The Third Rejection Of Alternative Centrism

The Third Rejection of alternative centrism is the rejection of degeneracy. The Third Rejection is the contention that excessive peace leads to degeneracy.

There’s a lot to be said for peace. In particular, peace feels great when you’ve just been through war. The reason why the Establishment Centre comes to power in the first place is because the peace they’re offering feels so good. Many people start to go crazy after the Establishment Right and Establishment Left have trashed everything in their efforts to get an advantage over the other. In their desperation, these people often take the first plausible offer of peace.

The human animal, however, didn’t evolve for peace. We evolved in a cut-throat environment where ‘Kill or be killed’ was the only universal law.

Without a moderate amount of tension, the human animal starts getting bored. And then, much like with dogs, it starts getting destructive. This will for destruction, for destruction’s sake, goes against all vital, healthy and natural instincts. Nevertheless, it appears to be the inevitable result of an excess of peace. In rejecting this degeneracy, alternative centrism takes the side of the instincts that promote the creation and maintenance of life.

Sometimes degeneracy manifests as physical destruction. This nihilistic propensity for violence can be seen in gangs and football hooligans. It’s also seen in the indifference to one’s own physical health exhibited by alcoholics, smokers and uncontrolled eaters. Many pill-poppers fall in this category as well. All of these behaviours, as well as deliberately making oneself more ugly, are ultimately the result of degeneracy.

More often, however, degeneracy manifests as spiritual destruction. This is especially true in the modern world. Because soulless nihilistic materialism is so common nowadays, most people assume that it’s natural and normal. In reality, it’s anything but. So most people suffer an awful existential emptiness and longing for purpose, seldom understanding that both things are the result of degeneracy and are far from natural.

One of the best things about peace is that it finally gives people a chance to overcome trauma. Because most people are traumatised (at least to some degree), most people desire peace. This peace makes a low-stress lifestyle possible, which in turn promotes the ability to heal from traumatic stress disorders. The positive nature of this process is why the Third Acceptance is so acceptable.

There is a negative aspect to this process though, and it’s what inspires the Third Rejection. Most people intuitively understand that if a person is left to overcome trauma forever, to the exclusion of anything else, they will degenerate. Once a person decides to take it easy, they often take it so easy that they lose discipline. They become lazy and fat. After thousands of instances of taking it easy on themselves, they have found themselves degenerating.

The same is true of societies. These follow the same life cycle as everything else natural (as depicted by the Quadrijitu of Elementalism). Once a society decides to take it easy, it often loses discipline too. The decline of the Roman Republic really set in after the Third Punic War, many historians believe, because the Romans became degenerate without an outside enemy keeping them sharp. Absent the threat of war, the Romans grew fat and lazy.

The habit of avoiding conflict for peace can become more than a habit. As William James may have warned us, it can become a character, and then a destiny. That destiny is less likely to be eternal peace and more likely to be chaos or stagnation.

If a man is too peaceful, he doesn’t do anything about crime. In today’s England, the excessively peaceful nature of the average citizen can be seen in their tolerance for Muslim child rape gangs. Some 19,000 children get raped by these gangs every year, an atrocity that could be expected to stir immense anger among the local population. But very little anger is evident. There is some grumbling and some angry social media posts, but there are no protests against the rape gangs, much less revenge attacks. Some of the rapists from the Rotherham gang are already out of prison and again walking the streets they once terrorised. People just accept it.

In fact, British politicians go as far as to play down the importance of these rapes. MP Lucy Powell stated that people expressing concern about the Muslim rape gang epidemic are making a “dog-whistle” to racists and Nazis. Apparently, objecting to children getting pack-raped by foreigners who hate them is a step on the slippery slope to gas chambers. The needs of the white working class who make up the majority of the victims are long forgotten.

History fans will recognise an echo between the children being exploited under the gaze of an indifferent ruling class in England in the 2020s, and the children being exploited under the gaze of an indifferent ruling class in Weimar Germany in the 1920s. The anger of the people was, in both cases, ignored by their ruling class, so it festered. The anger caused by the degeneracy is what gives rise to the Alternative Right.

In Britain at time of writing, the alternative nationalist Reform UK has become the highest-polling party, Most of their voters are angry about immigration, in particular that of Muslims of Africans. These latter two groups generally have vastly negative influences on most areas they move to, and people are angry about having been called racists for pointing this out over the years.

It’s apparent that existing Western society is highly degenerate, and that this degeneracy has led to colossal anger and resentment, and that this anger and resentment is powering a resurgence of the Alternative Right. This is a process expounded in detail in my previous work Clown World Chronicles. It’s enough to summarise here by saying that degeneracy leads to the rise of the Alternative Right through the Third Rejection.

