Politics, Metapolitics, & Hegemony

1,200 words

As Kevin Deanna has observed, every election is now the most important election of our lifetimes, and we are always one electoral defeat away from total disaster.

It didn’t used to be that way. Twenty years ago, it was easy for White Nationalists to be indifferent to electoral politics because, from our point of view, there were no real choices between the major political parties. Our options were only slightly different versions of anti-whitism: open borders, globalization, multiculturalism, and pandering to perpetually aggrieved minorities. We could vote for anything, as long as it was anti-white.

Since overturning anti-whiteness is the most important issue for me, I saw no point in voting. Instead, I was focused on broadening the options at the ballot box by persuading people that white survival is at stake and that we need closed borders and remigration to save our race and civilization.

At this point, we can introduce a distinction between politics and what I like to call metapolitics. Metapolitics is what comes before politics. In this case, politics is about choosing between the different political options on the ballot, whereas metapolitics determines what issues are on the ballot in the first place.

If you want to know the dominant values of a society, the things that are sacrosanct, you don’t look at the things you can vote on. High taxes aren’t sacred if you can vote for low taxes. Freedom of speech is not sacred if you can vote for censorship. What is sacred in a society is what you can’t vote against.

I call such ideas “hegemonic,” since hegemony is a form of domination. But hegemony is not specifically political power. Hegemonic ideas don’t need to struggle against other ideas in the political realm. Instead, they set the range of possible political battles. Anti-whiteness is hegemonic, which is why all we can vote for are different flavors of anti-whiteness.

Politics today is much more exciting for White Nationalists because our metapolitical efforts are paying off. In 2015, when Donald Trump announced his candidacy for president, immigration and globalization—both of them anti-white—were politically hegemonic. There was a consensus in the major political parties not to compete on these issues, even if voters wanted it. Trump rejected that consensus. He questioned the value of globalization and immigration. That’s why millions of Americans rejoiced, myself included. Similar nationalist, populist, and immigration-restrictionist ideas were making headway in Europe as well.

No, Trump and other national populists are not rejecting anti-whiteness as such. But they are rejecting crucial anti-white policies, and that’s a start. They are doing things we would do if we were in power. Granted, they aren’t doing them for the reasons that we would do them. But their policies, if carried through, will at least slow down white demographic decline. This will give White Nationalists more time to set things right.

Anti-whites have reacted to national populism with equal but opposite passions. Political “civility”—which just means acceptance of the same hegemonic ideas—has broken down. Before the rise of national populism, white extinction was simply built into the political process. Pro-whites couldn’t fight against it, and anti-whites didn’t have to fight for it. But now white survival is the great political battle of our time.

This is why politics has become increasingly polarized, uncivil, and existential. Whites are now literally fighting for our existence, and the Left is literally fighting for our destruction. The Left see this as an existential struggle too, for anti-whiteness is now the only thing sacred to the Left. The political center is the “common ground” between Left and Right. The center will slowly disappear, because there is no middle ground between white survival and white extinction, and no issue is more important.

Left and Right are no longer different political tendencies within the same people. Instead, they are rapidly becoming two different peoples: quite explicitly with the Left, which has bet everything on race-replacement immigration. But when two different peoples share the same territory and political system, there can be no peace. They must either separate or fight it out.

Multiparty democracy is dying in America. Multiparty democracy presupposes that it is safe to hand the power of the state—in effect, a loaded gun—over to one’s political opponents from time to time. But the Left clearly thinks the Right is too dangerous to be allowed back into power. Thus, as soon as the Left returns to power in the US, they will try to ban the Right altogether. It is slowly dawning on the Right that they can’t afford to let this happen. It is madness to hand state power to those who regard our destruction as a holy cause. Whichever party bans the opposition first will rule unopposed.

This is why every new election will be the most important of our lifetimes, and why we are all ways one election away from disaster.

You can buy Greg Johnson’s The White Nationalist Manifesto here.

So, are we going to keep doing this forever?

Obviously, not. We simply need to ban the Left, which is to say: the militant vanguard of anti-white politics. But there are superficial and deep ways to do this, which correspond to the distinction between politics and metapolitics.

Banning the Left politically means shutting down its parties and NGOs and banning its members from participating in political life. The sooner we do this, the better. Nothing can be fixed until that happens.

But it is only a short-term solution. The long-term solution is to purge the Left from all important institutions of society: education, the media, publishing, the arts, the churches, etc. In short, we must eject the Left from any institution that shapes the culture and minds of the next generation. For if we leave these institutions in the hands of Leftists, they will simply create more Leftists. Thus the only way to permanently defeat the Left is to break the mold, so no new Leftists are produced.

Victory is not a party of the Right taking power and then defending itself forever against the ceaseless onslaught of rabid Leftists. Instead, victory is ending the Left forever by seizing the means of cultural production.

As a White Nationalist, I define ultimate victory as making pro-white ideas hegemonic, meaning that being pro-white is the essential condition for entering polite society and participating in the political process. What could be more natural than making the identity and interests of a people sacrosanct in its own homeland?

A metapolitical victory will allow us to relax in the political realm. We can even allow multiparty democracy again. You’ll be able to vote for anything, as long as it is pro-white.

Is such a victory even possible? Of course it is. The hegemony of anti-white ideas was established within the lifetimes of many of my readers. We simply need to study how it was created, then use the same techniques to overthrow it and establish a pro-white hegemony in its place.

If we want our people to survive, then we must make our interests and our identity sacrosanct, for what we hold to be sacred is what we will hold onto until the end.

Counter-Currents, April 30, 2026