The Strong Horse

Legionnaire has a post up on acting progressive to subvert the progressive machine. While I think has strategy has merit, I think it is not the correct path.

The first objection is simply the lefter-than-thou complex of the Jacobins. The Jacobins will happily cannabilize their own and their allies the instant they show any sign of impure thoughts.

You may be able to succeed in infiltration for a while, but eventually something you say will be outside the warren’s acceptable limits and you will be ejected. The strategy will simply not work long-term on an individual level.

But, far more important is that it will be counter-productive in the long-term.


The Jacobins succeeded by being utopian and nice, then slowly expanding the definition of nice. The original Jacobin revolution ended rapidly after they began the Terrors. The more moderate Gramscian Joacobins succeeded by inches. They positied one small change as “nice”, “fair”, “equal” and this didn’t seem so bad, so people went along with it. (ie: a small pension so the nearly dead don’t spend their last couple years in miserable poverty). Each little “nice” thing added up until we came to our current cruel, inhuman behemoth. (ie: A pension system where rich 65 year-olds play golf on their non-existent, unemployed grandchildren’s dime).

Reaction can not win that way. It is not nice and never will be. Reality in this fallen world is harsh and ugly; those who are putting forth reality will be putting forth something harsh and ugly, not something nice.

Violent restoration is near impossible and even if it succeeded, what we’d end up with in the end would hardly be what the reaction desires. I’m sure the Jacobins neither desired nor foresaw their revolution would end with a Corsican dictator and a Europe-wide war.

So we have to restore gradually, but we can not restore in the same manner the Jacobins ushered in their gradual revolution.


If we look at the current state of the Jacobins, we can see they keep their power mainly by control of the cultural institutions and by barely hidden aggression (such as that used on Watson, Richwine, Card, etc.). Neither of these can be defeated through Legionnaire’s form of subversion. It only plays into the Jacobites power.

By acting progressive you are further cementing the Jacobin’s apparent control over the cultural institutions. Know this, the apparent control is far weaker than it seems on the surface. A number of times in univerity after I made some right-wing (but not yet reactionary) point I was told after the fact that the person agreed with me but didn’t want to say anything. Others currently in the system have told me that people in the university system are not as left-wing as it seems, as its mostly a few really loud people and others simply going along to get along. The illusion of the Jacobin’s control is what builds the Jacobin’s control. By acting progressive you are furthering that illusion. By being open, you are shattering that illusion of consensus and control.

We will here go to Asch’s conformity experiments, which demonstrate that most people will conform to the group even when the group is objectively wrong in an easily verifiable way. Think about what kind of conformity can be manufactured for something as amorphous and hard to verify as politics.

But the more interesting part of the experiment was when the subject received a partner. The addition of a single confederate confirming the truth dropped the incidence of conformity by 80%.

If the Jacobins can force the illusion of progressive conformity, this will simply build the conformity, but if one person simply stands, the illusion is shattered.

As for the punishment, it is primarily social and economic. They can not use naked violent force, for that would shatter the “nice” stereotype they’ve built for themselves, so they weild social pressure instead. If reactionaries show an unwillingness to bow to this pressure and willingly accept the consequences they show the weakness of the actual threats (such as in Vox’s McRapey saga).  This cripples the threatening power of the punishment.

I made numerous crimethink in university. My favourite was when I stated, regarding affirmative action, “why should I be punished because my ancestors were better than others’ ancestors?”. One young women’s mouth, literally, fell wide open in speechless shock. Other than some minor attempts at shaming, I never received any punishments for my crimethink. My grades didn’t suffer, my friends remained my friends, my classmates mostly remained friendly. There were no real negative consequences apart from some easily ignorable shaming. If others see this, the threats will be robbed of their nonexistent power.

In addition, if reactionaries stand with those being punished, then suddenly the social and economic consequences aren’t so bad. If, for example, the right goes to see Card’s Ender’s Game in theatres en masse, this will further rob the Jacobin’s threats of their seriousness.

Reactionaries need to stand strong as individuals to destroy the illusion of control the progressivists have.

Reaction is the ideology of reality and of strength. If we look unconfident of our views, we will lose before the battle begins. If we show weakness we are dead. Hiding the reaction, even with the intent of subversion, will fail, because it will paint us as the weak horse.

Reaction need to be the strong horse.

