Chapter 1: The Rise of the New Right

In recent years, we've seen a noticeable ascent of the new right, along with an even more extreme faction. These movements can aptly be characterized as both populist and reactionary. A key illustration is Marine Le Pen's National Rally party, a nationalist and right-wing populist organization in France.

Here's a graph that highlights this political shift:

Furthermore, I recently encountered an essay that references a seminar by Jacques Lacan, which sparked some thoughts. The central idea I want to explore is as follows: "Lacan argues that when an authority figure starts to lose credibility, it often attempts to reclaim its status by 'worsting' itself. This concept revolves around the notion of 'worsting,' or in Lacan's terms, 'ça s'oupire,' meaning 'it makes itself worse.'"

Zizek draws parallels between this concept and the current populist right movement in the US. He posits, "The struggles we face today, from the populist Right to Cancel Culture, are essentially morbid symptoms — or, as Lacan would term it, sinthome, a condensed manifestation of ideological enjoyment, often rooted in racism and sexism. Are figures like Donald Trump not prime examples of a political leader's 'worsting'? The appearance of dignified authority gives way to an obscene paternal figure who ridicules himself, indulging in crude jokes and racist innuendos — the populist Right embodies this 'popu-Lust,' allowing for the indulgence of base desires by humiliating the despised Other."

Let's cut to the chase: this so-called "new right" is merely a group of trolls. They perceive themselves as revolutionary, yet their rebellion is simply a recycled echo of outdated ideas and perceived taboos, driven by a Lacanian Father figure that has said no. This is not a legitimate uprising against authority; it’s a reactionary outburst, lacking a coherent ideology and filled with innuendos and indulgent nonsense.

This movement isn’t about advocating for substantive change. It’s a hollow exhibition of political identity, defined entirely in opposition to external authority. They take delight in breaking societal taboos, flaunting their political incorrectness as if it were a badge of honor.

"Look, look, look over here! I’m being shamed for saying something naughty."

This performance is quite pathetic.

While I support challenging taboos — and I believe it's essential — I seek a leftist populist who can employ crude, shocking language to genuinely connect with the base, someone who can stand apart from the hypocrisy and elitism prevalent in the political establishment.

Now that I’ve sufficiently critiqued the right (which is necessary, lest the liberals dismiss me out of hand), let’s delve deeper into my critique.

Chapter 2: Dime Square and the Dirtbag Left

Let’s explore populism further, particularly the Dime Square movement, which was once seen as the heart of the Dirtbag Left. This movement is largely defunct now.

Imagine if the individuals from the Dime Square era weren’t bored elites with old-money liberal parents from New York, and if their idea of rebellion didn’t revolve around making offensive statements and ironically embracing racist views. The Bernie Bro crowd at Dime Square positioned themselves as anti-liberal leftists. However, under scrutiny, they revealed themselves to be a more transparent form of liberalism.

The true irony? These populist movements start as provocative rebellions, only to recognize themselves as the very establishment they claim to oppose. The Dime Square crowd fancied themselves as rebels against the liberal elite, only to discover they were merely a more honest incarnation of that elite — one that seeks personal liberation devoid of shame or performance. They admitted that much of their activism was aesthetic, aimed at achieving individual freedom.

This phenomenon is not unique; it highlights a broader trend: movements born in opposition to the status quo often end up reflecting that same status quo. What begins as rebellion devolves into mere performance — a superficial distinction that leaves the underlying structures intact and the status quo unchallenged.

Rebellion has morphed into a performative addiction for likes, views, and attention. Look at the Dime Square crowd — once self-proclaimed leftist rebels, they are now shifting to the right, chasing digital applause. They crave the limelight, the thrill of outrage, and the masochistic pleasure of online derision. Their rebellion isn’t about enacting change; it’s a sordid spectacle, a shame fetish performed for an audience that enjoys jeering.

What I truly want is to witness a genuine leftist rebellion against authority. Why? Because the right has skillfully framed themselves as the opposition to global elites. Their agenda includes rejecting environmentalism, immigration, and LGBTQ rights while championing patriotism and cultural identity. They’ve shifted extreme views to the mainstream, presenting themselves as defenders against elites and "globalists."

