Print this post Print this post

Identitarians in the Sandbox

1,437 words

farage-trumpAn interesting segment from the Rachel Maddow Show aired recently. In the clip, Maddow seemed beside herself with wonder at the presence of UKIP’s Nigel Farage at a Donald Trump rally in Mississippi. Calling UKIP “racist” and “neo-Fascist” because of their opposition to mass immigration, she opined that the idea of Farage being relevant to US voters is ridiculous, since only a “radical fringe” of people would even care about the issues he is associated with. Talking about UKIP and mass immigration to the UK in American politics is, Maddow exasperatingly declared, not just evil and racist but also “kooky” and bizarre — as irrelevant and random as “getting up and preaching quadratic equations.” While she strained to suggest that the Republicans in the crowd didn’t know who Farage was (which is certainly false), what comes off in the clip is basically indignation and frustration at American conservatives looking up to the anti-EU and anti-immigration British icon.

While Maddow is famous for her Left-wing credentials and certainly represents that side of the already Progressive mainstream media, the spectacle, in its sense of frustration and “how could they be so stupid” condescension, is actually most reminiscent of a group traditionally held to be at the other end of the US political spectrum. For Maddow’s performance almost perfectly matched in tone the many similar exhibitions and articles this year by Bush-era neocons discussing the topic of Russia and Vladimir Putin’s place in this same presidential election.

Those cable news diatribes, and National Review op-eds, have exhibited the same combination of head-scratching wonder, disdain, and steadily-accumulating rage as we see in the Maddow clip. In them, the various members of the Podhoretz/Wolfowitz/Rumsfeld contingent bemoan the unfolding shift within the Republican Primary electorate toward disinterest — or even sympathy — regarding Russia.

As Trump — on the campaign trail — continued to speak about Russia in more and more realistic, open-minded, and ultimately positive terms, it was clear that the GOP voter base embracing him was no longer thinking in the Russophobic manner neocons take for granted. These Primary voters did not view Putin as the evil Bond super-villain Mitt Romney referenced four years previously, when he said Russia was America’s biggest geopolitical threat.  Neither did they seem to reflexively identify Russia with communism and Stalin and historical atrocities. Nor did their actions and comments and answers to polling questions suggest any real existential fear of the vast Eurasian country.

The neocons were beside themselves with anger and indignation. Long accustomed to fomenting Russia-hatred at will, they must have wondered why their alchemy was failing. “Don’t they understand that Russia must be brought to heel?” the neocons must have asked themselves. “Putin deposed, the economy opened, the culture enlightened, with mass immigration and transgenderism for all? After all, its capitalism and freedom and that’s what America is all about, and we have never failed to exploit their patriotism before.”

We can see the parallel with Maddow quite clearly. “Why would these redneck Republicans care about Nigel Farage?” one can see her wondering. “He is British and they are American. Mississippi and Britain are half a world away from each other. And why would they care if Britain is overrun by immigrants anyway? After all, that’s only diversity and diversity is progress and progress is strength. To think otherwise is racist, and we’ve always been able to exploit their fear of being called racist before.”

But whether or not Maddow was stumped by Farage’s presence or just posturing, his speech on that stage in Mississippi is of great significance, as is her response, and the responses of the neocons over Russia’s place in the election.

For Maddow and the neocons clearly want Republican voters to see things through the old lenses they are used to looking though. They are applying lenses, or paradigms, of Nation (in the case of the neocons), or at best Culture (in the case of Maddow), to what should more accurately be called questions of Identity. And as Vox Day recently put on paper, “Identity > Culture > Politics.”

Just two or three decades ago most White Americans still thought in explicitly national terms. They were America and America was them. A threat to one was a threat to both. As a result, other nation-states such as Russia were very naturally positioned as enemies. Even in my childhood I believe this was still the case. Indeed as a little kid I would play with toy soldiers out in the dirt for hours upon hours in a manner that proclaimed this very fact. One little plastic army was America, and one side was our enemies. On any given day they might be Chinese or Japanese or WWII Germans, but more than anything they were Russian. The opposing sides would square off from dirt clods to flower boxes, porch steps to rock formations, and engage in glorious battles to decide the fates of their nation-states. Identity and Nationality were in perfect congruence.

