Counter-Currents
Bertrand de Jouvenel
1,806 words
The Dissident Right is well familiar with Bertrand de Jouvenel’s theory of High Low versus Middle (HLvM). Even ordinary people have grown familiar with his theory, as they have had to experience it in their daily lives for the past several years, but especially since 2020. Most people might have never heard of de Jouvenel, but this does not matter. If presented with a summary of his theory, they would agree that it accurately describes their experience of reality.
2020 was the epitome of the High and the Low allying together not just to squeeze the Middle for profit, but in many cases to maliciously destroy it. Centralized authority, represented by the upper echelons of Western governments and mega-corporations, made an alliance of convenience with the dregs of society as represented by Communists, sexual deviants, blacks, and hall monitors to attack whites, the middle class, and small businesses. History is filled with other examples: modern-day Venezuela, the Bolsheviks destroying the Kulaks, and any time that upper royalty has allied with the masses against the middle nobility.
There is a less obvious microcosm of de Jouvenal’s HLvM macrocosm taking place among the elites that is worthy of further investigation. The elites, if that term is broadly construed to mean the upper class or perhaps just highly successful people in general, is also experiencing a phenomenon in which the Upper High has allied with a new, up and coming Upper Low to squeeze the Upper Middle for a variety of motivations.
How do we define Upper High, Upper Low, and Upper Middle? The lines are blurry between these groups, but their contours can still be identified.
The Upper High is the easiest to describe. They are the pseudo-elite who immediately come to mind when one hears the word elite. These are the CEOs, entrenched Congressional incumbents, mainstream journalists, big lawyers, and especially prosecutors, financiers, top military brass, and tenured professors.
The Upper Low are essentially a petite new elite who are best described as trumped-up midwits. They have achieved their position through a combination of affirmative action, dark triad traits, a single-minded focus on ladder-climbing careerism (this especially among the females), and by graduating from colleges that have degenerated into expensive degree mills. They fill the roles of corporate boss bitches, human resources commissars, Congressional staffers, law clerks and low-level attorneys, military officers, and college faculty, amongst other things.
In most cases, the Upper Low consciously — or at least subconsciously – know that despite their positions, they are not much better than the Middle, and in many cases are actually beneath the Middle in competence, culture, and integrity. There is a reason that so many of these types, such as the Latinx woman in the CIA’s woke recruitment video, struggle with “imposter syndrome” as it is not a syndrome in many cases, but a truth. This insecurity is oftentimes what drives their disdain, if not outright hatred, for the Middle.
Turning to the Upper Middle, we find small business owners; entrepreneurs; those corporate employees who actually get things done; silent professionals; as well as politicians at the city, county and state levels, combined with insurgent Congressional candidates, attorneys at boutique law firms, and rogue authors and scholars. Their station in life is usually well-earned, and they often take joy in helping others succeed. Their general attitude was one of live and let live, until current events began to demonstrate the folly of such a hope. They are usually, but not exclusively, straight white males, and in preferring individualism over group identity were caught off-guard by the woke Left.
Despite the Upper Middle’s former laissez faire attitude, the Upper High correctly sees the Upper Middle as a threat. This is because they are outside the Upper High’s control and are generally moral — and the post-1945 order, especially after the 1960s, has had decidedly immoral aims. The Upper Middle can think for themselves, even if it has taken time for them to appreciate the gravity of the threat presented by Leftism. They also have the capital (understood in the broadest sense) to effect change in society, especially if they work together. They also just happen to often excel at networking. They can’t be coerced through economic or social pressure, nor can they be bribed with Epstein’s pedo island.
If one wants to accomplish a Great Reset or Great Replacement, the Upper Middle is therefore not just a potential inconvenience, but an existential threat.
You can buy Greg Johnson’s Confessions of a Reluctant Hater here
It is little wonder, then, that the Upper High allied with the Upper Low. While the Upper High also happens to recruit more warm bodies with cold souls for the ever-growing clerical positions that a rule by big government and big business requires, aggrandizing and expanding the Upper Low also helps squeeze out the Upper Middle. This is accomplished via human resources bullying, but also through a microcosm of the Great Replacement.
