The Shadow Party
Recent elections have demonstrated beyond doubt that there’s a hidden constituency in western politics.
It’s not represented by a specific party, although it’s better represented by the right, so it’s voters lean that way more often than not.
It is pro-welfare state, anti-war, anti-intervention, pro-union, anti-elite.
It has two further defining factors.
The first is that it is overwhelmingly, but not exclusively, male.
The second is that it is culturally chauvinist. In truth this means pro-white, although this is articulated or consciously expressed (or even recognised) by the members of the group itself varies greatly. In practise this position means actively prioritising and promoting the interests of their ethnic group over all others.
Elements of this group have voted for Bernie Sanders, Jeremy Corbyn, Trump, Brexit and the Tories
All of this begs a few questions. Taking the US and UK as examples- Where are the mainstream parties that align with their views? If the parties don’t exist, why not?
The core issue is that for the respectable media - the media that embodies and acts as the voice of the cognitive elite - any express attempt of white people to more of less explicitly act as a traditional ethnic voting block are inherently evil and must be stopped.
That does not mean that no-one will speak for the shadow party. There are plenty of representatives: LePen and Trump (campaign edition) are probably the best examples. But anyone who crosses the line to advocate for these causes openly will be viewed by the respectable press as evil.
This means that the shadow party only attracts as its spokespeople those who are happy to be viewed as evil, of too stupid to care that that’s the reputation they are acquiring.
It becomes a self fulfilling prophecy - only a sick, crazy, and evil person would advocate for these causes, so only sick, crazy evil people do, because they’re the only ones willing to be placed in that deplorable basket.
The question a Liberal (in the American sense) might ask, is - why does it matter that racist people are deprived of a platform to advocate their views? Well - do you want fewer Trumps or Brexits? Those eruptions have occurred but have not yet found their apotheosis. The energy that powered them has not dissipated.
In some cases it may have been diverted. To take Trump as an exmaple, in the course of his presidency he has delivered roughly 0% of his promised nationalist agenda. No wall. No mass deportatations. No restoring the glory days of American heavy industry. The base that elected him is drifting away from him, but it is not winking out of existence. It is becoming clear that he will never fulfill their political desires. They will pause regroup and look elsewhere. There will be another Trump.
The only way to prevent the next explosion is to vent the steam, by assimilating some of the motivating emotions into a mainstream political party.
It seems at this point that will never happen. It can’t on the left, because a pro-white stance is antithetical to modern liberalism.
It is more likely on the right, but still basically impossible, because policticans on that wing are thralls of pro-immigration big business and because mainstream right wing policticans crave above all the approval of the respectable media and the cathedral. These institutions cannot allow discussion of white people as a political ethic interest group. So we sit at our present impasse awaiting more explosions, more eruptions.
Where does this end? The only other solutions I can envision is one that is already occurring – social media and networked technologies allow people to recognise and associated with kindred spirits in a way that was not possible 20 or 30 years ago.
A theoretical Shadow Party exists - perhaps a real party could be formed in the shadows, and with the the institutions (parallels of those in the light) to support it. News outlets, social media sites, fundraising mechanisms, political action committees.
This is well underway, and what has been created so far, from Counterfund to Infowars, illustrates the risk of leaving one group's political desires in addressed and unassimilated too long. We live in an age in which (it may turn out) the acceptance of the mainstream is no longer needed to build a political world. What we may get instead of assimilation and neutralisation is the Shadow Party in its purest form.