Category: far right

Sallis is Right Again: Farstreaming

Orban moving right.

Read this.

Recall this?

Well, my comment that Jobbik is to Orban’s right no longer holds, because Orban has continued farstreaming to his right, while Jobbik has been mainstreaming to the center.  The two ships have passed each other on the sea of political rhetoric.


Orban farstreaming to the right = sailing to political success.

Jobbik mainstreaming to the center = sinking and hemorrhaging supporters.

Mainstreaming may be good in theory but has no empirical support in practice. Mainstreaming fails.  Pushing the radical envelope succeeds.  Sallis is correct…again.

The Farstreaming Problem

The (partially) failed counterpart to mainstreaming.

I have long been an opponent of the concept of mainstreaming in politics, generally defined as radical political elements moderating their beliefs and rhetoric to move to the center and gain votes for electoral success; in rightist terms, it means moderation of the Far Right to a more centrist orientation with the objective of electoral victory.

Mainstreaming has been for the most part practiced by nationalists in Western Europe (and the Anglosphere, such as Australia) and has exhibited a virtually unbroken record of dismal failure.  Its next test will be this year’s electoral quest of Marine Le Pen. If she is, against all odds elected, and if elected actually enacts useful policies, then mainstreaming will have been partially – not completely – vindicated, and shown to have some limited utility in specific contexts.  If, however, she fails, then any reasonable person may conclude that mainstreaming has been, or should be, completely discredited (at least for the foreseeable future, and, hopefully, permanently). Mainstreaming fails for many reasons, foremost in that the mainstreamers adopt views centrist enough so they can be co-opted by the Establishment Center-Right, while at the same time the mainstreamers are still smeared by the System as “extremists” – leading rightist voters to gravitate to the “safe” choice – the Center-Right.  Furthermore, mainstreaming strikes principled people as dishonest, dishonorable, and cowardly, which, combined with its history of continued failure, makes its adherents seem both of questionable intelligence as well as of questionable character.

But there is a mirror image of mainstreaming that I term “farstreaming” – those at the center moving toward the political fringes in order to exploit populist political niche space and thus ensure electoral success. Sometimes moving to the center is not the key to success, sometimes the voters want more “red meat.”  Particularly in situations where such “red meat” is lacking, or is viewed as too extreme or too disorganized for success, opportunities exist for moderates to reinvent themselves as ”radicals.”  From the rightist perspective, this would be men (and women) of the Center-Right moving toward a Hard Right, if not Far Right, direction, and espousing nationalist-populist viewpoints.  

I’ve previously discussed how the Trump campaign in America was not mainstreaming; actually, it is a textbook case of farstreaming, as Trump adopted rhetoric and positions far to the right of his previously stated opinions on those subjects.  After all, in 2012, Trump criticized Mitt Romney’s entirely reasonable self-deportation idea, while in 2016 Trump moved so far to the right on the immigration issue he had the Alt Right behaving like a bunch of hysterical besotted schoolgirls. Trump’s populism led to electoral success, and now we see the inevitable outcome: betraying his base as he moves back to the center and flip-flops on many of the issues that attracted that base to begin with.

Hence, one major danger in farstreaming – the farstreamers are as dishonest as the mainstreamers, albeit in the opposite direction, and, lacking any deep personal and philosophical connection to their recently adopted positions, they are primed to betray those positions and fall back toward the center at the earliest opportunity.

A more encouraging example of farstreaming is Orban in Hungary, who has so far not betrayed his base and stayed true to his rhetoric (to a point, and I’ve criticized Orban at this blog for his half-way measures).  Point is, Orban was never a Nutzi-turned-moderate; indeed, his Fidesz party was originally libertarian and quite centrist.  The difference in Hungary is that Orban has a credible political threat to his right in Jobbik; the Hungarian people are more nationalist than are (White) Americans, and Orban must be aware that if he cucked like Trump his political support would crater. Thus, the nationalist trends in Hungarian politics and society, represented by Jobbik, exert a political gravitational pull on Orban to the right.  In America, candidate Trump was as rightward as any credible political candidate has been in recent times; with no political threat on his right, Trump feels comfortable in cucking to the center.  The empty rightist political niche space thus emptied needs to be filled with genuine nationalist-populists, who should then move the political window even further right into explicitly pro-White politics.

In summary, both mainstreaming and farstreaming are long-term dead ends for our cause; even in Hungary it is unstable long-term.  Either the Hungarian Far-Right will achieve greater success or they will eventually fade; if the former, farstreamers will be superfluous, if the latter, farstreaming will lose relevance and Orban and his types will move toward the center.  The other possibility is that the Hungarian Far Right mainstreams and becomes indistinguishable from Fidesz, at which point, farstreaming will lose relevance as well.

We need genuine ethnoracial nationalist politics.