For example, take how wages and quality of working life for the white working and middle classes was hurt by the simple supply-and-demand effects of flooding the labor market with immigrants and female workers. While the Upper Middle was always happy to lend a helping hand to up-and-coming talent who deserved it, the Upper High saw to it that they were inundated with low-quality competitors who frankly do not deserve their station.
The insidious nature of affirmative action is thus revealed. There is a mostly inelastic number of spots in colleges and hiring opportunities. By giving these opportunities to people who did not deserve them, the Upper High culled, or at least crippled, a good number from the Upper Middle. There are some brilliant exceptions, but most in the Upper Middle still have to go to college, build connections, and acquire experience, even if their parents were Upper Middle as well. Because of the Upper Middle’s sense of fair play and individuality, they did not understand the obvious until now — or if they did oppose affirmative action, it was based entirely on lukewarm arguments about merit instead of power and identity.
The Upper Low was happy to oblige. Their hatred for the Upper Middle is the same as their hatred for the Middle. It is driven by resentment, because they know that they are unequal. Healthy people feel inspired by the accomplishments of others, but the Upper Low is far from healthy. Even when the new Upper Low bears no hostility towards the Upper Middle, they still end up functioning as if they did by inflicting student loan debt and a reliance upon the Upper High’s patronage.
The good news is that the Upper Middle is waking up. The Upper Middle can target low- to mid-level political offices, sponsor the arts and culture, and build business. They can also network with other elites to combine their capital for projects that they could not accomplish alone.
One might ask why they haven’t come to our rescue and magically solved all our problems yet. First, 2020 was probably the turning point in their radicalization. We should not hold this against them, for how many of us were “purple pilled” or — forgive me for saying the word — libertarian back before 2016? Scolding influential people because they took a few extra years to figure things out is not a winning strategy.
Second, their help by its very nature may be clandestine, or at least not readily apparent. This is especially true if they become donors or occupy sensitive positions.
Third, the Upper Middle can be expected to demand professionality. They are not going to squander resources or take risks, monetary or otherwise, on edgelord podcasters, narcissist wannabee dictators, or incel catboys. With a few notable exceptions, the Dissident Right has had a paucity of professionality. We are not entitled to the Upper Middle’s support. We must earn it, but by earning it we will acquire a solid foundation.
Fourth, the Upper Middle is not as predisposed to think in terms of ideological labels as we do. They have no interest in declaring themselves such and such a thing. This might actually be a good strategy, as labels are easily tainted through guilt by association, which inherently hinders institutional infiltration and also tends to sow division within our ranks.
What really matters, though, is policy. Many of the Upper Middle who are becoming amenable to our views probably agree with 90% or more of what we want. Most of that remaining 10% can be dealt with another day, and it is likely that the Upper Middle or their heirs will be further radicalized by then, either through a combination of the regime’s insanity or by warming up to us after we earn their trust by working together on common goals. Consider how many Leftists from the 1960s ended up being perfect Communists in regards to action and policy even if they never identified as such, or even saw the Communists as misguided. We can do the same if we allow the Upper Middle to use their own labels, or perhaps no labels at all.
While Counter-Currents’ plan for a policy institute is a major step towards courting the Upper Middle, there are other ways that you can help achieve this as well. Where can “our guys” and the Upper Middle go now that the 2016 era of mass political organizing has passed? With the midterms approaching, now is the perfect time to volunteer for a low- to medium-level political campaign. Win or lose, these campaigns are great networking opportunities. There are also the College Republicans and college fraternities. Some might scoff at Greek life given certain tropes, but there is a reason why the establishment despises them. They are one of the last places that white men can network; future elites at that. Anything even loosely resembling a Männerbund terrifies the pseudo-elite, and for good reason.
