– Rizal Roja


There is no real non-liberal opposition in the US. There are very, very few real Communists on the left, and very few real Fascists on the right. Within the US, the alt-right serve as shock troopers of the Republicans (liberals) as ANTIFA serve as the shock troopers of the Democrats (also liberals). There is no real struggle within the United States, aside from the struggle between the competing trends of liberalism whose existence resulted from the implosion stemming from the post-1991 crisis of Liberalism. The “New Liberals” and the “traditionalist” liberals (Whose traditionalism is ultimately bogus and as fictional as the narrative of the new liberals). This “struggle” is effectively a bourgeois cultural war, and not any kind of “class struggle” or “clash of civilizations” as is dramatically claimed.

What is the “Crisis of Liberalism”?

To simplify as best as possible, Liberalism as an ideology came into existence in conflict with the old world order of Monarchism and Feudalism. At the time, ideological liberalism was, as observed by Karl Marx, a progressive force, alongside Capitalism. Ideological Liberals academics, and liberal regimes (such as revolutionary France and the United States) saw themselves as underdogs, as rebels, as in conflict with the “great other”, or great tyranny of the old world order, with a kind of systemic mission to overcome this tyranny, and to bring about “liberty”. This opposition to a kind of great other would define the worldview of the liberal ideologues and regimes. In order to function, Liberalism as an ideology must be in competition with some form of “great tyranny”. Once there are no more great tyranny’s to oppose, no more “liberty” to impose, once Liberalism itself becomes the old power, liberalism loses its spiritual mandate to exist.

Immediately following the collapse of Feudalism within the “old world”, the submission of all of the great monarchies to ideological liberalism, Liberalism would come to replace its need for a “great other” with stand-ins of the time. For a short time, this was Fascism and Nazism. Following World War Two, the “great other” status transitioned to Communism. The opposition to Communism (and later, “communism”) would provide the spiritual mandate necessary for liberalism to function. Following the collapse of the USSR, liberals were quick to proclaim victory over the world stage. Francis Fukuyama famously proclaimed “the end of history” and “Pax Americana”.

While the Liberal ideologues and regimes were dizzy with success following their “victory over communism”, a silent crisis was forming. Absent a “great other” to see itself as in competition with, Liberalism was faced with an internal existential crisis. For a short time, the war on terror formed a unifying factor for the Liberal regimes. The concept of “terror”  as an opponent, however, is extremely vague, so this would serve as only kind of band-aid solution. As a result of this, sometime in the last decade, the crisis of liberalism would cause a kind of implosion within the liberal ideology, first within the heartland of the liberal or Atlantic Empire (America) and later to the other core territories. This resulted in the creation of two split, and opposing Liberal deviants – the “New Liberals”, centered around the Democratic party and other social liberal, and formerly social democratic parties globally, and the “traditionalists” centered around the Republicans, Tories, and the resurgent “far right”.

Both trends attempt to paint themselves as the successors of liberalism in different ways. Both attempt to paint themselves as carrying on the traditions, and the torch of liberalism, even if they sometimes distance themselves from past liberal movements. And to do so, both have invented a fictional worldview, laced with a fictional, conspiracy theory ridden narrative of the present. They both paint themselves as rebels in opposition to grand, overarching, tyrannical conspiracy against “liberty” and “freedom”. The nature of this conspiracy, while similar in structure, varies on both wings.

The “traditionalists” see themselves as opposed to a great conspiracy masterminded by Islamist, Communists and SJW’s to destroy free speech, to repress and “replace” white people with third world immigrants, to destroy in an Orwellian fashion all free speech, and to institute a nightmarish “politically correct” communist dystopia.

The New Liberals see themselves as opposed to a great conspiracy masterminded by white, Christian conservatives and fascists to legalize and promote hatred of minority groups, to oppress or “exterminate” ethnic and sexual minorities (eg, queers, “POC”) and to create a nightmarish, totalitarian Nazi dystopia.

Both wings are ultimately convinced of their status as a rebellion against the great conspiracy, which in their minds, is in near full control of the state apparatus, the media, private corporations, etc. Both see themselves as victims, and both have been whipped into equally as delusional hysteria against the “great other”. In opposing this “great other” both are making moves, geopolitical and locally which could be seen as almost suicidal. The Atlantic Empire – and especially the United States is in effect, cannibalizing itself in its self-imposed madness.


