Note: This piece was originally posted at WRSA as commentary on an article discussing strategy and tactics. The original article is from the blog “Liberty and Lead” and is titled Sound Thinking. It includes this very simple and useful formulation of strategy and tactics:
“Strategy is what we desire to achieve.”
“Tactics is how we get there.”
Below are my comments (with some minor updates). I’m posting this because I use these terms (Haxoist, Buppertist Anarchist, etc.) occassionally in other writings and they are defined here.
Why WRSA has no common strategy
There is no agreement on what we desire to achieve here. And in fact the degree of alignment has gone down over the last several years. Broadly I see a bunch of groups here, and they have quite different aims:
GROUP: The Constitutionalists
GOAL: Restore something that more closely resembles a previous version of our nation, perhaps the pre-1860 Republic. Disassemble or destroy most, but not all, of the Federal Government, including all the 20th Century additions from the EPA to Social Security.
GROUP: The Buppertist Anarchists
GOAL: Destroy both the Federal Government and State Governments as prelude to the spontaneous blooming of the NGU. (No Government Utopia)
I call them Buppertist Anarchists because their beliefs differ in significant way from Traditional Anarchists, who are broadly part of left. For instance the Buppertists, while hating the State with a passion, are big fans of property rights. They do not favor revolutionary violence, as most adhere to the Non Aggression Principle, but they do have expansive views of what constitutes self-defense.
GROUP: White Nationalists / AltRight
GOAL: Force the secession of some portion of the USA and create a white ethnostate there. The resulting State would be explicitly pro-white, and push the removal of non-whites from their territory, either through incentives (Spencer et. al.) or violence (Northwest Front). A less common variation wants to recapture the entire continental USA as that ethnostate.
GROUP: Christian Nationalists
GOAL: Believe completely in the cosmology and philosophy of Christianity and see the Bible as the best guide for reconstructing society. Most want to reassert a more moral, idealized Christian society after SHTF. Most seem content for the State and Society to fail on their own, rather than engaging in revolutionary violence to for the fail. This is, to some extent, an extension of their religious belief.
GROUP: Civic Nationalists / MAGA Right
GOAL: Fix America through the political process. Possibly including dramatic events like a Constitutional Convention. Believe that the USA has gone far off the tracks, but that with diligence and education things can be fixed without revolutionary violence. They reject as morally bankrupt any exclusion of anyone based on race, religion or ethnicity. This groups is sometimes referred to (derisively) as the Alt-Lite. And many would describe themselves as “Patriots”. They formed the core of Trump supporters. (There are many fewer of these people on WRSA than even five years ago.)
GROUP: Southern Nationalists
GOAL: Break off the Southern States from the USA and reform a modern confederacy. Most favor some sort of expulsion of the large Black and Mexican population currently living in the South, usually via some variation of “send them to New York”.
GROUP: Survivalist Right
GOAL: See the collapse of society and the State as inevitable. Wish to survive with their families intact. Most serious ones have opted for a return to rural or wilderness living, often formed into intentional communities. Do not believe politics can change things. Do not believe that revolutionary violence is worth it. Politically seem to favor Local Community as the most important form of government. Not fans of any continent spanning States, or large Nations with agendas.
GOAL: Get rid of Jews. The Haxoist critique of our society says that a hostile alien tribe has captured control, and needs to be removed. Once that is done things can be rearranged in a more traditional (pre WW2) way, and society fixed.
I’ve tried to use descriptive and non-insulting names here, in a couple cases using the most prominent supporters to name some fairly small groups. Most of these groups have both allies and enemies among the other groups.
I have focused on the groups or factions that make up the dissident right (or, as some term it, the “hard right”), and can be found contesting in the comment section at WRSA. There are many other right wing factions that are more center-right, such as the neocons, Rockefeller Republicans and libertarians, who are not represented on WRSA, are not part of the dissident (hard) right, and who are generally better understood. I have not bothered to describe these groups, but they are out there, and in aggregate probably outnumber the hard right.
The Constitutionalists and Christians Nationalists get along pretty well and agree on a lot of things, neither agrees at all with the White Nationalists. The Southern Nationalists and White Nationalists are frequent allies, but have no use for the Buppertist Anarchists. And so on.
The Survivalist Right can be viewed as both a tactic, and a strategy. All the groups listed here include Survivalism as one of their tactics, but I have called out those who view it as a strategy. That is a permanent and desirable end state in itself. People describe themselves as “a survivialist”, in the same way others would describe themselves as “a conservative” or “a Christian”. It is an ideology for some, not just a tactic.
There is no agreed upon strategy among the dissident Right. This applies to the commentators at WRSA, too. Instead, we belong to all these different factions. We are united in our intense rejection of the Left, and a sense that things have gone badly wrong in our culture and society. But beyond this, we do not agree on basic principles. We do not share the same axioms.
Returning to the quote at the top: “Strategy is what we desire to achieve,”, what we see is that all these factions or groups desire different things. Therefore there is no possibility of us all agreeing on a common strategy.
A Christian Nationalist would be happy with a Bible-believing black family living next door who went to the same church they did. They might look very dimly on the idea of self-professed atheists having political power. On the other hand, the White Nationalist right is full of atheists, and views many aspects of Christianity as a problem. Organized Christianity’s focus on charitable acts such as importing downtrodden immigrants (for instance) is seen as a pox, a wrong belief that needs to be eliminated in their desired future white Ethnostate.
Without a common set of axioms (core beliefs) it is difficult to agree on common goals.
Without a common set of goals it is impossible to agree on a strategy.
This is why the brief idea to “unite the right” was doomed from inception, and indeed crashed and burned at their first attempt to show up and demonstrate unity. The acrimony and recrimination for that event is still burning.