The Russian collusion debate was straight-forward to begin with. The Clinton campaign accused the Russians of hacking the DNC’s email account in order to embarrass the Democrats and swing the election to Trump. That was their explanation for Hillary’s loss.
Progressives had good reason to reject this argument, but it seems to me they’ve stopped paying attention. Although the investigation has uncovered plenty of troubling behavior by Donald Trump and his associates, we’re stuck on the possibility of Hillary Clinton foisting herself into the White House. The continued refusal to consider Mueller’s evidence begins to look like a defense of the 2016 election results.
There are good reasons to be suspicious of establishment fear-mongering, but it’s important to consider the evidence in each case. Otherwise while we’re busy fighting the neoliberal agenda we might ignore an agenda every bit as hostile to the progressive cause. I’m thinking of the rise of the alt-right in the United States and its apparent ties to the current administration.
American racism has increased with the election of Donald Trump, but the rise of White Nationalism represents racism of a different sort. It is legitimate to be alarmed about national security when presented with evidence of ties between Donald Trump, the White Nationalist movement, the European New Right, and Alexander Putin.
As it happens, the neocons are not the only ones forming think tanks and crafting ambitious plans for the world. According to an article in New Dawn Magazine, geopolitical groups have also been at work in Europe, laying the groundwork for the Eurasian agenda. That was the claim made by Romanian-born journalist and author, Jean Parvulesco (1929-2010), who compared the policies of these groups to the neoconservative Project for a New American Century. Parvulesco was influenced by the perennialist Traditionallism of Rene Guenon and Julius Evola, and was also associated with the European New Right.
“It is the confrontation of our imperial and catholic [universal] doctrines with the current political historical reality…which will see the final emergence of the catholic Great Empire which constitutes our ultimate objective, the Imperium Ultimum, the Regnum Sanctum, which should comport, in principle, three operational stages….
“The first stage was to be the creation of a Paris Berlin-Moscow axis that is considered to be the axis along which this major change will occur. This axis will tie together the destiny of three nations (France, Germany and Russia).
“The second stage is the integration of what was traditionally known as West and East Europe, together with Russia, Siberia, India and Japan.
“The final stage involves what is termed the destruction of the ‘global democratic conspiracy,’ led by the United States, including a revolutionary liberation of its people, after which America as a whole (North and South) will become one entity. We can only wonder whether the present drive by the US to expand NAFTA and create a North American Union are steps in this direction.”
There are a disturbing number of similarities between the ideas of the European New Right and the American Right. Parvulesco anticipates the death of the ‘democratic system’ of political correctness—political correctness is a pet peeve of Donald Trump. Parvulesco predicted that the United States will self-destruct in a second civil war due to irreconcilable differences between the liberal community and the archconservative religious community—conservative leaders in the US have spoken of the possibility of a civil war.
Parvulesco’s geopolitical model for what he had in mind was the sudden collapse of the Soviet Union. He thought it demonstrated that powerful empires can disappear from one day to the next, requiring a new society and structure to be built from the ground upwards. At the same time, he argued that the Soviet Union’s collapse was not as sudden as it appeared. The public collapse was merely the revelation of a death that had already occurred. This is what he believed would happen to Europe. “The collapse of ‘democratic Europe’ has already taken place, and all that is left is the public acceptance of this fact and the beginning of a new Europe.” And he also thought he knew what would replace it. His idea of a new Europe was the ‘Eurasian Empire of the End Times,’ and its symbol was Vladimir Putin.
Lately, we see the same choices playing out in the United States. For some, it is obvious that American democracy is worth protecting. Many of them supported Bernie Sanders in 2016. For others, who also call themselves progressives, the capitalist system at the basis of American democracy is finished. This faction did everything it could in 2016 to distract Sanders voters with a third-party candidate and to promote inane advice like, ‘vote your conscience’. They failed to mention that your conscience will have no say at all in what happens after the collapse. Could it be that they are closer to the imperialists of both the Left and the Right than they are to Bernie Sanders’ supporters?
Another article in the same magazine speaks of the part that Jean Parvulesco played in acquainting the world with the visions of French esotericist Raymond Abellio. Abellio and Jean Parvulesco are identified in this article as two prominent French esotericists who visualized and tried to implement a roadmap for what Europe – and the Western world as a whole – should become. “It is a future where the real role of the Priory of Sion comes into its own.”
