Grzegorz Braun and some woman with coloured hair

Dagon Always Swims Right - Why the left has never won and never will

By VVoytila | Comments on Culture | 9 Jul 2022

There is a monstrous myth among so called rightists around the world that the left is a spectre than knows nothing of retreat. It encroaches upon the ancient regime, upon healthy society and, though stopped by oppressive katechons for a decade or two, ultimately wins small victory after small victory to arrive at a GloboHomo dystopia that all ambitious people dread. Such a view is a perspective on history that the right shares entirely with the left, which has given much attention to the legend that its own victory is inevitable. Buying into that myth can well be regarded as the death knell of any right wing political movement - why resist that which will be ultimately victorious? While well grounded in the authority of leftie gurus such as Hegel, Marx, Voltaire or Rousseau, the notion that 'social progress' is somehow inevitable, this is simply not the case when you look back in time.

So in the late 18th century some radical thinkers came up with the idea that only the material world matters because its the only one you can see and hence we should ensure that everyone gets more than enough to fill their cakehole and work as little as possible. Paternity of children should be concealed from everyone, private property should cease to exist, institutions such as marriage should be dissolved and so on and so forth. The rabid ravings of dangerous lunatics became socially acceptable enough to inspire political movement and by political movement is meant mass murder of people for their perceived social standing. This happened in France and is known as the French Revolution (though this term more readily applies to a period of change rather than just some state-terrorist episode, but I digress). Over two hundred years later the heirs of the original lefties call for taxing the rich more than the poor. If this is progress it really seems to be progress of reason rather than laziness. Over the last two hundred years the right seems to have civilised the left. Cutting out the heart of your dead daughter and eating (Babeuf) seems less offensive than ordering a beer during lockdown (Starmer). Just as taxing people more when they have more seems more reasonable than cutting off people's heads with a massive falling shard of steel if they are caught consulting a watch.

Mental illness naturally comes up with many ways to be a destructive force, some so creative they easily corrupt the curious youth and become weaponised by power-hungry leftists who can only thrive on the discord generated by a cleft. The splendid idea of mutilating manipulated minors, for example, has found advocacy with some established 'left-wing' movements. This does not mean the left in the traditional sense is in any way more robust, if anything it shows that they have become desperate and the only way they can bring about communism is by hyping up a social fissure that is numerically insignificant compared to the antagonism between manual and rural labourers and financial elites in the past. Communism only had a field day because it:
a) was financed by external state actors in order to destabilise other states, see Lenin being sent to Russia with two million marks in gold  in 1917, much like islamic terrorism financed by America to harm the Soviets in Afghanistan,
b) became the ideology justifying the struggle against late colonialism in Africa and Asia, with doctrinaires such as Patrice Lumumba and Ho Chi Minh being communist by circumstance (discussions of the authenticity of their convictions aside, we can apply the favourite Marxist notion of basis and superstructure to posit that their socioeconomic circumstance made them communist)
c) continues to be the ideology of choice for spoiled brats who never worked a day in their lives and subconsciously want it to remain that way, but want to combine this yearning with a healthy rebellion against their doting parents who supplied them with the calories necessary to grow fat in body and spirit, nourishing the cancer of communism.

That's it. The great iceberg of leftism cannot boast anything that would not have occurred outside of normal historical processes. Wage renegotiation? Better labour conditions? We had a similar change after labour became more scarce after the Black Death and sure enough, Marxist historians actually claim the 1381 peasant revolt to be a proto-Marxist movement. Well, if you had a revolution back in the late 14th century and needed another one in the late 18th and both were allegedly victorious in their struggle against feudalism, maybe what you call a revolution is not as harmful in the long term as you think it is, brutal murders of better off people and looting aside. It seems at this pace we might have to wait to the early 23rd century to witness another communist revolt against the monarchy of house Musk, though if we are to take the adage that history does not repeat but rhymes literally, even that would be a plot by the immortal Emperor Besos, by no means a communist. 

The left as it started has already lost. Marxism, by diluting itself with other deranged materialisms, has simply marginalised itself as an ideology of opposition to the power that is, usually called capitalism. The perceived power of the left over the centuries, a spectre that induces trembling in historically naive right-wingers, is merely a different, trivial factor masquerading as Red Scare. (Something economists call a confounding variable, I think.) We have witnessed not the progress of communism but the progress of atheism and materialism, which go hand in hand. While classical Marxism is irreconcilable with capitalism (whatever that means), other materialisms are and so a nominally right wing movement which is not spiritual may well adopt a homosexual harassment culture as a means of securing loyalty and deciding advancement in a party (see the Tories). The old left is dead and achieved nothing. Its skin has been peeled off and is currently being worn by people so insane they are a danger only in as far as they can convince others to be like them, for their lifestyle is so decidedly unhealthy it cuts their life expectancy almost in half. The right, in absence of spiritual guidance to the contrary, has decided to bend over for the loonies as long as they remain the bank in Monopoly. That's Hegelian dialectics for you, but in this case there is no spirit of the times except the culture of presumed hedonism derived from a silent autheism (autism+atheism). Don't believe me? A quick though experiment. Imagine Britain became 100% Muslim overnight. Suddenly, everyone sees the light and bows to Islam. Do you suppose politics would remain unchanged? No, the discussion would soon shift to how many lashes you should get for drinking beer vs. vodka. A turn to the right no doubt. The decline of the right is simply the decline of spirituality, not some victory by a supposedly consistent and coherent international cabal of lefties. Cthulhu may always swim left, but he is not in his element. Under water, Dagon is king and he slowly swims in the opposite direction.

How do you rate this article?



I love Christ.

Comments on Culture
Comments on Culture

Comments on Culture Comments on Culture

Send a $0.01 microtip in crypto to the author, and earn yourself as you read!

20% to author / 80% to me.
We pay the tips from our rewards pool.