With regard to the Establishment, its primary difficulty is simple: as soon as the Establishment Centre makes peace, the Establishment starts degenerating. It’s almost as if the Establishment Right and Establishment Left become soft and flabby as soon as they stop fighting each other. Maybe they lose purpose with no-one to oppose.

This is why the Alternative Right is deeply involved with active clubs (the point of which being to overcome physical degeneracy) and with occultism (the point of which being to overcome spiritual degeneracy). On the flipside, this is also why they can be deeply involved with control freakery, wowserism and authoritarianism, which is much of the reason for the Fourth Rejection.

In summary, degeneracy is the natural end result of Establishment politics and is what ultimately leads to the rise of the alternative positions, whether those are for or against it. The first to reject degeneracy is the Alternative Right, which is why this is known as the Fourth Position in alternative centrist philosophy.

This chapter is from The Alternative Centrist Manifesto, the upcoming work of political philosophy that offers the answers to the political problems of the West.

For more of VJM’s ideas, see his work on other platforms!
For even more of VJM’s ideas, buy one of his books!

If you would like to support our work in other ways, make a donation to our Paypal! Even better, buy any one of our books!

Some Important Dates In Elementalism

07 FEB – Summer Thermistice

21 MAR – Autumn Equinox

25 APR – Anzac Day

07 MAY – Autumn Equitherm

21 JUN – Winter Solstice

07 AUG – Winter Thermistice

30 AUG – Ernest Rutherford Day

21 SEP – Spring Equinox

12 OCT – First Day of Battle of Passchendaele

07 NOV – Spring Equitherm

17 DEC – Simo Hayha Day

21 DEC – Summer Solstice

Understanding The Psychology Of Gang Members

A lot of energy is currently being directed into solving the gang problem. I grew up in a family full of gang members, so I have some idea. My father was one, my uncle was one, and my brother and one cousin grew up to be one. I went on to get a master’s degree in psychology, so have some special insight into the workings of gang member psychology. This essay shares some of my relevant observations.

The first point worth noting is that the mainstream narrative around the psychology of gang members is grossly inaccurate. This is because the mainstream narrative has been determined and advanced by middle-class people with no experience of gang culture.

Thus, there any many common misconceptions. In reality, people don’t join gangs for economic reasons. If they did, then wealthy America would have far fewer gangs than India and China, when the reverse is actually true. Neither do they join gangs because of colonisation. If they did, there would be no such things as white gangs. Nor would there be Tongan gang members, as Tongans were never colonised. Neither do they join gangs because of a lack of educational opportunities. The narrative that poverty, colonisation or lack of opportunities causes gang membership is pure Marxism.

In truth, people generally join gangs because they are horribly anti-social, and in joining a gang find a community of like-minded people. The vast majority of anti-social mentality comes, in turn, from two major causes: one material, one spiritual.

The material cause is really physiological: abuse and neglect resulting from shit parenting. Shit parents hit their kids, swear at them, lose their tempers in unpredictable ways, and fail to meet their children’s emotional needs. Shit parents fight with each other, do hard drugs, get institutionalised, break up with each other and refuse to get their own mental illnesses treated. All of this leads to immense stress in their children during their most crucial developmental years.

This stress leads to severe delays in emotional development. Brain structures exposed to massive traumatic stress in early childhood can mis- or underdevelop in a wide variety of ways. This leads to behaviours commonly seen in gang members, such as getting upset easily, which is often a consequence of a phenomenon known as limbic hijack. The brain is wired to react to threats to one’s person, and other considerations (such as long-term consequences or consideration for other people) are deprioritised.

The end result is selfishness. A person who is suffering naturally puts themselves first, so a person who is habitually suffering learns to habitually put themselves first. For someone who has consistently done so throughout their formative years, selfishness becomes character. People who have suffered a lot as children tend to put themselves first as adults even when inappropriate to do so – as if they were still children. Understanding this lingering trauma-based childishness is key to understanding the psychology of gang members.

The vast majority of gang members have suffered an upbringing characterised by severe abuse and neglect, whether physical or psychological. This is why the first thing that has to be understood about gang members is that they are, emotionally speaking, literally children still. If you would take the mind of a three-year old child and put it in the body of a 110kg male who everyone else was scared of, it would behave with similar levels of impulsivity, selfishness and aggression to the typical gang member.

A recent X post by Steve Stewart-Williams showed that toddlers are the most violent age group of all, and that people gradually become less violent as they age out of toddler mentality and grow into adults. Anyone whose emotional development is stunted, e.g. by traumatic abuse and neglect, won’t grow out of this toddler phase as fast, if at all. Some of those end up as manchildren with tattoos and bad attitudes.

It’s at this point where a reader might object that the vast majority of abused children do not go on to become anti-social or gang members. This is absolutely correct. The second factor, the spiritual factor, must be in play as well.