I don’t hold the left entirely responsible for this situation; I view liberals as the primary culprits. American liberals are trapped in a cycle of moral self-indulgence, caught in an endless loop of shame — not guilt, but shame tied to a self-constructed identity. They are preoccupied with hyper-individualistic self-critique, obsessed with not offending anyone while flaunting their moral superiority. Their fixation on identity and the narcissistic cultivation of a political persona leaves them powerless in the face of genuine political challenges.

This performance of moral superiority has set the stage for disenfranchised individuals to be exploited by populist narratives. Their emphasis on personal responsibility and self-optimization has left many vulnerable to the allure of restored community and belonging by opposing perceived external threats like globalists and multiculturalism. The new right has seized upon this, redirecting frustrations toward these convenient scapegoats.

This obsession with performative rebellion has plunged politics into a quagmire of stagnation, where self-image and public shame overshadow collective needs and class struggle. Liberals, consumed by their fixation on identity, have unwittingly provided the right with a golden opportunity to masquerade as the true revolutionary force, railing against the supposed inertia of liberal globalism and multiculturalism.

Liberals must awaken from their narcissistic stupor and remember what it means to be a leftist. It’s not about crafting a pristine moral identity — that endeavor is hollow and irrelevant. Your public displays of shame are meaningless theatrics. The focus needs to urgently shift toward building coalitions with groups that understand the foundations of genuine revolutionary movements. Rebellion isn’t about self-flagellation or self-aggrandizement for digital applause; it’s about uniting for real, radical change.

Chapter 3: The Left's Ideological Crisis

Leftist revolutionary movements have nearly disappeared, overshadowed by the rise of the new right. The left, ensnared in the complexities of identity politics, is fixated on pronouns, language policing, and curating a Marxist veneer without comprehending the core principles of the ideologies they superficially espouse. They prefer the performance of protest over engaging in local elections. Everything has become an aesthetic. This superficial engagement has left them directionless, making them easy prey for the new right, which has deftly exploited the left’s ideological confusion and lack of focus.

The left's preoccupation with surface-level aesthetics and moral posturing has rendered it ineffective, allowing the right to assume the mantle of rebellion and revolution. It’s a tragic irony — those who once championed the cause of the marginalized now find themselves adrift in a sea of self-righteousness, while the new right advances, waving the banner of change and defiance.

Chapter 4: The Hypocrisy of Liberal Multiculturalism

The new right's agenda can be distilled into four primary themes: opposition to "excessive" environmentalism, hostility toward immigrants, rejection of LGBTQ rights, and a strong sense of patriotism. Interestingly, Muslim fundamentalists share similar views, opposing excessive ecological concerns, LGBTQ rights, and multiculturalism that threatens their cultural identity. The conclusion is stark: new right populists resemble Muslim fundamentalists in their ideological stance. However, liberal multiculturalism, the common target of both the new right and Muslim fundamentalists, is also hypocritical. Western multiculturalism is not genuinely open to others, leading to a superego dynamic where the more one claims to be open, the more guilt they feel.

To clarify: liberals often dwell in shame rather than sincere guilt. Their performative actions aim to transform this shame into guilt, desperately trying to present themselves as authentic allies. Yet, what we truly need is a collective mission grounded in class consciousness. Only by understanding our shared struggles can we convert shallow shame into genuine guilt.

True guilt must be rooted in a genuine sense of collective responsibility, akin to class consciousness. This authentic guilt can fuel sincere and effective political engagement, allowing us to move beyond reactionary rebellion against the omnipotent 'Daddy' figure of authority. Collective guilt forges a stronger bond to our shared mission, deepening our commitment to allied causes and driving the relentless pursuit of liberation. This is the foundation of political revolution.

It’s time to abandon performative shaming and self-indulgence. The left's hollow core has only strengthened the populist right, which manufactures scapegoats to justify their oppressive agenda against authentic liberation. If the left fails to pivot, the consequences will worsen, and the rise of the new right will trample the very ideals they once championed.