Understanding Identitarianism In A Time Of Identity Politics

Lambda Sigil, symbol favored by European Identitarians.

What it is.

With the rise of the alt-right and its so-called ‘anti-fascists’ opponents in the United States one word has been rung like a phantom bell over and over again in the background of the metapolitical landscape – Identitarian. As the identitarian movement is largely the ideological forebear to much of the so-called, “Alt-right” it’s own ideological foundations bare some consideration, therefore I thought it might be constructive to present a brief overview of the movement, given it’s obscurity and somewhat dense philosophical groundwork.

Etymological Roots.

The term, identitarian was first coined by French sociologists who used the phrase repli identitaire (meaning Identity Withdrawal) in reference to disenfranchised immigrants who the researchers believed to be the victims of various forms of racism and discrimination. The term came into common parlance with the rise of the French New Right where it was often employed as a noun (Les Identitaires, meaning, the identities).

Ideological roots.

The ideological roots of the Identitarian Movement are primarily found in the European New Right, a revivalist, archeo-futurist, socially conservative and anti-liberal right-wing political movement which was popularized by such dynamic thinkers as the french philosopher and founder of GRECE, Alain de Beniost, Archeo-futurist founder and philosophical theorist, Guillaume Faye, Folk-nationalist author Henning Eichberg and the German Philosopher, Arnold Gehlen. The list goes on and would require a presentation of it’s own to adequately encompass all of the individuals who lead to the movements creation.

The Euro New Right sought to bring about a total political revolution which would completely reject globalism in favor of region and national governance wherein all racial and ethnic groups would be able to maintain their own identity free from the accelerated miscegenation of mass migration and forced integration and this goal is similarly reflected in most identitarian blocs. [Though, given that the movement arose in Europe, most identitarians tend to be of European heritage and advocate for some form of “white identity.”] Addition influences include, Rene Guenon and Julius Evola’s conception of Traditionalism [perennial philosophy], the works of the iconoclastic, German philosopher, Friedrich Nietzsche (Will to Power), the philosophy of Archeo-futurism (that being, the ideal synthesis of traditional values and futuristic technology and structures) as well as Antonio Gramsci’s notion of metapolitics, upon which heavy importance is generally placed by those within the movement.

The culmination of these various ontological methodologies is the belief that culture ultimately is derived from a people and a people are ultimately defined by their genetic expressions (though there is great debate within the movement as to the precise degree of genetic expression vs. cognizant choice – that is, nature vs. nurture).

Indentitarians believe that every distinct people should be able to freely pursue their own unique destiny (a common phrase within such circles), meaning, essentially, the actualization of their own evolutionary progression, unhindered by non-conformist or contradictory/dysgenic elements (foreign peoples/cultures/religions), hence it’s amiability to racial nationalism. Though many identitarians are indeed white nationalists, they are not racial supremacists, as such ideology would be in total opposition to the fairly libertarian thrust of their collective philosophies (i.e. complete freedom of association and racial identity for all peoples).

It might be best illustrated as:

genes > people > ideas > culture > politics > civilization > destiny

Follow Kaiter online here