That is no longer the case today, however. There has been a radical transformation in the last twenty years. Mass immigration and multiculturalism have turned the idea of a Western nation-state on its head. In our current system, or at least the one we are moving towards, a nation-state is no more than a random collection of people from all over the world, speaking different languages, worshipping different Gods, and living according to different cultural mores. The idea of the U.S., or any Western European country, still representing a single “shared honor group” is becoming ridiculous. Indeed, all around us we are besieged by the forced breakdown of any and all “shared honor groups.” Rather than extended tribes, modern Western states are — through mass immigration and globalization — becoming more like the multinational corporations they prop up, and the citizenry of such nations are at best like shareholders and at worst like products or assets — shifted from one place to another to ensure the proper (Progressive) political parties win elections, and that the multinational corporations have cheap labor. The Rachel Maddows and neocons are the mouthpieces through which the vast mechanism is presented as normal.

As a result, it is of course quite natural for GOP Primary voters to embrace Nigel Farage. For Farage squared off against the globalist powers opposing the Brexit vote and triumphed. Even if only symbolically, the vote dealt a massive blow to these forces, and their twin engines of Progressivism and Multinational Corporatism. For any person of any race wishing to live in a united, somewhat homogenous, culturally unified country, Nigel Farage is therefore a hero.

The same logic dictates the question of Putin, and why GOP Primary voters have warmed up to him in a manner that seems so inexplicable to many pundits. Yet the reasons for it should be equally clear, for Russia, unlike America and Western Europe, is still pretty similar to the nation it was 50 years ago. Sure the political landscape has changed dramatically, and the former Soviet borders have receded, but culturally, racially, and linguistically, it is in every way the same country. And with that being the case, it is also much closer in identity to the nations these GOP Primary voters used to live in.

Indeed when they look at Russia today, they see a land they can relate to. They see people much more like them than many they run into every day in their own countries. From a perspective of identity, they are beginning to relate more to Russia than to their own rapidly changing lands. This is a powerful concept, and as changes to Western Europe and the United States ramp up, its implications are of profound importance.

Few if any would have predicted this, and thus the example of my toy army guys referenced earlier is doubly relevant. For as a child, I eventually grew so obsessed with my fictitious toy battles, and the hypothetical conflicts I could make them represent, that I would beg my parents to buy me books on geopolitics and war. They complied, but I was too young to really understand them. I have no doubt however, that they would never have predicted the world we see today, and the new fault lines that are forming. The world is shifting, and one must ask: When little army men square off in American and European sandboxes tomorrow, just what forces will they represent?

About the Author

Julian Langness is the author of Fistfights With Muslims In Europe: One Man’s Journey Through Modernity. He writes about European politics, 4th Generation Warfare, masculinity, society, and identity. He is also the editor of






If you enjoyed this piece, and wish to encourage more like it, give a tip through Paypal. You can earmark your tip directly to the author or translator, or you can put it in a general fund. (Be sure to specify which in the "Add special instructions to seller" box at Paypal.)
This entry was posted in North American New Right and tagged , , , , , , , , , . Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.


  1. Old Sarge
    Posted September 3, 2016 at 3:15 pm | Permalink

    I was in the USAF 1974-1994. I spent 8 of those years servicing Tactical and Strategic nuclear weapons. I never hated Russians. I felt sorry for them. I was aware of what the murdering Marxist regime had done to them. When we crashed their economy and the USSR died the MSM lied about how bad conditions were for them. It was much worse than most people know. We failed to help them get back on their feet and made things worse for them. For the first time in my life I was ashamed of my country. I still remember every detail of my sudden awakening…

    The NWO hates Putin because he cares about his people, culture and heritage. The ultimate sin in the eyes of our owners and masters.

  2. Robert Pinkerton
    Posted September 3, 2016 at 11:25 am | Permalink

    Tsar Vladimir’s Russia is not the Soviet Union.

    Many if not most top-tier Neo-“conservatives” are Jewish. Bad blood between the Russian People and the Jewish People has historic depth.

    Many top-tier Neo-“conservatives” started their political lives as Trotskyists. When Russia, as the Soviet Union, was a Holy See of Marxism, Trotskyism might have been a heresy, but it was still Marxism. When the Soviet Union fell, Russia sloughed off Marxism. This leads me to the stab-in-the-dark guess that Believers who have retained scraps of the Faith (the Neo-cons), bear animus against outright apostates (Russia).

  3. T
    Posted September 2, 2016 at 5:13 pm | Permalink

    I wrote a paper in college, 91, predicting that the US and Russia were on course to swap places. Them becoming freer. Us drifting into a socialist police state. Sadly, it seems so today.