The name ‘Raymond Abellio’ is the pseudonym of Georges Soulès (1907-1986). In 1942, Georges Soulès became secretary general of the MSR (Mouvement Social Rèvolutionnaire. “This group had evolved out of the sinister Comitè Secret d’Action Revolutionaire (CSAR), also known as the Cagoule. Soulès was now to become acquainted with Eugène Deloncle, head of the political wing, dedicated to secret direct, and violent action…so here we have a Socialist turned Fascist, deeply involved in political movements who actively collaborated with the Vichy government.” (Guy Patton, Masters of Deception, as quoted by the New Dawn Magazine)
According to Patton, Abellio’s thought is “typical of an extreme right-wing esotericism, the aim of which is to ‘renew the tradition of the West.’ He wanted to replace the famous Republican slogan, ‘Liberty, Equality, Fraternity’ with ‘Prayer, War, Work’, to represent a new society built on an absolute hierarchy led by a king-priest.”
Abellio chose his pseudonym because he identified himself with Apollo, and because his initials, RA, were those of the Egyptian sun god. His ideas were a mixture of Christian eschatology, prophecy, and gnostic doctrines regarding what it is to be human. His most famous work is ‘The Absolute Structure’ (1965). The absolute structure is a vital ingredient in his idea of the Assumption (destiny) of Europe.
Although Parvulesco and Abellio differed in some ways, they both believed in the need for a final battle against the counter-initiatory and subversive forces (the non-being), and they both saw themselves as freedom fighters, a theme that runs all through their writings.
“In the West, it was the task of freedom fighters – terrorists? – to bring about this change. These ‘heroic’ battles were brought to life in [Abellio’s] novels…many consider ‘The Pit of Babel’ to be his best work and it is here that he plots intellectuals that are disengaged from all forms of ideology and scruples engaging in widespread terrorism.”
Also mentioned is a familiar theme on YouTube, a polar shift.
“Parvulesco often uses the term ‘Polar’ in reference to the ‘polar fraternities’ with which Guénon had once associated. He sees these as important instruments in the creation of modern Europe. He also used the term to refer to the Hyperborean origins of the present cycle of humanity, which he argued would soon end with a polar reversal. Here he is close to Guénon but far from Abellio’s thinking, who had an altogether more optimistic vision of the future…”
(Some believe that Donald Trump inherited Hyperborean lineage, through his mother.)
The last part of this article, titled Russia, Putin and the New Europe provides the names of people important to the New Right and emphasizes the importance of the last message of Fatima, which was delivered in October 1917, at the moment when the Bolshevik Revolution began. For esotericists, the appearance of the Virgin Mary at Fatima and her messages concerning the future of Russia are part of this Great Empire. This not only has meaning on the political plane—it coincides with their vision as to how ‘real politicians’ work together with the ‘denizens of the other world’ to accomplish the Assumption. The apparition at Fatima inspired Abellio’s effort to unite the two factions of the Cold War.
Now for those who claim to be afraid of war above all else, it is clear that this movement provides a poor rationale for war with Russia. This fear misunderstands the nature of the struggle.
For those who see the value in continuing the struggle within the present system, it is important to know that democracy itself is on the front lines. Parvulesco argues that due to the extreme dissatisfaction within the United States and the disparity between the archconservative religious community and the liberals, it is impossible to be elected as president on a genuine agenda. This is his entire rationale for the end of democracy. Unfortunately for him, 2016 proved the flaw in this rationale with the sudden appearance of a genuine agenda and the support of the majority of Americans.
Considering the New Right’s focus on the demise of democracy it becomes obvious who the opposition was in 2016. It was every false actor who pretended to be like Bernie in 2016 and 2018, everyone who rigged the process, everyone who purged the voting rolls and closed the polling stations, everyone who lied and wheedled and bribed and cheated, everyone who thought they could win with platitudes and cliches, in short, everyone who helped to defame the democratic process. They played right into the arms of the imperialist devils. Little did we know that a campaign like the one Bernie ran in 2016 was the most logical response to this threat. It is the perfect defense of democracy against the defamations of the alt-right.
When you draw the battle lines in this way, the entire polemic of the New Right is absurd. If democracy is destined to fade away, as they claim it is, what could be the purpose of all those books and articles? All those marches and slogans? The same can be said for the neoliberal agenda. Why bother convincing people at all? Do they hope they can get us to accept the theft of our democratic rights as a default position? If so, the outcome must still depend on us.