Lindsay Liberalism vs. Neo-Buchananism: A Cultural Analysis

How James Lindsay Fashioned a New Cultural Alignment

Following the ideological dominance of post-2016 Trumpian populism, the face of American conservatism has metastasized into something far more dynamic, active, and effective than the remnants of new century neoconservatism. It is evident that young people have become noticeably more “radical” than previous generations. This is to be expected given that we live in a period notably defined by creeping political polarization. However, the fiery zeal of anti-immigration rhetoric bubbling up from the initial Trump campaign of 2016 has now cooled and solidified into a nationalist executive regime that is currently settling the foundation for a new and revitalized Right-Wing (RW) “ascendancy” in the United States.

Driven by widespread dissatisfaction with the status-quo of dominant Western liberalization theory, as well as the suffocating influence of globalization seeping into every element of American society, young citizens are undoubtedly fatigued with universalizability. The rejection of liberalized institutions in favor of bold, uncompromising beliefs. From climate activism to social justice dogma, the iron-fisted hold of Leftism has invoked a heightened attitude of numbing Pyrrhonism over governmental authority, institutional legitimacy, and legacy media. Even more deeply desired is the ability to publicly acknowledge national identity, heritage Americanism, and critique the mandated endorsement of egalitarianism. The reasons for this new wave of skepticism may be due to a variety of social factors, many of which have already been mentioned by mainstream conservative pundits — the decline of church membership, the epidemic of fatherlessness and increased divorce rates, the loss of community, and the swelling public school apparatus responsible for spreading deficient curriculum. Whatever the cause may be, it is crystal clear that this newfound skepticism is activating the new American RW.

James Lindsay and the ‘Woke Right’
The ‘anti-woke’ movement that helped shape the post-COVID conservative culture included a group of academically-inclined figureheads that were not characteristically RW, but ritualistically fetishized free speech and medical objectivity in response to draconian COVID policies. Figures like these included Jordan Peterson, Steven Pinker, Joe Rogan, Lex Freidman, Sam Harris, and others. Such individuals stepped-up to the plate publicly critiquing the growing influence of Wokeism in nearly all major American institutions following the pandemic. “Wokeism,” a term denoting a collective obsession with social justice and rectifying perceived systemic oppression of certain racial and gender groups, was nearing its climax shortly after the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic. James Lindsay inserted himself in the Zeitgeist of anti-woke post-COVID conservatism, a reactionary movement designed to stop post-COVID cultural woke rot. However, Lindsay’s influence predates COVID, and actually started with his 2018 grievance studies affair, winning him many online admirers. Lindsay effortlessly skewered the Left’s madness over the next few years of his ascendency within the online RW despite not formally aligning himself with the conservative movement. Lindsay’s founding of New Discourses also contributed to the conversation with insightful prose on the modern political condition. His appearance on Joe Rogan also threw him into RW relevancy during this time.

Amidst such success, you would think an individual like this would effortlessly become the beloved poster child of the new RW. This did not end up being the case. In the last year, Lindsay has been marketing a new term to help define a part of the developing RW: he calls it the “woke right.”

Essentially, woke right can be defined as an idea (or individual) criticizing classical liberalism. Figures that may come to your mind would likely include those invoking positions that are yet deemed highly ‘nuclear’ in the mainstream political discourse; Nick Fuentes, Richard Spencer, Anthime Gionet, and more. However, these last few weeks prove that the phantom of the woke right isn’t satiated easily. A more mainstream conservative figure like Matt Walsh was suggested to be fraternizing with the woke right by Lindsay. In fact, the term is not limited to people alone. Arby's ham and swiss sandwich is also guilty of being woke right. Tucker Carlson was described by Lindsay as embodying the archaic paleoconservative elements of Pat Buchanan, inviting additional harsh critique by the mathematician. Indeed, Buchanan’s status as vilified conservative “extremist” stands strong in the minds of Leftists today – but, given the present youth culture in conservative spaces; should Carlson or Buchanan be dismissed?

Arby’s is racist, according to James Lindsay. It’s “curtains” for them!

Neo-Buchananism Ascending
Pat Buchanan’s political ideology is an easy one to understand. He stood for everything that the young American conservative craves. Nativism, isolationism, aggressive traditionalism, and all the principles of paleoconservative that have been ostracized from limp-wristed Bush-like Republicanism.

