In my last post, I made the claim that Both Marxism and Fascism are Liberal heresies, and by extension it follows that the Alt-Right is a Liberal heresy. There is nothing in the Alt-Right which is not Liberalism rooted. All of the thinkers of note which are claimed by the Alt-Right are liberal theorists. Take Carl Schmitt for example, he was a Hobbesian in a strict sense.
This liberalism, even when filtered through Fascist heresy, is manifest in such claims as the “waking up” of society. This betrays a Liberal conception of society as an amalgamation of reasoning individuals who give their assent to governance. Locke would not have problems conversing with the Alt-Right. Isn’t this remarkable as well? Every escape is just the same thing as that which it opposes.
Of course, some other thinkers lumped in with the Alt-Right demonstrate a propensity to be outside of liberalism, such as Davilla or Evola, but they lack a structure and merely sum up to a series of observances (largely correct) without being explanatory.
De Jouvenel’s system is a Copernican revolution, in that it explains and it is predictive. It is also truely non-liberal when Moldbug’s embrace of unimpeded power is accepted. Something which Jouvenel could not do.
Taking the position of not impeding power takes you so far out of modernity and the Liberal tradition, you might as well be speaking a new language.
The upshot is that a true opponent of Liberalism is now in existence. The De Jouvenlian system explains what to do in that it makes clear that short of restructuring the political system to remove blocks, you are fated to liberalism -both in power and in all opposition. Politics determines culture. The prize is the political structure, end of story.