  4. James O'Meara
    Posted September 2, 2016 at 11:16 am | Permalink

    There’s a low-level cable show called “World’s Dumbest [topic]” in which D-celebs (Tonya Harding, Todd Bridges, for ex.) and no-name comedians make jokes about internet clips. An awful lot of clips of epic road rage, dumb stunts (jumping off buildings and landing crotch-first on fences) etc. seem to emanate from Russia and the ex-Soviet region.

    Frank Stallone, whom we all recall for his disco song stylings in Stayin’ Alive and Scarface, regularly adopts a Sylvester Stallone/Rambo persona for his comments, which usually include American flags blue-screened behind him, and consist largely of “Russians are so fucking dumb” rants. Usually other celebs are intercut showing reactions of horror, amusement, bewilderment at Frank’s intensity of hatred. It seems it’s intended as a parody of old-time patriotism, a la Johnny Carson’s Floyd R. Turbo, American.

    I think it illustrates both the previous attitude, of Us vs. Them, as well as the media message that “only morons still think like this.” That is simultaneously does this while insinuating that Russians are, in fact, stupid makes it brilliantly include the anti-Putin meme as well.

  5. Dashui
    Posted September 2, 2016 at 9:08 am | Permalink

    What happens if Hillary is elected and starts agitating against Russia?

    • James Alexander
      Posted September 2, 2016 at 4:33 pm | Permalink

      We start learning Russian.

      • WP
        Posted September 3, 2016 at 7:32 pm | Permalink


        If there is a war in the near future, the Russian Armed Forces will be fighting for the Motherland, Traditional Family Values, and the Orthodox Faith. NATO and the Americans will be fighting for Gay Marriage, Black Lives Matter, and the Almighty Dollar… which side do You think is going to trounce the other?

        For many, the one Russian phrase that you should how learn to speak passably is “Is there a place in your Army for foreign volunteers?”

  6. nineofclubs
    Posted September 2, 2016 at 3:25 am | Permalink

    In the 20th century, the greatest threat to nations, institutions and tradition was other nations, institutions and traditions. In the 21st century, the greatest threat to nations and institutions are the internationalist elite. This elite includes (the worst) elements of the former left and right. Bringing together the nationalist elements of the left and right will ensure that nations have a fighting chance against the new elite.


    Kindle Subscription
  • EXSURGO Apparel

    Our Titles

    Confessions of a Reluctant Hater (2nd ed.)

    The Hypocrisies of Heaven

    Waking Up from the American Dream

    Green Nazis in Space!

    Truth, Justice, and a Nice White Country

    Heidegger in Chicago

    The End of an Era

    Sexual Utopia in Power

    What is a Rune? & Other Essays

    Son of Trevor Lynch's White Nationalist Guide to the Movies

    The Lightning & the Sun

    The Eldritch Evola

    Western Civilization Bites Back

    New Right vs. Old Right

    Lost Violent Souls

    Journey Late at Night: Poems and Translations

    The Non-Hindu Indians & Indian Unity

    Baader Meinhof ceramic pistol, Charles Kraaft 2013

    Jonathan Bowden as Dirty Harry

    The Lost Philosopher, Second Expanded Edition

    Trevor Lynch's A White Nationalist Guide to the Movies

    And Time Rolls On

    The Homo & the Negro

    Artists of the Right

    North American New Right, Vol. 1

    Forever and Ever

    Some Thoughts on Hitler

    Tikkun Olam and Other Poems

    Under the Nihil

    Summoning the Gods

    Hold Back This Day

    The Columbine Pilgrim

    Confessions of a Reluctant Hater

    Taking Our Own Side

    Toward the White Republic

    Distributed Titles

    Tyr, Vol. 4


    The Node


    Carl Schmitt Today

    A Sky Without Eagles

    The Way of Men

    Generation Identity

    Nietzsche's Coming God

    The Conservative

    The New Austerities

    Convergence of Catastrophes


    Proofs of a Conspiracy

    Fascism viewed from the Right

    Notes on the Third Reich

    Morning Crafts

    New Culture, New Right

    The Fourth Political Theory

    Can Life Prevail?

    The Metaphysics of War

    Fighting for the Essence

    The Arctic Home in the Vedas

    Asatru: A Native European Spirituality

    The Shock of History

    The Prison Notes

    Sex and Deviance


    On the Brink of the Abyss

    Beyond Human Rights

    A Handbook of Traditional Living

    Why We Fight

    The Problem of Democracy


    The Path of Cinnabar


    The Lost Philosopher

    Impeachment of Man

    Gold in the Furnace


    The Passing of a Profit & Other Forgotten Stories

    Revolution from Above