As Richard Nixon’s most reactionary acolyte and speechwriter, Buchanan rose to political relevance and developed a legacy in the conservative movement that is, albeit controversial, but also dynamic and passionate, and it is currently being emulated in the Trump MAGA-movement. Buchanan incessantly lobbied conservatives to reject the moderate GOP, and brought to attention the many concerning components of the post–World War II dogma of liberal internationalism. It is undeniable that MAGA-ism and the Trumpian executive regime rests on the spiritual and ideological contributions of Pat Buchanan. A combination of the classical liberal principles of free-market ideology running in tandem with outspoken cultural traditionalism and nativism is the characteristic force of Buchananism. It is also this strain of conservatism and RW ideology that is longed for by young people in America. It assures that personal stability – and objective reality – exists. It invokes a sense of pride and establishes a firm agentic identity that is requisite for personal development and masculine Western virtue. The elements of this belief system is being presently adopted by hoards of frustrated young RW men (and some women) and applied through various entryism infiltration tactics.

This is neo-Buchananism: the revisitation of old-school ideals that mobilized a generation of anti-Communist activists, a reclaimed nativist outlook on national identity, and the shared renouncement of foreign entanglements ever present in American policy-making.

It was these exact ideals that were targeted and disposed of during the ideological reign of William F. Buckley.

William F. Buckley and Lindsay Liberalism
Ardent Catholic and public intellectual William F. Buckley was a monumental source of influence over latter-20th century American conservatism. Along with his founding of National Review and work on Firing Line, Buckley shaped our conception of modern American conservatism and contemporary classical liberalism. However, his handling of the movement was proven to be more of a cold stranglehold, than a nurturing cradle.

As previously mentioned, following World-War II, the encroaching liberal world order would not tolerate a conservatism that espoused dynamic politicking and pro- national identity rhetoric. It was polarizing. Perhaps, even dangerous. For that, Buckley refashioned the 20th-century RW order into its more tolerable doppelganger. His containment over the movement placed immense pressure on presumed “dissidents” and “extremists,” assuring that only the tenets of global economics and managerialism would prevail. For this reason, Buckley simply existed to make the RW more digestible for general audiences. Identified radicals, such as the members of The John Birch Society, were rooted out and alienated from mainstream political participation and relevancy. He gatekept, he neutered, he suffocated. This management of the American RW performance is what greatly contributed to the presently despised 21st-century Bushist neoconservatism.

Today, we see the patterns of Buckley’s behavior acted out by James Lindsay. Lindsay’s desire to ‘control the narrative’ and socially ostracize anyone invoking a Buchaninist approach to politics is strangely megalomaniacal. His comparison to Pope is just one of these many fantastical elements of Lindsay liberalism. His claims of anti-Communism may be correctly intended, but poorly demonstrated through his additional fear of radical RW propositions. His beleaguered concern over ‘Nazis’ and ‘neofascists’ infiltrating the collective anti-woke agenda is verging on paranoia; ousting anyone motivated to get involved in RW politics aligned with neo-Buchananist principles. Unless, of course, Lindsay truly finds Pat Buchanan’s politics ‘fascist.’ If that were the case, we can deem Lindsay for what he seemingly is: a covert Leftist.

Although Lindsay has been largely admonished online for this ineffective mobilization techniques, he did rally some support of what are considered RW voices. Joel Berry from the Babylon Bee has clarified the true intentions of this newfound ‘philosophy.’ It has little to do with their empty words about keeping radical agents out of the movement (groypers, Nazis, wignats, etc.) and everything to do with keeping the pro-American RW from sitting at the table they built.

Joel pulls no punches.

To this day, Charlie Kirk’s Turning Point USA routinely platforms James Lindsay, allowing him to speak at events like Americafest. Additionally, last week, Daily Wire also platformed Lindsay on Jordan Peterson’s podcast. Why are these ostensibly RW, pro-America organizations buttressing the views of someone who articulates subversive alienation tactics meant to divide our popular movement?

Today, my definitions of the following two underlying movements of modern conservatism stands…

Neo-Buchananism: the revisitation of old-school ideals that mobilized a generation of anti-Communist activists, a reclaimed nativist outlook on national identity through the support of anti-immigration policies, and the shared renouncement of foreign entanglements present in American law-making. This ideology, although not identical to, is similar to and in fact helped inspire Trumpian ethics and the MAGA movement. It is predominantly defined by the importance of culture and defined nationhood.

Lindsay Liberalism: A belief system best acknowledged by the practice of removing perceived elements of extremism in the conservative and RW movements. It philosophically equates itself with classical liberalism and free-market capitalism, however it refuses to consider the underlying cultural influences that may contribute to these principles. It is loosely connected with modern American Libertarianism. Freedom of speech is a characteristic value, although poorly applied. Nationhood and identity are irrelevant.