Look to Islam; the West, especially the Jacobins, falls on its knees mouth wide open before the Islamicists, when what the Islamicists desire for our society is far more contrary and repugnant to the Jacobin’s stated beliefs than even the most extreme reactionaries. Yet the Jacobins bite the pillow and present themselves.

Why? Because Islam is strong. The Islamacists do not quaver, they do not worry about social ostracism, they do not worry about their jobs. They simply fight.

What we must realize is that the modern Jacobin is a spineless, emasculated sham of a man, and he knows it. He allows his women to control him, he licks the boot of his strongest enemies, and he worships those who would do him harm. He beats on conservatives because he knows they will play by his rules and fold in the face of his cultural power. Refuse to play by his rules, refuse to fold, and he will kneel. He knows he can do no other when facing his superiors.

The modern Jacobin women longs to submit to a real man. She is so disgusted with the eunuchs around her that she often chooses her career, or to be alone, rather than marry one. Lead and, even if she won’t follow, you will have respect, which is more than she will give the eunuch, even if she does marry (and divorce) him.

If reactionaries want to win, they must become strong, like the Islamicists, so the men kneel and the women respect.

10 responses to “The Strong Horse

  • el sid

    As an athiest from an islamic background and an admirer of islam. I couldn’t agree more with ya.

  • The Time to Stand Tall is Now

    […] Reaction is the ideology of reality and of strength. If we look unconfident of our views, we will lo… […]

  • Conan

    Thank you for this article, it articulates my view on this subject perfectly.

  • The Halls of Darkness | The Legionnaire

    […] however, I recommend you read both “Advice for the Student Reactionary” and “The Strong Horse“.  The first covers how to comport oneself as a young reactionary on a college campus.  For […]

  • What’s a Thought Criminal To Do? | Anarcho Papist

    […] And their tantrum strategies do work. They will continue to work so long as they’re allowed to continue to work. Considering Pax’s own situation, I doubt all those who have the authority to fire him are sold out to modernity. It only takes one crusader and everyone else to stand back, for fear of appearing politically incorrect, for the practice to have power. As Free Northerner states: […]

  • Leap of a Beta

    There are two strong reasons I can think of, beyond what you list.

    The first, and weaker of the two, is that no one is hated as much as a traitor. Anyone attempting this WILL be seen as a traitor, and is going to be treated as such. I’m currently accessing whether I’m going to outright cut ties by unfriending people on my facebook, or have to deal with this traitor status, because I’m tired of censoring myself. Since I’m moving to a different state and going into the trades, I’ve run out of reasons to need to do so.

    The second is that it does not play to the strengths of conservative viewpoints and the neoreactionary movement. The strength of our movement is that it is the truth being backed by the ability to use direct force in physical, mental, and spiritual realms. The strength of progressive leftism is that of the subversive infiltrator, coaxing it’s victims down slippery slopes of emotional rationalizations.

    Each movement can adopt the strategy of the other for limited amounts of time, but will reach a point of limited returns until they switch back to their strengths. Right now traditional values are in such extreme danger because they allowed the progressives to set the rules of those we see today – indirect emotional arguments are the norm, with direct reason seen as a bully. You literally can not make statistical points without being called as ‘picking on’ the individual opposing you unless you spend 80% of your effort framing the argument prior to that to divorce all witnesses association of the discussion from said individual.

    Once we correctly stop apologizing for using direct strength, the conflict will continue to be lost gradually. We will never win while we follow their rules instead of our own. The best we can hope for with such a strategy is to slow the decline.

    I’d rather win, bring glory to my God, my family, and myself.

  • Free Northerner

    Those are great reasons as well.

    I don’t know if you’d need to defriend them. Simply be open; if they’re for reason they’ll remain friends, if not they’ll defriend themselves.

    I think a few people have probably defriended me on FB for some of the articles I’ve posted or arguments I’ve made. It matters not.

  • Lightning Round – 2013/09/11 | Free Northerner

    […] writes more in response on his hidden reactionary strategy. Related: Why liberals keep winning and what to do. Related: […]

  • The Path to Legionnaire: Series Introduction | The Legionnaire

    […] few other concepts, drawing influence from the concepts of the “Alpha Male”, the ‘Strong Horse“, the “Student Reactionary“, the “Mindweapon“, and the […]

  • The 2013 Anti-Progress Report | Radish

    […] No surrender, Free Northerner: […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: