Counter-Currents
1,275 words
As recent American political events have demonstrated, the modern political Left can no longer be seen as making any legitimate contribution to philosophy, culture, politics, society, and so on. They have essentially embraced a type of political schizophrenia which has no real relation to the actual classical Leftist theory to which they pay lip service, only pretending to abide by the ideology’s original insights. The political Left of the modern Western world is essentially a rationalization for all that is evil today. It is for this reason that, as many have noticed, Tolkien’s masterwork has come under fire for themes which run contrary to the corruption and decadence that has overthrown our society.
The Lord of the Rings is a classic story of virtue, heroism, chivalry, and brotherhood in which our heroes of the Fellowship represent objective good, while their adversary Sauron represents objective, anti-human (or in this case anti-human/elf/hobbit/etc.) evil which aims to rule over the free peoples of the world through darkness and homogenization. Tolkien claimed to be apolitical in his books and he said that he never intended for them to be construed in a political manner; I believe him. The story is simply one of good triumphing over evil.
It is not by chance that Sauron is an ancient, perennial being who can apparently only be temporarily defeated until he rises again. He and his orc slaves represent chaos and decadence, just as what prevails in our world today. It is these suggestions of the timeless truths of the human experience which makes Tolkien’s story so magical and yet so believable, despite the complete lack of nuance between the protagonists and villains.
Who makes up Sauron’s army? There are three main archetypes, the first of which is the traitor and self-appointed enemy to his own race: Saruman the wizard. The traitor is perhaps the most hated in all human societies. It is therefore no surprise that traitors are traditionally given the worst penalties for their crimes. For example, in Dante’s Inferno traitors are perpetually frozen alive in the lowest pit of Hell, and Captain Corneliu Codreanu remarked that “the first and fiercest punishment ought to fall first on the traitor, second on the enemy.” Saruman betrays the human race to the Uruk-hai orcs not because he believes in their cause’s legitimacy, but in its inevitable victory. Rather than die trying to save Middle Earth, as many of the gallant knights of Rohan and Gondor do, he corrupts the sacred keep of Isengard and jumps on the bandwagon of the new order which Sauron promises. He does this exclusively for personal gain.
The second archetype is the orcs, who have inspired the Left’s ire due to the popular perception that the orcs are a parody of blacks. However, Tolkien never implied this himself, and it is ironically the only ones who do are the Leftists. Does this mean that the Left believes blacks are orc-like? If not, then why do they make this connection? It is here that the mask slips and the Sarumanic nature of the white shitlib left reveals itself. This is not a radical proposition; Theodore Kaczynski wrote of the Leftist in his manifesto that
[m]any leftists have an intense identification with the problems of groups that have an image of being… otherwise inferior. The leftists themselves feel that these groups are inferior. They would never admit to themselves that they have such feelings, but it is precisely because they do see these groups as inferior that they identify with their problems.
You can buy Collin Cleary’s Wagner’s Ring & the Germanic Tradition here.
Furthermore, how effective would Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals be if blacks and other ethnic aliens didn’t provide a perpetual underclass in America for the Judeo-Bolsheviks to agitate? Indeed, if blacks acted like Nubian elites and built a complex society which other peoples wished to emulate and envied, then this comparison wouldn’t be so believable — and yet here we are. Personally, I see no evidence that Tolkien had any specific race from our world in mind; if he did, it was more likely the Indians, who were beginning to settle in large numbers in Great Britain at the time he was writing.
The last archetype is the Haradrim who, unlike the orcfolk, are an obvious representation of Arabs, particularly the men of Near Harad, who are the predominate type of Haradrim described in the books. Interestingly, it is only this group among the forces of absolute evil which Tolkien presents with any ambiguity, describing their leader in favorable terms. As opposed to the others, the Haradrim are presented as a people whose values and warrior culture are honorable, but who are being naïvely manipulated by forces of chaos which they do not fully understand. Is this not precisely what is currently happening today between the Christian and Muslim worlds, where two civilizations are being pitted against each other for the sake of malevolent forces whose plans are not yet fully understood by many?