Now is a good time to allow the regime to flail about and weaken, and for us to silently grow in strength. The Dissident Right was hampered by a lack of elite support in 2016, and without leadership and capital it was doomed to fail — although not before it inflicted mortal wounds upon the establishment. The significance of forcing the pseudo-elites to abandon their previous policy of a slow, sinister boil through open occupation and hatred should not be underestimated. 2020 was a Pyrrhic victory for them. When the next great political tidal wave comes, we should ensure that our heirs in this multigenerational struggle have the support that we never had.
With the Upper Middle being squeezed by the Upper High and Upper Low more intensely, now is a perfect time to reach out to them. Befriending someone from the Upper Middle who is amenable to our policies is good. Convincing someone from the Upper Middle to join or work alongside us is even better. And becoming a member of the Upper Middle, if possible, is by far the best.
* * *
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:
Paywall Gift Subscriptions
If you are already behind the paywall and want to share the benefits, Counter-Currents also offers paywall gift subscriptions. We need just five things from you:
- your payment
- the recipient’s name
- the recipient’s email address
- your name
- your email address
To register, just fill out this form and we will walk you through the payment and registration process. There are a number of different payment options.
12 comments
Could Dr Emmanuel Goldstein explain why it is now “Upper” High, Middle and Low? Is there a Nether High or Middling Middle? What about the Lowest of the Low — are they Friend or are they Foe?
Yes, one can define three broad social classes each with three sub-classes. The way I (and many others) would do so is by income, whereby upper-upper class would be the billionaires. However, in this case, the author is giving more of a functional definition, describing The System’s major influencers (upper high) and The System’s major beneficiaries (upper low) and specifying who exactly comprises these sub-classes. That’s another valid way of looking at it. My only quibble is that the journalists are not powerful and independent figures who call the shots; they’re just talking heads hired by a corporation, and every last one of them is expendable and can be replaced.
As for the lumpenproletariat, Marx was of the opinion that they side with reactionaries (that’s us). It’s my opinion that they’re generally too unreliable and apathetic to make organizing them an effective use of one’s time. Sure, you can go to a homeless encampment and tell them about what the folks in Davos are up to; you’d probably get some listeners, but your mileage may vary about the results.
I would encourage any of our younger readers who do not already have at least a BA from college, to drop everything else, and at least do that. And since finance (or money) does indeed make the world go ’round, please at least minor in Finance in whichever college you choose. You will automatically find yourself surrounded by High Middle ‘wannabes’, and you should be one as well, as explained in the post. Finance, Accounting, Management etc., are exactly what we need for ‘entree’ into the realm of people who can support our ideals. Major in History or Philosophy or World Literature, or whatever serves your heart (I majored in Art History and it has enriched my heart greatly throughout life; then studied finance and the stock market on my own in the evenings). I was never a ‘gregarious joiner’, but if you have that talent, make the best of it. Above all, try to get out of the computer gaming world and the arguing with detractors online (which I read about incessantly in CC posts — Nick Fuentes and Richard Spencer come to mind), since both are time-wasters. Same for Metal — I doubt any Upper Middle share your obsession. Just a few housekeeping ideas. Good luck and much prosperity, certainly enough to share to financially grow our Worldview here.
With all due respect, I couldn’t disagree more about finance and accounting. Colleges overproduce majors for these subjects and underproduce medical and tech degrees relative to market demand. According to the BLS, nursing and tech jobs are growing. Growing fields are more permeable to the unconnected white introvert from a lower middle class background than finance or accounting and hence a better potential springboard to an upper middle class income.
Studying history, as you recommend, is indeed good but best done on one’s own without the professor taking money for it or perverting the focus.
I would agree that computer gaming is a waste of time, but I know some successful white guys who are gamers. So as long as they can balance it out with necessities they should be okay, but if they can’t, they should quit gaming.
I don’t know whether high class people like metal music more or less, but I don’t care for it. I know mostly white guys like it, so it’s a white thing, but I don’t get it.
I think one of the classiest things people can do is read comments by Alexandra O. I always do. For example, I recently read the one about you liking horses as a little girl. My aunt grew up in the 1950s and liked horses too. Guess it was a thing back then. Recently, I saw a young woman who looked to be an adolescent or teenager riding a horse down the street and then walking him or her like a dog. Probably still a lot of white girls wish they could have one. Speaking of finance, though, they’re expensive, but it’s nice to have a status symbol that can also be your friend and getaway vehicle at the same time.
