Against Right Wing Third Worldism
Don't Give Into to Pearl-Clutching about "Oppression"
Welcome back, and thanks for reading! I owe paid subscribers two articles (many thanks for your patience while I was on vacation), so both today’s article and the one slated for Friday, a book review about which I am very excited, are primarily for paid subs. All those who are not yet paid subscribers: while some of this article is free, please subscribe for just a few dollars a month to support this project, get access to audio episodes, and read this article in full. As always, please tap the heart to “like” this article if you get something out of it, as that is how Substack knows to promote it!
Finally, this article is one about which I have wanted to write for a while, but which I’ve struggled to put into words, as it is, by the nature of the topic, somewhat sensitive and difficult. I generally try to avoid this sort of thing, and did my best to be as thoughtful as possible, but this issue is one I have found increasingly worrisome and grating. So I did my best to put my concerns into words. This publication will remain focused on history and what we ought learn from it, not focused on this sort of disagreement with the ideology of others, so if you dislike it, you needn’t worry: normal content sort of content will resume on Friday. In any case, I hope you find this at least thought-provoking, even if you disagree (and if you do, please leave a comment letting me know why), and thanks again for reading.
The Online Right/New Right/Dissident Right/Whatever You Want to Call It has been around for long enough that most of its criticisms of the American-led world order are now widely known, if not widely accepted.
According to such a view, America has, broadly, pushed the worst sorts of subversive cultural exports upon the satrapies that compose its empire, from OnlyFans-style degeneracy to DEI-style race communism, and at the same time used economic neo-liberalism to undo social structures built by the National System of Political Economy. Meanwhile, it also destroyed the colonial system and replaced it with a mix of anarchy and (American) corporate interests, waged forever wars for the ridiculous purpose of pushing the same cultural rot that hollowed out our formerly thriving lands, and waged war upon the Heritage American population with opioids, DEI, and the like.
The empire and state of things described by such a view probably reached its zenith under the Obama Administration during its continuation of the war in Afghanistan, when Afghan women were made to sit for lectures on urinal art1 as our troops were made to allow, in the name of tolerance, corrupt police commanders to rape little boys on American bases; meanwhile, the Heartland from whence those soldiers came and for which they supposedly fought was hollowed out by the China shock, which hurt them and helped the financier class, as opioids and mass migration were foisted on those dispossessed by free trade.
The natural and proper reaction to such things is utter and abject horror. Why are our tax dollars funding the genital mutilation of children, the slaying of Christians in Syria, the destruction of American cities, the uncontrolled demolition of Europe’s cultural heritage through mass migration, and much else besides?
The natural sense of revulsion one ought feel when examining the empire was, I think, best articulated by Ron Dodson in a recent article: “[A young white man] looks at the culture, the institutions, the spiritual exhaustion of the West, and concludes that something is deeply rotten. He is not wrong about that. In fact, his anger contains something healthy; an instinct against lies, against ugliness, against the bureaucratic management of human souls.”2
Indeed, and there has been a great deal of good work done to expose the egalitarian-minded civilizational suicide that has brought the pillars of civilization crumbling down upon our heads.
It is where things go from there, however, that the conversation starts to be derailed. The wrong answer is “right-wing” third-worldism, which is a contradiction in terms but an undeniably real phenomenon.
The Third Worldism Problem
Originally, Third Worldism was the belief that both the American-led “free” world and the Soviet Bloc had gone in different wrong directions, and so the unaligned nations of the world—namely the decolonized African countries and a few hellholes in the Middle East and Asia—ought band together to fight for a third way of governance that demolished colonialism while also rejecting communism or liberalism.3
While perhaps reasonable in some ways, the problem is that the Third World is the Third World, and is as such primarily characterized by disorder and dysfunction.4 Boldly following Patrice Lumumba into the brave new world sounds great…until that means watching cannibals hopped up on “brown-brown”5 destroy every vestige of civilization in the attempt to wipe away the accursed tint of colonialism.6
The Third Worldists, in their attempts to wipe away the legacies of “colonialism” and “imperialism”, ended up just bloviating about equity and “oppression” while rejecting what it meant to be civilized, as such was seen as being the legacy of that which they aimed to extirpate.
Despite that, Third Worldist doctrine became a mainstay of thought even in the West, particularly during the chaos and disorder of the 1970s, and in the academia that grew out of that era. As a result, we have been taught that we ought to subsidize and tolerate the enemies of civilization now to make up for our supposed past sins against them. The “legacy of oppression” is used to justify the looting and destruction of the West. As Arktos Journal noted, referencing Guillaume Faye, “Third Worldism is a doctrine, on the Left and Right, which claims the Third World has been ‘exploited’ — and that it’s advisable to aid it, unceasingly, with financial and technological transfers, and to welcome its migrants.”7
Unfortunately, there is a similar tendency amongst some factions of the “New Right”.