The spiritual cause of anti-social behaviour is even more complex than the material. Ultimately it’s a matter of thinking that evil is good and good is evil. This requires a complete spiritual warping, something that usually only happens in evil circumstances.

The main spiritual aspect is mimicry. Growing up trash like I did, I observed the high esteem afforded to adults in gangs. Other family members acted like older people who were in gangs, whether family or friends, were the coolest thing that it was possible to be. Men who had reputations for being particularly aggressive or cruel were afforded the most respect of all. In an anti-social environment like this, normal and healthy moral values are twisted and warped beyond recognition.

In anti-social families like mine – of which there are thousands in New Zealand alone – decent people are treated with contempt. As with pre-civilisational savages, kindness is seen as a weakness. Respect comes from having done time in prison, or having earned a reputation as a fighter. Children in such environments naturally mimic the displayed values of their elders, and come to value aggression and cruelty themselves. In doing so they start to climb the reverse dominance hierarchy of the anti-social. In this reverse dominance hierarchy, feelings are weakness, and turning them off and going down the psychopathy spectrum, a.k.a. “hardening up”, is an act of heroism.

A normal person would be ashamed to behave with the mindless, impulsive aggression that the typical gang member does. Gang members don’t think of their actions as childish, though, but rather classy, rebellious, cool or heroic – much the same way children rationalise abusing people. Do you remember hitting a younger sibling to “teach them a lesson”? If so, you have a good idea.

In a gang environment, however, all the common values are inverted. Reckless stupidity becomes bravery. Mindless sadism becomes dominance. Shallow preening and posturing becomes class. Perhaps worst of all, a soulless moral nihilism becomes dispassionate reason. It’s a total slave morality, but with a bestial veneer. A moral revolt of those not even fit to be slaves.

Perhaps the crucial spiritual aspect is a refusal to believe in any spiritual consequences for selfish actions. Of all the gang members I have met, I have never met one who believed in karma, and if I ever did I would assume that this person was on the way out of the gang scene. The universal logic seems to be that if you can escape legal consequences, then you escape consequences.

In summary, it’s the combination of bad material and bad spiritual influences that creates the anti-social mindset that leads to people joining gangs.

Just getting abused doesn’t make a gang member. Many people who get heavily abused as children become depressed rather than sadistic. Many swear off the idea of violence altogether and become the most peaceful people of all. A heavily abused child is many times more likely to become sadistic than a non-abused one, but that doesn’t tell the whole story.

Just being evil doesn’t make a gang member either. Plenty of evil people go into politics, religion or marketing instead of becoming gang members. Many would argue they cause much more suffering thereby. Gang members are rare: there are around 10,000 in New Zealand, which is only 1 in every 500 people. If the rate of evil in the general population is 5%, then gang members make up at most 1 in every 25 evil people.

The combination of physical and psychological damage is key. An abused child who has learned that gang members are exemplary has no real chance at life. It’s very likely they become a gang member too (there are multiple men in my family in this category). The only real solution – given that gang members are allowed to breed – is philosophy.

For more of VJM’s ideas, see his work on other platforms!
For even more of VJM’s ideas, buy one of his books!

If you enjoyed reading this piece, buy a compilation of our best pieces from previous years!

Best VJMP Essays and Articles of 2023
Best VJMP Essays and Articles of 2022
Best VJMP Essays and Articles of 2021
Best VJMP Essays and Articles of 2020
Best VJMP Essays and Articles of 2019
Best VJMP Essays and Articles of 2018
Best VJMP Essays and Articles of 2017

If you would like to support our work in other ways, make a donation to our Paypal! Even better, buy any one of our books!

The Third Acceptance Of Alternative Centrism

The Third Acceptance of alternative centrism is the acceptance that the Establishment Centre is correct when they speak of the importance of peace.

The Establishment Right and the Establishment Left love to fight. Both feel that they have a legitimate right to rule and are willing to assert that right with force. Thus, much of the march of history is one ruling class fighting a would-be ruling class, back and forth, over years, decades and centuries. Whether it’s nations or classes doesn’t matter. The war to impose order and to be free from someone else’s imposed order goes on and on. Without a peacemaking force that brings both sides to the negotiating table, either side will escalate conflict as soon as they perceive themselves to have an advantage.

This leads to endless war. The logic of extremism is war – the more extreme, the less room for negotiating, thus the more force and aggression. Both the Left and the Right see the will to negotiate peace as weakness. But without peace, nothing gets built, everything gets destroyed. If the Establishment Right and the Establishment Left were the only players in history, it would be a never-ending battlefield, where peace was only achieved by the strong and even then was always temporary. They would lay waste to every facet of civilisation in their fervour to get an edge over the enemy.

