888 words
Translated by Greg Johnson
Nicolas Gauthier: Joe Biden has been proclaimed winner of the US presidential election. Donald Trump, who has not conceded defeat, cries fraud and is preparing to engage in a legal battle. What is your analysis?
Alain de Benoist: That’s not what is essential. Everyone now admits that the polls heralding a Democratic surge were, once again, wrong, since Biden, as long as his victory is confirmed and the suspicions of fraud are unfounded, only won by a narrow margin. But this observation is not enough. What the polls had not predicted was that Donald Trump would receive between 7 and 10 million more votes than in 2016. The idea conveyed by the media was that four years ago, “Trumpian demagoguery” had taken advantage of a naïve electorate, which now repented bitterly (hence the predicted wave). The opposite has happened. Not only did those who voted for Trump in 2016 confirm their votes, but millions of former Democrat voters joined them.
Given the considerable voter turnout — which is rare across the Atlantic — the massive, indisputable fact is that half of Americans today are “Trumpians,” in other words that they are now encamped with populist positions. Trump lost a battle, but Trumpism did not lose the war! The traditional two-party system is turned upside down: the Republican electorate is nothing like it once was. And as fierce enmity prevails on both sides, and the old foundations of collective American identity have faded, the United States finds itself divided as it had never been since the Civil War. A Danish daily spoke these days of an “abyss of division, anger, and hatred.”
How to characterize the two camps?
Contrary to what we often imagine, on the Right as on the Left, the division is not fundamentally ethnic. Trump has been accused of being the “white people’s president,” indeed some hoped for that. But if that had been the case, he would surely have lost, and by more votes. Racial tensions are obvious, across the Atlantic as elsewhere, but they do not sum up everything. The living conditions of “minorities” (who are on the way to becoming a majority) improved much more under Donald Trump than under Obama. This explains why Trump improved his tally with them by winning 17% of the vote among blacks, against 13% in 2016, and 35% among Latinos, against 32%. The Black Lives Matter movement, we too often forget, was not born under Donald Trump but in Obama’s second term . . .
If Trumpism is growing stronger, it is not because Trump’s voters are “white supremacists” or because, won over by conspiracy theories, they imagine that Hillary Clinton is devouring living children during dark “pedo-satanic” rituals. What separates the two camps today are totally opposed class affiliations and conceptions of society. We have, on the one hand, the representatives of the Establishment, supported by almost all the media, on the other, Americans attached to their roots, to their own ways of life, and to shared values. The settled people who are from somewhere and the nomads who are from nowhere, ordinary people of the popular and declining middle classes (those Hillary Clinton called “deplorables”) and the “out of touch” [hors sol, literally “above the soil”] lobbies who think the rise of populism is incomprehensible as it is scandalous. It is very similar to what we observe in European countries: a frontal clash between the inhabitants of globalized cities and what we call “peripheral France.” With, in the case of the United States, an important geopolitical detail: the states most favorable to Trump are concentrated in the center of the country; they belong to continental America; while the strongholds of Joe Biden belong to maritime America: the major metropolises of the east coast and California. Land and Sea, always.
Joe Biden has proclaimed his desire to be a “president who unites.” Is he likely to succeed?
I do not think so. Let’s move on to this character’s petty mediocrity. That the Democrats have chosen as their champion a senile politician, expert in gaffes and thoroughly corrupt, already says a lot about the crisis facing the Democratic Party, which, moreover, has just lost seats in the House of Representatives and may not win the Senate. Biden’s camp is deeply disunited, and its room to maneuver will be very narrow. Donald Trump was, for the Democrats, a providential scapegoat: it was only hatred of Trump (the same hatred shown by 90% of the European media) that brought them together. If Trump is no longer there, all of their differences will come to light, as the people’s discontent continues to rumble. And if — as is quite possible, perhaps likely — Kamala Harris, representative of the Left-wing of the party, succeeds Biden during their term, the gulf between the two Americas will widen even more. Until what point? In a country where more than 350 million firearms (more than there are people) circulate freely, perhaps we should fear the worst.
Source: https://www.alaindebenoist.com/2020/11/09/il-ny-a-pas-eu-de-deferlante-biden/
If you want to support Counter-Currents, please send us a donation by going to our Entropy page and selecting “send paid chat.” Entropy allows you to donate any amount from $3 and up. All comments will be read and discussed in the next episode of Counter-Currents Radio, which airs every weekend on DLive.
Don’t forget to sign up for the twice-monthly email Counter-Currents Newsletter for exclusive content, offers, and news.
10 Comments
Is it correct to call Trump a populist candidate at this point? I don’t think so. He was a radical Zionist from the first moment he set foot in office demonstrated by everything he did for Sheldon Adelson and Israel, Jewish pharmaceuticals responsible for opioid deaths, and bailout for his NY buds and Kushner associates. Contrary to what Benoist states above, having some white populist representatives in the white house ever once in awhile to provide those people with helpful policy changes, instead of inviting kanye, Kim, little pimp and ice cube In there every few months to discuss new employment opportunities and prison reform for people who did not vote for him in 2016 would’ve done him some good.
The writer appears to suggest that ‘conspiracy theorists – a phrase created and used ad nauseam by the dark side – are wrong about politicians engaging in satanic rituals.
