Among the many mistakes made every day is taking for granted that Europe will achieve nothing because it is led by an inept and decadent ruling class.
Is that true? Yes, but…
It’s not that our leadership is worse—on the contrary, it’s often better than that of true or presumed powers like the US and Russia. We accuse it of being coke-addicted and debauched, but the ruling elites in imperial capitals aren’t much better, and their societies are not in better shape than ours either.
Europe faces four enormous problems: our post-1945 dependency—from which, however, capital and politics have gradually partially broken free—the de-virilized, patricidal culture of the post-1968 era, demographic collapse, and the absence of a central power.
That’s no small matter, yet despite the mediocrity, we’re not worse off than those playing the bully. Compared to others, the only real gap is the lack of central power, because on all other fronts they’re not doing any better, even if we indulge in exotic delusions imagining the grass greener on our neighbors’ side.
Today, with the global restructuring involving a decline in American interest in the Atlantic quadrant and with the technological challenge pulling us in, the trend toward rearmament and power is hard to avoid. And for me, to be clear, that’s a very good thing.
Still, people say they don’t want to die for this Europe, for von der Leyen, for Macron, or against Russia.
Slogans! Because Russia—the key cause of this shifting scenario—is merely the pretext. It has no real interest in bombing Europe; it merely wants to subjugate those peoples it considers its historical slaves, but has thoroughly proven it is incapable of doing so. A veritable paper tiger.
Arming ourselves serves the purpose of becoming a power, of preventing threats from anyone, of emancipating ourselves from the Americans, and of containing threats that are far more likely to come from the south than from the east.
Moreover, it won’t be von der Leyen’s or Macron’s or Mattarella’s Europe, because they’ll be long gone by the time this process is solidified.
But this isn’t just about names or faces—it’s a matter of social and political structure.
Almost none of today’s “politicians” are anything more than presenters, at most mediators between what remains of the state (that is, the bureaucratic structures plus the so-called deep state), public opinion shaped by media and social networks, and the economic powerhouses that, in our fully post-democratic age, are dominant regardless and truly make the difference.
If we hadn’t abandoned political culture—any political culture, be it Marxist, Fascist, national-revolutionary, Christian-social, or National Socialist—we’d be dealing with reality and not with imagery, with substance and not with slogans.
And the substance tells us of a European rearmament, with a return to broad-based, if not mandatory, conscription.
This presents us with only two types of political positioning. And when I say political, I mean political—not verbose attitudes with baseless subjective theories.
The two revolutionary mentalities we know well always return.
One seeks to carry out sabotage to produce a kind of proletarian unity that will then overthrow the system. But that inevitably becomes serving the enemy against one’s own land.
The other chooses to act (as in the Risorgimento, Interventionism, Arditism, Fascism) in the direction of national power—never forgetting, indeed actively working toward, the transformation of power relations in society and the imposition of communal and virile cultural and spiritual standards.
Standards that even capital’s current interests today make somewhat acceptable.
Hence the “denazification” of anyone seeking a return to power status.
Let it be clear: all this will happen on its own, regardless of us. And the most important thing for us is to live with style and order, to serve as an example and not let the world change us. We should not believe we hold the world’s destiny in our hands.
That’s what it means to be an elite. But to be a vanguard means something more: to conceive an active role in the projection of national and European power and in its reconversion—which is far less impossible than we’ve been led to believe, trapped as we’ve been for decades in the ideology of defeat and impotence.
It’s not necessary for everyone to be part of the vanguard, but it is essential that we act on how we live and behave far more than on how we think.
However, it is essential—even just to act more powerfully on ourselves—to understand that political leadership doesn’t direct politics.
This doesn’t mean only the “strong powers” do, but rather that physical and metaphysical necessities stand above them, and we must not allow our minds to remain imprisoned in rigid, rusted frameworks—because the tiger must be ridden: the tiger of history, and the tiger of meta-history.
Happily. Perhaps even with enthusiastic pessimism—so long as there is enthusiasm.