When the major political forces act like this, no-one can be wealthy. All wealth is commandeered for the various war efforts, and then destroyed in the war itself. Bombings, artillery strikes and battles destroy buildings and infrastructure. Medical costs from war are extreme, and wounded veterans are much less likely to go on to produce an economic surplus. And of course dead people can’t produce any wealth at all.

Worst of all, the infighting risks that one gets conquered by outsiders. Outside forces that would steal a nation’s wealth take notice when that nation’s Establishment Right and Left are fighting each other. They then swoop in to wipe out the survivors.

This process leads to the rise of the Establishment Centre. The Establishment Centre is not interested in arguments about how the Establishment Right represents quality (or order/stagnation) and the Establishment Left quantity (or freedom/chaos) and blah blah blah. They have little time for the abstract, let alone the metaphysical. They are immensely practical – and equally godless.

The really good thing about the Establishment Centre is that they succeed in getting the other wings of the Establishment to agree on the value of peace, and thereby to negotiate instead of fight. In so doing, they end the cycle of violence between those two wings. This gives them a very special role in the historical development of human society. If the Establishment Centre can negotiate peace between the other wings of the Establishment, prosperity inevitably follows.

Solon might have been the first Establishment Centrist in Western history. He was brought to power at a time when there was immense discord between the wealthy and the poor in Athens. The city-state was on the brink of civil war on account of widespread debt slavery. Both sides trusted him to be an impartial arbiter between them.

The genius of Solon was that he was able to find an acceptable balance between the excessive order of his predecessor Draco, and the excessive chaos of the disadvantaged who wanted to redistribute everything. This did not satisfy the extremists on both sides, but it satisfied enough of the moderates of both sides that they agreed peace was better than further conflict. The influence of Solon’s reforms led directly to the Golden Age of Athens, and he is remembered as one of the Seven Sages of Athens.

The Third Acceptance, then, accepts that peace is more valuable than either excessive order or excessive freedom, and that peace is usually best found by finding the right balance between order and freedom. This Third Acceptance is the key to understanding why the Establishment itself is so enduring – its centre acts to correct any excesses that might form in either wing, so that the overall edifice remains balanced.

In today’s modern democracies, the Establishment Centre often ends up taking control by virtue of controlling the balance of power. Because the most stubborn, irrational and antisocial elements drift to the wings (this is as true of the Alternative as it is of the Establishment), the Establishment Centre often finds itself with more reasonable and intelligent people than either wing. As such, they often come to be seen as the natural leaders of the Establishment.

In New Zealand, this phenomenon is seen with Winston Peters, leader of the pseudo-nationalist New Zealand First party. As an Establishment Centrist, he often finds himself holding the balance of power with 6-7% of the vote. This means that he can play the Establishment Right and Establishment Left off against each other to get the best deal. It also gives him veto power over the makeup of the government. This position in the centre is so powerful that, even after 30 years of broken promises and sleaze, he still cannot be dispensed with. European countries with similar systems often have similar problems.

The phenomenon is not as obvious in America and Britain, because America has a two-party system and Britain has a First Past the Post-style system. Consequently, the largest party in any general election in either country seldom has to rely on the support of the Establishment Centre. It could be, and has been, argued that such an arrangement is inherently unstable and leads to warmongering (the history of America and Britain since the founding of the Federal Reserve certainly supports this argument).

The Establishment Centre, in whatever time and place, is usually full of merchants. If no aristocrats are available to stop the timocrats from fighting, the oligarchs have to step up and find the way to a peace agreement. The Right and the Left might criticise the merchantry as unprincipled, but the merchants themselves would counter that firmly-held principles lead only to bloodshed. Better for everyone to just chill out and trade.

Generally this arrangement has indeed brought peace. It could be argued that historical examples of lengthy peace were often examples of times when the Establishment Centre was in charge. The times of the greatest expansion – and profits – of the British Empire was the time inbetween the Napoleonic Wars and World War I, when men like Nathan Rothschild had the greatest influence. After World War II, another lengthy peace followed the Establishment Centre’s assertion of liberal democracy.

The alternatives to the Establishment Centre finding peace are continual crackdowns and oppression under the Establishment Right, revolutionary chaos under the Establishment Left, or endless warfare under them both. So the Establishment Centre often ends up coming to power, as Solon did, with a mandate from the rest of the Establishment to negotiate peace. The Third Acceptance accepts that this process is natural and good.

There is a problem with eternal peace, though – it leads to the Establishment coming together against the people. This is a unique form of corruption that manifests as degeneracy. It is this process of degeneration and its results that are rejected by the alternative centrist in the Third Rejection.

This chapter is from The Alternative Centrist Manifesto, the upcoming work of political philosophy that offers the answers to the political problems of the West.

For more of VJM’s ideas, see his work on other platforms!
For even more of VJM’s ideas, buy one of his books!

If you enjoyed reading this piece, buy a compilation of our best pieces from previous years!