Leaving aside The Donald for one moment, the other thing to take away from this US Presidential race is that Marco Rubio is paradigmatic of the union of centre-right parties and big business throughout the Occident. Rubio’s low trust change in Gang affiliation from 8 to 6 is not one of substance but of tactics in advocating for non-White immigration, just as the donors are the exact same beneficiaries of such population replacement.

The question as to motivation is perhaps more complex than first meets the eye; after all, Rubio has made it his number one talking point to make the public aware of Obama’s systematic efforts to change America. Perhaps such types see their actions as beneficial not just for themselves but for our nations as a whole. Or is this overanalysing empty rhetoric and sophistry?

To any Alt-Righter this is manifest nonsense. Knowing many cucks through political activism it’s a hard sell to suggest that they have any thoughts besides the transitory.

I have had conversations with such people where they agree on the Chinese problem, and begrudgingly accept that we should not compromise food or energy security. Momentarily, that is.

It’s as if they live out an eternally recurring Groundhog Day intellectually and at the stroke of midnight (or later if we’re on the beers) the ideological circuitry resets itself to factory settings and that oh so sweet moment of triumph may as well never happened.

The most frightening part of these conversations is when you ask them what kind of world they want to leave for their children and grandchildren. A non-alcohol glaze settles over their eyes, and then it hits you between yours that such long-term thinking is alien to them.

This type of cuck is an extreme egoist, where only their unenlightened ephemeral gain is ever on the cards for consideration. They must live a brutishly solipsistic life where their future or living children are extensions of themselves, or simply illusions conjured by their intellect to fool their senses.

A concrete example of this type would be an Anglo-European Australian property developer. Hard to visualise when a sleazy Mohametan is the first thing that comes to mind thinking of developers, yes, but persevere.

The NSW government plans for half of Sydney to be living in strata by 2040. This is entirely fuelled by non-White immigration.

Sydney can no longer grow outwards horizontally, so we are told that we must grow vertically to house these immigrants that we have to have. This growth is changing the face of Sydney in more ways than the obvious. Cosmopolitan apartment dwelling is a different mode of living than traditional Australian suburban life.

It is also one ruled with by-laws. This tale of two Sydneys is one where the quintessential Australian activity of having a few mates around for a BBQ over a few beers and perhaps the occasional winnie blue is slated for extinction for one half of the city.

Sardonically poetic, when you think about it. If these new developments are meant to house the new Australians it stands to reason that they will usher in a new “Australian” way of being. The historic Australian nation be damned, the centre-right and big business union has decreed this so.

It is a cold statistical probability that the children of Anglo-European Australian developers will have their birth right stripped from them forced to live like a Singaporean in a flat they do not entirely own and will be habitable for ten years at most. Once this die has been cast and the son or daughter is out of the family home, they’re on their own. Only the developer’s self is real, after all.

It is remarkable that the Southern traditionalist Richard M. Weaver saw this exact same thought process in the 1940s, as attested in the book that was said to have launched the conservative movement (before it became Conservatism Inc):

houses are erected by anonymous builders for anonymous buyers with an eye to profit margins. A certain trickiness of design they often have, a few obeisances to the god comfort; but after twenty years they are falling apart.

Twenty years! Would that these possibly asbestos ridden apartments lasted that long…

Weaver beautifully captures the fons et origo of this logic, stating, “our spiritual impoverishment is followed by material impoverishment”. Once a people loses any notions of the transcendent they lose sight of who and what they are, which can be tracked through changes in the material culture.

Transcendent here does not mean a religious concept but rather something outside and above mundane animal existence. Ethnic feeling and connection is such a thing. When this is gone there is the situation we presently find ourselves in, of anonymous atoms buying and selling to and from other anonymous atoms.

This is the logic of liberalism and the logic of the cucks thus far investigated.

Liberalism doesn’t have to be categorically bad. Consider hedonism, utilitarians recognised the silliness of “pleasure is good, pain is bad” and made a hierarchy of pleasures where higher order pleasures are to be pursued over lower order ones. Even liberal institutions can be used for higher values; there are Masonic lodges in France dedicated to the study of Julius Evola and René Guénon.

The opening hypothesis still could be valid; these cucks mightn’t be the cucks we were looking for. Perhaps there are higher order cucks initiated to use liberalism to benefit our nations and people.

There are two ways this could be possible. The first is the more realistic; being that the centre-right elites truly understand the dire situation our nations are in and seek to alleviate the pangs of a civilisation in decline with a measured dose of distractions and comforts for the populace and a space for the gifted to excel. The second way would be a calculated accelerationism with an eye to spurring on national renewal.

The first is not unprecedented. When the old political order that sheltered Australia in a hostile region collapsed, the Liberal Party thought that strategic concessions to a post-colonial Asia would secure White Australia.

In 1958 the then Immigration Minister Alexander Downer Sr. pinned all his hopes on policies like the Colombo Plan, of allowing Asian students to study in Australia, to reconcile a White Australia with greater engagement in the Asia-Pacific region. As they say, the rest is history. Reality got in the way of such sentiments paving the way for our present state of affairs.

From then on the trajectory was downward. Intentions changed from noble, no matter how naïve, to sinister, with integration coming to mean ethnic displacement.

Make no mistake; this was a deliberate act on the part of successive governments in the 1980s and 1990s. Paul Keating never forgave Samuel Huntington for unpacking the logic behind Keating’s Asianisation of Australia and making it known to the world.