It may seem that I have undermined my own proposition that Tolkien was not political in his writings. In today’s context, perhaps it does seem that he was, but we must remember that the books were written nearly 70 years ago, and more than a decade before the cultural revolutions of the late 1960s. Therefore if we see any political relevance in them, it’s because of the circumstances of our own times. Tolkien was simply telling the story of the battle between objective good and evil, using timeless themes to do so. On one hand there is the bromance of the young (for hobbits) lads who set off on their adventure under the guidance of a wise elder to save civilization as they know it. They literally assemble a Männerbund to confront an eternal chaotic force with no hope of success. On the other is the chaotic force itself, whose lieutenant Sauron betrays everything he had pledged to protect, sending legions of orcs and Haradim to destroy anyone who dares to stand in their way. There is nothing inherently political in this. If we see a resemblance to our political situation, it says more about our age than about Tolkien.
So why has the political Left condemned The Lord of the Rings? It should be plainly obvious now: because The Lord of the Rings paints them exactly how they truly are. The story perfectly illustrates their ugliness, inside and out. They represent evil in its darkest form. Thus, their politicization of the saga is in fact a testament to the objective and perennial evil which they now represent. The name “Satan” comes from the ancient Hebrew word Shaytan, which literally means the “adversary” — and it is Sauron who embodies this archaic, eldritch theme. The Left sees themselves in Saruman, the orcs, and the Haradrim.
There is simply no way in which they can somehow interpret the story to see themselves in the knightly spirit of the Fellowship or the genuine brotherly love between Frodo and Samwise.
Given that there is simply no way to deny the obvious parallels other than to attempt to poison the well and flee, disparaging the story in its entirety as “racist” or something of the sort, it begs the final question, which is no less important: How did we get to a point where absolute evil has been given a legitimate platform in today’s politics? As I ponder this, I am reminded of our heroes who are being held in solitary confinement at this moment, guarded by orcs on the orders of traitors while conservacucks wash their hands of it, and I remind myself that we are not the bad guys of this story. Our movement soon will be vindicated.
* * *
Counter-Currents has extended special privileges to those who donate $120 or more per year.
- First, donor comments will appear immediately instead of waiting in a moderation queue. (People who abuse this privilege will lose it.)
- Second, donors will have immediate access to all Counter-Currents posts. Non-donors will find that one post a day, five posts a week will be behind a “paywall” and will be available to the general public after 30 days.
To get full access to all content behind the paywall, sign up here:
18 comments
And Dune too. LOTR is pretty fucking based stuff. Dune is like the US cousin. Eugenics, Feudalism, Anti AI, monarchism but in space.
I’d guess the writings of CS Lewis can’t be far behind a ban either.
Plenty of leftists love the LOTR, especially but not only the films. Leftists can look at the “Fellowship” coalition as a symbol of diversity, and there are plenty of strong roles for women, though no doubt there will be some feminists to quibble if they aren’t 50.1% of them. I’d suggest a theme to your observation is that leftist tend to be more neurotic than the right, and some among them are addicted to finding offense even to loaf of bread, especially if it’s white bread.
The way a white person reads loTR or Dune is very different to the way a black “reads” it. If you look at the YouTube’s that explore the Lore of both these worlds most whites analyse the economic viability of the spacing guild monopoly and the technology that’s actually being used to transport, while blacks are worried that Paul is a white saviour. Same goes for LOtR. The white readers will concentrate on linguistic subtleties of Finnish, Anglosaxon and Danish or the use of fairy tales blended with historical fact. Blacks wonder if the Orcs are them. I’d assume that East Asians find these two stories inaccessible but quaintly interesting, they’ve got their own mythopoetic traditions and don’t really care.
This statement is so disingenuous:
“the modern political Left can no longer be seen as making any legitimate contribution to philosophy, culture, politics, society, and so on.”
The left actually dominates AT LEAST 90% of all “culture” and entertainment produced today. Whether it is good or bad is completely irrelevant. You can’t become a mainstream artist as a conservative unless you keep your politics secret. You saying that the modern left is unable to do “legitimate” contributions to culture or society in decades implies you are substituting the word “legitimate” for “good.” Fact is nearly every cultural contribution to modern culture has come from the left.
I wouldn’t be surprised if it were nigh impossible for a white male with his birth genitalia intact to get a professorship in the humanities department of any major university, other than Notre Dame maybe.
I think leftists like Lotr, probably more than rightists because they tend to be better edumicated. They see themselves as the hobbits and trump as the Sauron no doubt. But you know who never seems to like fantasy or sci-fi? Blacks. Do any blacks ever like Tolkien?
Not judging mind you, I only wonder why they never like those things.
These fantasy/ scifi stories tend to leave East Asians and Blacks cold. They are stories for whites.
Well, generally, one has to know how to read in order to like Tolkien. Okay cheap shot (even for a WN site commenter) but I couldn’t resist.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jY234rsn2Hc
I’d guess this nerd is a Liberal. Yet here he is analysing the Orc destruction of a Gondor statue of a King. Not sure of the date of recording but the statue pulling has been a hot topic for a over a decade now. This guy is a great example of the vacillating white. He’s over educated and under informed. He won’t connect the haunting blatant image that author Tolkien and filmmaker Jackson have made, to our current reality.
Hopefully John McCain is frozen alive in the deepest pit of Hell. I’ve always hated him way more than I hate Nancy Pelosi or Chuck Schumer.
Really beautiful article, by the way. I love the happy ending and I believe in it.
I want to, but so many black pills these days.
I hope everyone is accumulating a library of banned books. I am sure it will come to ‘451F’ one of these days. Just sheltering the books in your homes or apartments is a gift for the generations. Check which ones of CC are already banned, and then of all the other Nationalist sites. I would say I have about 50 to 60 banned books so far, and now I’ll add “Lord of the Rings” (who knew?) and probably all of the fairy tales from Grimm et al. I cannot believe the Left has come this far in just my lifetime, since 1943, when we have lived through the horrors of Communism, which raged a far greater bloodbath than even Hitler dreamed. But, both horrors started with book burnings. Today, we have electronic book burnings and word by word censorship online. We have to stand against this!
I’m no expert on the Third Reich, nor the microtopic of Nazi book burning, but I believe I have read a credible source (or more than one) in decades past deconstructing this Hitler as book burner myth. That famous newsreel footage of Hitler Youth burning a pile of books has always been used to make it seem as though the Nazis were pre-literate savages atavistically dedicated to anti-intellectualism. In reality, that infamous group of youthful arsonists were burning exclusively Jewish books, and by all accounts, especially odious ones that deserved to be consigned to the flames: Marx, Freud, Trotsky, Bernstein, and all other manner of morally, culturally, and politically degenerate and subversive tomes.
I ask a serious question: should we be reading such garbage? Our civilization has produced so much magnificent scholarship and literature – much more than an individual can master (or perhaps even cursorily read) in a lifetime – that one wonders where the harm is when responsible elders exercise their ethnocollective wisdom by proscribing certain works guaranteed to harm the moral, racial and social order. No one needs to read Marx, except to refute him (or to understand better the origin of the horrors of our age). Ibram Kendi offers nothing but lies. His books are racial weapons deforming gullible and intentionally defenseless white minds. Would it not be preferable to keep subversive works away from the impressionable and stupid?
Of course, for the moment, white preservationists should be First Amendment absolutists. But this is only because we are the weak of today (incredible as this still sounds to my 60 year old ears which are nearly incapable of not thinking of this nation as my country). In the Ethnostate, “free speech” will not be eliminated, but it will be curtailed, making access to subversive works more onerous for those unlikely to assess them in the proper critical spirit.
They were literally burning a sordid pornography library compiled by Magnus Hirshfeld. They were not even burning Das Kapital. It’s all a myth. More censorship of books was common in the US and UK at the time. In Vile Bodies Evelyn Waugh has his narrators novel manuscript confiscated by a British border and customs agent. The Germans didn’t censor quite that much believe it or not.
You forgot to mention goblin-men, or “orcish” men along Dunlendings or “wild men probably representing corrupted(mixed breed) and lesser breeds of men.
The Left hates LOTR precisely because it depicts and resonates with the best of the heroic Western spirit (despite the interesting fact that back in the 60s, LOTR was very popular among hippies, rustics, and back to nature types). The Left hates the traditional moral values with which LOTR is saturated, despite its lack of overt Christianity (many have argued that Tolkien should be understood as a Christian novelist – not just as a Christian who was also a novelist – and I agree). And the Left especially hates depictions of confident, non-angst-ridden, classical Occidental men destroying other races in manly battle (even if in this case the “other race” is non-human; they can intuit the contemporary relevance).
CS Lewis was for all intents the editor and sounding board. So yeah it’s dripping with Catholicism and Anglicanism.
Comments are closed.
If you have Paywall access,
simply login first to see your comment auto-approved.
Note on comments privacy & moderation
Your email is never published nor shared.
Comments are moderated. If you don't see your comment, please be patient. If approved, it will appear here soon. Do not post your comment a second time.
Paywall Access
Edit your comment