In cumulative memory, the alt-right has not clarified to its audience and adherents what the “alt-” in alt-right connotes. In 2015 the movement was more inclined towards classical civilization as per the parameters of pre-Christian Europe or the classical liberalism of the Enlightenment. Over time the alt-right has become an explicitly white nationalist crusade drawing adherents from post-libertarian nationalism and filter bubble post-ironicism.
In metaphysical terms, the challenge facing the right is much greater than the often-fixated-upon Marxism, a paradigm which has diverted the right into a Pyrrhic conflict over the semantics of historical materialism. The centralization inherent within Marxism and libertarian decentralization are two sides of the same philosophical coin: Rene Descartes’ mind-body dualism (dualistic materialism).
To confound matters, straightforward asceticism or anti-materialism falls within the paradigm of linear materialism itself; analogous to the manner in which anti-theism fails to resolve theism–or explain its semantic value. If the right desires to claim any authority over a nation and its destiny, the right must resolve philosophical materialism itself. By engaging with the left on a linguistic (linear) platform the right has given the left license to further appropriate the agency of an unwitting populace. In order to sublimate the material, the right must rectify its relationship with the metaphysical.
Contravening monotheism–the notion that all domains of human existence (material and experiential) defer to a linguistic protocol of centralized origin–is anathema to fascism’s experiential origins. Hitler esteemed Hinduism and longed to return Europe to an esoteric paganism in which the Aryan race occupied the highest caste. The Italian futurist movement that preceded German fascism anticipated postmodernism and the information age as the afterbirth of modernism; and sought protection in the cyclical time of baroqe (polytheistic) aesthetics.
Consistent with fascism’s tenet of the aesthetic divine, Max Stirner framed a paradigm of individualist anarchism, which culminated in Friedrich Nietzsche’s creation of the Ubermensch; a nihilistic individual who would embody powers of divine stoicism. The impact of the Ubermensch was not exclusive to fascist aestheticism, however; and in 1960, Israeli political scientist J. L. Talmon delineated a role for the anarcho-monarchist in his theory of totalitarian democracy–a messianic reconciliation of German fascism and Zionism. In the anarcho-monarchist, the divine anti-monarch or Ubermensch and the messiah unite in a Hegelian synthesis–a Bane who becomes the Batman; a demon who makes his own Faustian bargain, an antithesis who becomes–of his own volition–the synthesis. In comparatively religious terms, the anarcho-monarchist unites the polytheistic paradigm of divinity with its monotheistic counterpart.
Enter the Meta-right: an alt-alt-right movement that specifies the orientation of mind-body dualism (philosophical materialism) within the guidelines of metaphysical nihilism
The meta-right posits that fascism was founded on the implicit observation by Mussolini and his contemporaries that Western aesthetics resolves (synthesizes) itself in Eastern esotericism–in purely aesthetic terms, fascism is a synthesis of neo-traditionalism and retrofuturism. Furthermore, that the discrete, low-context (linear) nature of Indo-European language may mangle and pervert the aesthetic, or cyclical, nature of fascism. Fascism belongs in the realm of the aesthetic–not the realm of linguistically-framed political theory. The dangers propounded by this caveat were exemplified by the European victims of the theater of World War Two and the saga of the Jewish (and non-Jewish) Holocaust.
The observation that a recursive or self-referencing aesthetic taste unites the right can be confirmed anecdotally. One who spends a requisite amount of time in the alt-right may notice that Traditionalists who state a goal of returning to the pre-modern era exhibit an affinity for electro-industrial or retrofuturist aesthetics. Since recursion through linear time is not physically possible, the desire to recurse is correctly understood as spiritual and metaphysical. We cannot travel to the past materially (there is no putting the genie back in the bottle); but we can return aesthetically and metaphysically. The recursion or self-actualization of the true nature of the right lies in a Hegelian synthesis of physical consciousness and Nietzschean nihilism; of language and aesthetics; of the glory and dignity of the past rectified with the highest promises of the future.
That is to say: If Nietzsche is the answer to Descartes, then Hegel is the answer to Nietzsche.