Tony Abbott decided to enter this mix, and it has set the tone for Turnbull as well. Going to the electorate in 2013, Abbott promised to institute what myself and others jokingly called a neo-Colombo Plan. Like anything these days, the meme became real, and the government called it the New Colombo Plan—connect to Australia’s future they advise young Australians.

Instead of being a “one way street” with Asian students coming to Australia, it goes both ways. The logic of goodwill pervades this plan, much likes its forebear, but it remains to be seen if it will indeed dispel the bigotry Asians have for Australians in seeing us as the “poor white trash of Asia”. That’s probably not even necessary for its functioning. Wishy-washy sentiment of belonging may be its garb, but its substance is fostering a generation of technocrats with personal ties to our northern neighbours.

The current Coalition government has a career path for these Australian graduates, and that is being part of the ideas boom. The National Innovation and Science Agenda has a $1.1bn budget to transform Australia into a nation of tech start-ups, and business-based researchers. Unsurprisingly, currying favour with the feminists comes into play with one of the key features of the plan being to encourage women to enter STEM.

The first point of reference to this Agenda people will have are the adverts on television and social media that $28m was set aside for:

The first thing an Alt-Righter will pick up on is the unrepresentative number of non-Whites featured in Australia’s future. It’s not all over, this could just be a strategic concession like the one made decades ago regarding Asian students. The advert finishes with a close up on a White child, smiling into the great warm tech glow that is the future prepared for him, so dog whistling may be at play.

But the more one digs into the plan the more that the idea of making the nation comfortable in decline disappears. It’s not like Social Darwinism is even at play in grooming the crème of the crop for STEM. In November this year as part of this Agenda, a new Entrepreneur Visa class will be created making it attractive for international entrepreneurs to resettle in Australia. Part of this is to make an easier pathway for permanent residence for STEM postgraduates. First comes residence, and then comes citizenship.

This is the exact same logic behind earlier attempts to Asianise Australia. Indeed, in justifying Asian integration the Agenda states,“in the next 15 years China and India together will be home to over 2.3 billion middle class consumers”. This could have just as easily been lifted from the Australia in the Asian Century White Paper (2012) released under the Gillard government—just spruced up to meet the latest fad. It is about being a cog in the global economy, it always has been, and it always will be for these technocrats.

In directing the Australian economy towards STEM this Agenda is not doing a service to the Australian nation, but rather to an ideological liberalism. The advertisements commissioned by a supposedly centre-right government make it abundantly clear that they have no concept of a flesh and blood Australian, let alone a propositional one.

There is only a spreadsheet with numbers and graphical representations, made possible by native born and overseas born entrepreneurial cogs. These cogs will drive the greater regional and global economy. This will all be done by the sweat of a technocrats brow in having the audacity to come up with the originary idea of the ideas boom itself.

This is not instrumental liberalism for saving a nation, but perhaps the liberalism of those advocating for an Islamic invasion of Europe is.

Where Coalition governments stopped the boats as a side show assuaging anti-immigrant sentiment in the electorate whilst overseeing unprecedented levels of legal migration, European centre-right governments are doing the opposite. The voices of the Alt-Right have been loud and steady on this invasion, making it a redundancy to add my own, so let’s get straight to the point.

Should one get past their disgust reflex over these events, they would see the way this is playing to a dissident right framework. One could be forgiven for thinking that a cabal of initiates are directing events under the mantra of worse is better. Every decision made seems to send Europe one-step closer to an incredibly nasty civil war.

It didn’t have to be that way, and that could be the point.

In 2010 Merkel declared multiculturalism to have “failed, utterly failed”. Besides it being The Current Year, how could someone go against their prior well-reasoned argument becoming in favour of its opposite in just five years? Rational human beings do change their mind when offered contrary evidence, but no such evidence exists to support multiculturalism. This is the first point in favour of this accelerationist thesis.

The only consistent force opposing immigration and offering a humane corrective is what the media term the "far right". The centre-right throughout Europe side with the left time and again to oppose these various organisations. The most recent example would be the collusion of Nicolas Sarkozy’s UMP with François Hollande’s Socialist Party to exclude Marine Le Pen’s Front National from office. The only reason any organisation of the right would do such a thing would be because they are trying to make the fire rise. Higher.

Instead of a whimper, these initiates are fomenting a bang to kick-start the Reconquista of Europe. This is an incredibly risky enterprise, and I don’t think this is the risk taking the Turnbull government is trying to foster in the Australian public with entrepreneurialism.

This is where the thought experiment unravels itself. No one who truly knows would be this irresponsible, dancing on the edge of a knife. If they truly knew what they were doing they would also understand that for renewal to have any meaning it must be voluntary and not out of necessity. Speaking of the values required to make European peoples great again, Guillaume Faye postulates:

The problem for us Europeans is not having these values imposed upon us, on account of our cowardliness, by Islam—as is already happening—but rather of being capable of asserting these values ourselves by drawing them from our historical memory.

Only we few, we miserable few that truly know what we’re up against and for what we stand can find a way back to normality for our people. It can be only us. When you boil it down, a cuck is a cuck is a cuck. There is no such thing as one that is riding the tiger or using the energy of the enemy against itself.

The traditional concerns of treacherous centre-right politicians and their financial backers are typical of them all, even if it may be expressed differently. The crude self-interest of the basic type is no different to the delusions of grandeur possessed by the technocrat. Nor is it that far removed from the dopamine rush the European cuck gets when abolishing his or her own race. They are all victims of modernity, which is not to absolve any blame.

There is only us. The time is short, and our work is serious.