Class collaboration is the best way to enforce stability within a country and declaw any communist movement which would have one third of society destroy the other two thirds. Collaboration is unlikely to happen on its own in a capitalist neoliberal society where it’s every man for his wallet. This is why you need a man with a Big Stick to do a little trust-busting now and then, to force the high to tend to the needs of the low, and force the low not to attack the middle in their hatred of the high.
Folks like Andrew Jackson and Theodore Roosevelt should have been president for life. This is why I’m a Fascist.
Trust busting and natural conservation are why Teddy Roosevelt is my favorite president.
TR is my favorite too. I say this as a European. Out of all U.S. presidents, the Rough Rider comes closes to the classical European idea of a statesman. Sadly democracy and the term limits demanded that a man like him deprive his country of his talents. As for what he did and stood for, I can consider people like Roosevelt, (and Hamilton, Lincoln to some degree) as the true precursors to Mussolini’s Fascism, which stood for vigorous nationalism, Christian morality, and a controlled economy that kept the financial powers in check, so that they served the state and its people. America certainly was hungry for Fascism back when Mussolini first came around, until, you know, the thing with the war happened.
They have achieved their position through a combination of affirmative action, dark triad traits, a single-minded focus on ladder-climbing careerism (this especially among the females), and by graduating from colleges that have degenerated into expensive degree mills. They fill the roles of corporate boss bitches, human resources commissars, Congressional staffers, law clerks and low-level attorneys, military officers, and college faculty, amongst other things.
Mr. Steuben, is it people who hold these jobs that you hate so much, or is it the very fact that these roles exist?
If your main concern is that the people (women) who hold these jobs didn’t earn them, take heart. They probably did earn their position. Women do not get affirmative action in the law and related fields, because it is clear that, if anyone needs it, it’s you, not us.
https://www.enjuris.com/students/law-school-women-enrollment-2020.html
Ironically, if you do find a woman in the legal profession who benefitted from affirmative action, she will probably be in Biglaw. Big law cannot retain women because we aren’t nearly focused enough on ladder-climbing careerism to work 90 hours a week.
The upper middle is basically the PMC. There are some among it who value their national community over their aspiration to higher class status, but we are few.
There is no chance of genuine national unity while there is economic stratification. Socialism needs the organic nation. The organic nation needs socialism.
Socialism is not synonymous with what you ‘men of the right’ disparage as the Left. Indeed, to cite Alain de Benoist;
’Left? Right? That’s over.’
I think that, eventually, the pro-White movement will have to realize that it’s not a movement of ‘the Right’. However the movement is imagined, it is not – concretely – a movement by right-wing forces to secure the power of a ruling class. So I think it’s an impediment to expansion to refer to the movement as ‘Dissident Right’. Were it not for historical accidents, the movement could just as easily be described as ‘Dissident Left’. At this time, Whites not the ruling power seeking to consolidate that power. Whites are now political insurgents seeking to construct a new political order (however much people might want to use the past and a template). That strikes me as more a project for a movement ‘on the left’ as it were.
“They have achieved their position through a combination of affirmative action, dark triad traits…”,
In my experience, there are just as many evil male ladder climbers as female ones except in HR of course.
Researcher Kevin Dutton found the ten most psychopathic jobs to be 1. CEO, 2. lawyer, 3. TV/Radio media, 4. salesperson, 5. surgeon, 6. journalist, 7. police officer, 8. clergy, 9. chef, 10. civil servant.
In my personal experience, 2 and 4 are disproportionately a mix of really good and really bad; 5, 6 and 10 are a mix of slightly above average, boring, and bad, the one 9 I met was a bit choleric during work hours, 8s at least are good conversationalists, the 1 I knew was stingy and egocentric, but he’d have your back in times of trouble, and I haven’t met any 3s.
I’m personally ashamed that us lawyers have to settle for the silver.
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