Every day, the media tells Americans that the Right poses a unique threat to Our Democracy™. Donald Trump is just like Hitler, and the Republican […]
Every day, the media tells Americans that the Right poses a unique threat to Our Democracy™. Donald Trump is just like Hitler, and the Republican Party has embraced “fascism.” Democracy would have literally died if the GOP won a few more seats in the midterms. This hysterical nonsense is taken seriously by the “adults” in our country, including the current Oval Office occupant, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and the FBI.
But it’s also regurgitated by a growing subset of conservative media personalities who fantasize about a coming “Red Caesar.” Like their liberal counterparts, they predict the emergence of a right-wing, charismatic strongman who will upend the present regime.
That assessment isn’t grounded in reality. Far from it. Any authoritarian political movements will almost certainly come from the Left.
America may soon face one of two kinds of left-wing authoritarianism. One is the soft despotism of liberal technocracy. This authoritarianism wouldn’t overthrow the present structures of our society or upend the economy. In fact, it would have the support of the regime’s major institutions. It would seriously curb civil liberties, such as free speech and gun rights, and feel much less democratic. More people would be arrested over memes, but much would remain the same. Political life in America would look more like contemporary Western Europe.
The other is a radical populism in the mold of Hugo Chavez, the Venezuelan socialist who turned his resource-rich South American nation into a hellhole. This authoritarianism would threaten America’s institutions and overthrow the economic order. It would not be supported by the powers that be and would crush civil liberties to enact massive wealth redistribution programs.
Unlike liberal technocracy, where the guiding principle is that “experts” should be in charge, this radical populism would be motivated largely by race resentment. The desire for revenge against “white supremacy” would inspire a movement to destroy the old America.
Today, an American Chavist movement looks more likely than Red Caesarism. Americans are primed to support its message thanks to popular media and real-world conditions. Plus, Chavism has a natural economic base that consists of gig workers, people stuck in the service sectors, low-skilled immigrants (both legal and illegal), the “lumpenbourgeoisie” (failsons who can’t achieve the lifestyle of their parents), and others who feel left out of American abundance. These growing demographics are turning to left-wing champions as seen in “the squad,” whose constituency will only grow with time.
This is the multiracial working class. Chavism would unite them in a coalition of have-nots. It is one charismatic leader away from becoming a dominant political force.
American Chavism may have similar policies to Bernie Sanders’ presidential campaign platform, but it would have a very different style. It would be aggressive and hostile to the Democratic Party establishment, where Sanders was civil and easily capitulated. Sanders also refused to lean into minority identity politics. His 2020 campaign lukewarmly attempted to incorporate that tendency into his agenda, but it wasn’t his chief focus. By contrast, minority identity politics would be as central to Chavism as wealth redistribution. The economic policies would be both socialist and anti-white.
This radical ideology would tamp down some of the excesses of wokeness. It would be pro-trans, feminist, and accept all the latest fads, but it would treat these as side issues. American Chavists would not let these issues distract from their core message of wealth redistribution. Excessive wokeness hinders successful far-left movements. You can’t get anything done if you’re obsessed with gender pronouns, and you can’t attract a mass following if you look like a freak show. Chavists would stick to what’s popular: anti-white socialism.
And make no mistake about it, anti-white racism is popular. It informs education curricula throughout the country. Two of 2022’s biggest blockbusters, Black Panther: Wakanda Forever and Avatar: The Way of Water, were silver screen denunciations of white settlement. Whites are the butt of every joke, from advertisements to late-night comedy. Politicians love to rail against rich white people. Celebrities can go on hate-filled rants against whites with social media’s approval and fear no consequences. Libraries are now filled with anti-white titles.
Anti-white racism combined with wealth redistribution undergirds support for reparations. Reparations supporters want to use the state to redistribute white wealth to blacks. A majority of Democrats now support this idea.
By focusing on black America, reparations somewhat awkwardly exclude other nonwhites from white wealth. American Chavism would rectify that. Here, the rest of the BIPOC coalition would get their respective “reparations” for whatever injustice they claim. Hispanics deserve reparations for immigration enforcement, Indians for European settlement, Asians for colonialism, etc. Left-wing populism would simply expand this concept to make it more “inclusive,” yet equally anti-white.
Venezuelan Chavism was originally anti-white. Chavez vowed to end the dominance of Venezuela’s white castizo elite and distributed their wealth to the nation’s indios, blacks, and mestizos. Chavez and his successor Nicolas Maduro made good on that promise, turning Venezuela into a tyrannical dump. Former Bolivian President Evo Morales followed this example, promising to empower the nation’s downtrodden indios at white expense. Moderate forms of this racial socialism can also be found in Brazil, Colombia, Chile, Argentina, and Peru. Left-wing populists throughout Latin America know that racial resentment is a potent political weapon.
An American version of this movement won’t be exclusively nonwhite. It will have plenty of white “allies.” Some will join due to their own nihilistic hatred for whites, parents, or surroundings. Others will join for the promises of more welfare and entitlements. Left-wing whites are not scared off by anti-white hatred; they often agree with it and amplify it.
We already saw this “mutliracial” anti-whiteness during the riots of 2020. Many whites joined in the destruction. In some places, like Portland, whites were the majority of rioters, even though the cause was a revolt against “white supremacy” on behalf of black lives. There are enough white Americans stupid enough to back Chavism here.
To be sure, Chavism isn’t imminent. It’s unlikely that we see it emerge on the presidential stage in 2024, as Joe Biden is certainly not a Chavist nor are any of his mooted competitors. But it’s possible that someone would run on this agenda in 2028 or in the 2030s. Radicals are doing much better in Democratic primaries than ever before. Latino socialist Chuy Garcia leads primary polls for Chicago mayor. “The squad” adds more members with every election cycle. Democrats will probably campaign on reparations in 2024. The Chavist message is more popular than ever.
The establishment will not welcome a serious Chavist presidential candidate. It’s fine with reparations, racial quotas, critical race theory, hate speech laws, and new holidays like Juneteenth. None of these things threaten the economic and political order. Chavism would threaten that order. The establishment does not want America to turn into Venezuela. It does not want a leader who would diminish American global power. The elites do not want to lose their homes and possibly be sent to prison for not paying their “fair share.”
Some on the Right may relish this prospect. Anything that upsets the establishment must be good, right? That’s only true when our own people don’t end up paying the price. The redistribution scheme would not be limited to billionaires. The entire white middle class (and much of the white working class) would pay more taxes, surrender their basic liberties, experience more crime, face anti-white racism, and possibly lose their property. Chavism may stick it to the establishment, but we’d also be poorer and more oppressed than before.
The only possible upside is that American Chavism would make the middle class more receptive to the real Right. When threatened by a radical Left that’s openly anti-white, the white middle class will realize that multicultural America is not a utopia. Threats to livelihood are more powerful than any other form of political persuasion. Americans accept the excesses of wokeness because it doesn’t threaten their livelihoods. Transgender ads and a new Wakanda movie do not threaten someone’s house or job. Chavism would.
Chavism promises the realization of multicultural America. It would reject everything great about the old America and turn our nation into a giant favela. Mass immigration and the popularization of anti-whiteness make that future more likely. We can only reject it by restricting immigration and ending anti-white racism for good.