The role of Big Business in the Crisis

It should be further added that the flames of this division are intentionally stoked by large corporations, with the intention of turning a profit. In the field of corporate marketing, in particular, there has been a trend away from advertising the “coolness” of a product or brand,. Eg, “Own this gadget or you’re going to be a loser” “Buy these shoes or girls won’t date you”, “If you don’t buy this toy, you’ll be one of the uncool kids”, as was predominately the case from the mid-20th century towards, towards a kind of “moralistic” marketing. “If you don’t buy this brand of sneakers, you are a racist” “If  you eat here, you are a bad American”, “If you don’t buy this video game, you are a cuck” or “If you don’t like this movie, you must be a Russian troll/misogynist”. This is, of course, a simplification, but examples of kind of moralistic marketing can be seen particularly with the new liberals recently. Two obvious examples being the fiasco around recent failed Hollywood movies (Ghostbusters or Star wars episode) with critics of the films being labelled “Incels”, “Men’s rights activists” (A pejorative term to new liberals, given the militant and violent male chauvinism of many of its adherents) and “Russian Trolls”. Or the recent Nike shoes advertising campaign featuring American football player Colin Kaepernick, who is famous for his association with the American black lives matter movement (Originally an organic and progressive movement, long since hijacked by the new liberals and transformed into a front of the New Liberal imperialists). This campaign caused a serious backlash among the “traditionalist” wing of liberals, escalating in a media and social media controversy and flame war, with traditionalist liberals uploading media of themselves burning Nike products in mass, and new liberal “radicals” rushing to defend Nike and accuse those who opposed Nike of being “white supremacists”. All of this translated into massive profits for the Nike corporation. Neither the “traditionalists” nor the “new liberals” would direct any criticism at Nike’s exploitative practices in the third world, where the company brutally exploits South Asian and Southeast Asian “ people of colour”, in conditions similar to slavery.


The goal of this marketing strategy is more to build brand or product loyalty than to encourage the sale of individual items. Given the current social environment of the western countries, with extreme social alienation being prevalent, along with a general atomization of all forms of community and the existence of extreme political-social divide between those oriented towards either wing of liberalism, this form of advertising has proven to be extremely effective at generating profit, and equally as effective at further fanning division. In the long term, this will undoubtedly harm even the largest corporations in the west. Capitalism is, however, a system of short-sightedness, and the capitalist class will most often favor short-term profit over long-term sustainability or survivability. Ending this marketing strategy presents a collective action problem. Those who do not join in will certainly lose out to the opposition who use the strategy, which makes it unfeasible to stop any time soon.


What about suffering in the West?

All of this is not to say that there is not legitimate suffering in the western imperialist countries (Atlantic Empire). On the contrary, things are getting increasingly worse for a lot of people. Poverty and unemployment are rising (statistics to the contrary possible due to the redefinition of unemployment in most cases) and re-proletarianization is gradually taking place. Although the proletariat is still a minority among working people in the west, it is gradually growing. The UK, in particular, will likely see massively increased proletarianization as the Brexit crisis continues to unfold. Outside of proletariat, oppression of certain communities has gotten worse. In the US, the Black, Latino and Muslim communities have endured increasing hate crimes and police repression from those aligned with the “traditionalist” liberals, which poor southern and Appalachians whites face a similar, but smaller hate fuelled campaign. In Europe, hatred fuelled attacks against the migrant and refugee communities, along with some indigenous minority groups are getting worse. In Italy and France, the Roma community are facing what could legally be called a genocide. In Australia, the Aboriginal community, African migrants, and urban homeless whites are the victims of a hate-fueled media campaign. All of this on top of rapidly worsening alienation, atomization of society, drug epidemics, and a crippling mental illness epidemic, particularly affecting the youth. These problems combined have led to a slow breakdown of society, with many western states becoming semi-failed societies.


While conditions are certainly getting worse, it should be understood that the majority – regardless of ethnicity, gender, nation, or occupation, still share a beneficiary status within the capitalist-imperialist system, and the demands of the working class are still centered around imperial economic demands rather than demands for a functioning and human-worthy society. Until the west is entirely severed from its Imperialist relationship with the global south, revolutionary change will not truly be possible. By necessity, things must get worse for the Imperial populations in the west before than they can get better. This is not to say nothing can be, or should be done in way of organizing for revolution, but rather we need to be more creative, and oriented around long term strategy. Those who are stuck with the mindset of instant gratification are doomed to lose.


On the “New Capitalism” of China

Concerns were raised toward us following the publishing of Jason Unruhe’s video on the original draft of this article, specifically that the analysis of this article drifted toward moderate or left third positionism (aka 4th positionism, national bolshevism, Eurasianism, syncretic socialism, or whatever else its adherents label themselves) in its fixation on Liberal capitalism, and its failure to mention the “New” authoritarian capitalism of China. It is absolutely the case that the authoritarian capitalism of China presents, in the long term, a far more significant threat than the liberal capitalism of the west, because it is a far more capable variant of capitalism, and that it is better suited for long-term strategic orientation. While there are similarities in this analysis and the analysis of the left-moderate third positionists, the position of red eternity differs from their position in that we are opposed to capitalism and imperialism in all forms, and not simply liberal capitalism. While we understand liberal capitalism to be the current primary and strongest trend of capitalism-imperialism in the world today, it is facing collapse. Our goal is not a “multi-polar” capitalist world, even one in which neo-colonialism is abolished. Our goal is communism – a truly classless, stateless global society, in which exploitation of man by man is entirely abolished. While our primary enemy is the same, left third positionists are at best, temporary allies in the short-medium term. As we go deeper into the “Chinese century”, and as the implosion of the Atlantic Empire continues, our energy will need to be focused increasingly on combating the new, global “Chinese Empire”.


The intent of this article is to provide an explanation for the current paranoid and seemingly suicidal moves of the Atlantic Empire as it moves closer to collapse. A more substantial analysis is still necessary, although we hope this article will provide at least partial illumination on the subject.



Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Post comment