Watch the video at Bohemian Grove
Read Thanks for the memories by Brice Taylor (real name Susan Ford) available on pdf which discusses Hillary’s satanic sexual activities.
This is important. They deny it as they do all their shady activities. It is however the truth/
Thanks, Alice… appreciate the suggestion… haven´t heard of that before… did in fact find a pdf… I tend to neglect the subject, therefore grateful for the advice that it´s urgent… I may underestimate the subject.
Trump has been accused of being the “white people’s president,” indeed some hoped for that. But if that had been the case, he would surely have lost, and by more votes.
Benoist says some things that ring true about the Somewheres vs the Anywheres, but the above statement is not one of them.
Trump may yet lose. If he does it will be at least in part because he lost ground with the White males. He needed their votes but didn’t court them and a bunch of them didn’t show up.
Trumpism turns out not to be ‘populism’, but just another flavor of anti-White identity politics and since White men take the brunt of anti-White politics, they didn’t support Trumpism.
Hamburger man,
I concur. I would add that without the tribe’s constant 24/7 brainwashing of White gentiles, and without the tribe’s constant attacks on free speech on the web, if we were able to convert even 30% of current White leftists to being pro-White advocates, that is all that would be needed to sweep election after election after election.
Now as has always been the case, the media is the key. Whoever controls the media/narrative OWNS the minds of the majority. Currently, unfortunately, that is the hostile jewish anti White elites.
“In the case of the United States, an important geopolitical detail: The states most favorable to Trump are concentrated in the center of the country, they belong to the Continental America, while the strongholds of Joe Biden belong to Maritime America: the major metropolises of the East Coast and California [and Oregon and Washington] and West Coast. Land and Sea, Always.
This essay has been monumentally clarifying for me. Benoist’s description of the ‘peoples of the land’ vs the ‘peoples of the seas and the coasts’ as being by far the biggest dividers of population of all. While the seas touch on the coasts of most countries worldwide, every country also has an interior of soil and rock formation, of forests and plains. And while myriads of people in any land make a living directly or indirectly from the seas, via fishing, shipping, etc., many more farm the interior land, corral its creatures, mine the mineral (including oil) from the soil itself. This produces the differences in outlook of populations which play out, to a great extent, in our differences thus displayed in our political outlooks.
The people of the interior, more attached to the land, are more patriotic, and since their livelihood depends on the land, they are more attentive to it. When, though bank foreclosure or by natural disasters, they are moved off the land, they become disassociated, and thus disgruntled and feel displaced: they’ll become the nomads and move to the coasts, where trade has produced factories and the jobs that support trade, but the people do not forget, and they remain patriotic.
Another distinction that the author made was between “settled people” and “nomads”. What we saw this past summer of rioting, burning and looting, were ‘the nomads’ in full anarchy action and display. The 71 million who voted Republican or just ‘for Trump’, on the other hand, were ‘the settled’, or at least ‘settled wannabes’. Did anyone notice the obvious nomads on TV footage jumping straight up into the air while chanting “Black Lives Matter”, just as the sub-Saharan chieftains in ‘tribal circle dances’? Nomads the world over do this. They are the epitome of Anarchy and the settled people of this country are having none of it. This is why we cannot just “Come Together” as Biden is whining about.
White Nationalism, I would think, does not demand absolute ‘lockstep’ settled living, but anarchy and nomadic squatter mentality doesn’t cut it either. We must define what we are aiming for. For me, as a woman, that would be a nice little home with an English rose garden and a white picket fence. A lot of women would agree. Obviously feminists would not — and I see them as a new type of nomad.
Alexandra,
Good points. I have been noticing lately how many jews have three kids. Almost every jew I look up online has 3+kids. All the while, the judenpresse had been pushing White gentiles to have fewer kids (in virtually all their publications they fear monger about “overpopulation”) since the 1960’s.
So, the jews are breeding like rats (minimum 3+ kids, while the hasids have 8+) but brainwashing the White White goyim to stop having children.
It breaks my heart to see so many childless women in my family….in their late 30’s or early 40’s….never married, and childless. They have been suckered by our jewish enemies that it is “Power” for White women to:
1. Kill their babies
2. Sleep around
3. Waste their whole lives making pointless powerpoint presentations, etc.
I try to set them straight….that TRUE Power is reproducing your genes. True Power is having lots of kids to spite those that hate your people…..but it all falls on deaf ears. These women will all grow old and die alone. They are victims. True victims in every sense of the word. Victims of vile, evil people that hate them and their kin, but hide behind flowery terms and jewish double cross.
It breaks my heart to see so many childless women in my family….in their late 30’s or early 40’s….never married, and childless.
And childless bachelors? Do they also break your heart?
Good article. But I would make one correction…
“The settled people who are from somewhere and the (((nomads who are from nowhere)))”
There we go, it’s fixed now. 😉
Good work by Counter Currents in translating this and bringing it to our attention. Yesterday I met a wealthy, young, jet-setting lady from South Carolina who was horrified that I “supported Trump and yet could be so nice and normal”. I took it as a compliment and then tactfully informed her that it was just such ‘nice, normal people’ who supported populists worldwide, whereas only the financial elite and their hangers-on, the brainwashed, the feeble minded and weirdoes still supported the mainstream media candidates.