-eyed about the infiltration of the Church and approach secular nationalists as brothers in need of patience and eventual conversion rather than as opponents or infiltrators.

The Church will play a huge role in our eventual victory, but only if we stay wise to the serpents in it who are wolves among their flock.


Church policy was pretty soft on Jews. According to traditional Catholic E. Michael Jones, the Papal States were where Jews ran off to when they would eventually get chased out by peasants and kings throughout Europe for their abuses during the 13th century on (it’s in the Jewish Revolutionary Spirit). He even admits that it was often for monetary reasons, E.G., the Church needed loans from Jews to fund certain projects.

The main purpose of any Church is to exist and worship, which is why they are expected to Render unto Caesar. Consolidating this fact with revolutionary politics is difficult if not impossible as Charles Maurras learned. That’s not to say people can’t be influenced by Christian principles, or that you can’t find very good priests and nuns that support us in mostly the Orthodox Church, but these institutions in their state right now won’t do anything but often cut off their own noses in spite of their face.

Fr. John+

Catholics are not Christian. NOT TODAY. They are a cult, and the Orthodox know it, and have known it for centuries. The purpose of the Church is NOT to ‘merely worship’ but to BUILD THE KINGDOM.

Golden Dawn has strong Ethno-Orthodox elements, as has been noted, even though this is a column from three years ago, buried in the archives, because NOT seen by a Jew, nor written by one, it would appear— but it’s THERE.

Your comment about a ‘rough, not polished’ nativist candidate sure seems to fit The Donald. Perhaps that is why he is so popular, and so feared by the Slick CUCKS of the RINO-sphere. That, and his billions- which must infuriate the Deicides as much as Mel Gibson’s $30 Million take on ‘Passion of the Christ.’

“I have no special insight into whether he’ll blow it within the next few weeks or whether he’ll be a wildly popular two term President. What I do know is that where Trump’s at right now won’t be populist enough or identitarian enough to satisfy the Zeitgeist in the future, just as the Ron Paul and Tea Party movements are now quietly eroding back into the sea of political irrelevance.”

Jack Spratt

In Greece Golden Dawn just missed their chance to the opposition party thanks to more than 3% of the Greeks being dumb enough to vote for ANEL. Going into a coalition with SYRIZA wasn’t enough of a tip off that they’re controlled?

It’s like Marine Le Pen attacking Golden Dawn and praising SYRIZA. Controlled opposition always attacks to the right and often tries to collaborate with the Left.


Most people who might be open to resistance or major social change don’t make a career or a fanatically dedicated hobby out of following these issues. It’s takes a bit of time and dedication to see through the miasma of propaganda and get to the core issues. Seeing through the fog requires time, effort and dedication most people can’t commit to because they’re busy. The other side takes full advantage of that fact which makes it relatively easy to dupe people who might resist into following dead-ends.

Marine LePen makes me want to throw up. The National Front in its current form is THE prototype for effective controlled opposition from right just as Syriza and Tsipras are from the left.


Ok Matt Parrott, I’m officially declaring you my favorite writer in the movement at this point in our nation’s history. You’ve been banging out one incredibly well-written piece after another, and I continue to be very impressed. I’m especially proud of the fact that you are of my generation, and that your attitudes and views reflect all the complexities and nuances of the experiences of this generation, which is something the late Dr. Pierce, among others, would never have been able to understand. I think you’re well on the way to becoming one of the intellectual “big guns” of the entire history of our movement in the United States. Keep doing exactly what you’ve been doing brother, and never give up!

ps mike

Roosh refers to the “banning” of free speech on FB and the like. Well, my FB account was indeed disabled last night over my vehement support of Ann Coulter calling out the jews by name. I have been using FB and openly attacking jews for a while. I was not entirely surprised. I was told this would happen by a few friends. Well, it finally did.

Leave a Reply