Why Metapolitics? Luís Graça at Forum Prisma Actual in Lisbon (summary of the speech)

In the aftermath of the EU election, let us remember that any right-populist success, the brightest example being Trump, is restricted, unstable and short-term unless it’s supplemented with the cultural revolution, a strong metapolitical basis and a global geostrategy.

The text below is a summary of the speech by Luís Graça, a 26 year old young man from Lisbon, who disclosed at the founding Forum Prisma Actual in Lisbon on May 4, 2019 the concept and the purpose of metapolitics, which is based on ten years of his experience as an activist and his theoretical studies.

Afonso MA, leader of Escudo Identitário which organized the Forum, made sure to support the message, for the first time expressed in his own opening speech, by the very structure of the conference that included the theory of metapolitics as seen and practiced by Escudo Identitário (Afonso MA, Luís Graça, Manuel Rezende), Portuguese geopolitics and geostrategy (Lieutenant Colonel Pilot Aviator of Portuguese Air Forces João José Brandão Ferreira) and paneuropeanism (Olena Semenyaka, international secretary of National Corps, Ukrainian nationalist movement with developed metapolitical, political and military structures and a geopolitical project of Intermarium as a platform for alternative European integration and, basically, a new world order).

Elaborating on the concept of metapolitics, still unfamiliar to many activists on the Right, Luís remarked that true power resides in cultural hegemony, not in police, military or state forces, for the one controlling the cultural spectrum is also in charge of decision making and ruling the masses. His explanations were based on the famous 2001 work by recently deceased Guillaume Faye, “Pourquoi nous Combattons: Manifeste de la Résistance Européenne,” also known as “Why we Fight” (edited by Arktos). Luís dwelled on the following theses from the book:

  • Metapolitics is the social diffusion of ideas and cultural values to provoke a political transformation in the long-term perspective;
  • Metapolitics is an indispensable complement to all forms of direct political action, though in no case can, or should it, substitute such forms of action;
  • Multifaceted Metapolitics approaches agitation and movements, and the population in general, with the goal of forming ideologically an active elite, as well as influencing the population;
  • To conclude, Metapolitics must avoid excessive culturalism, under the risk of becoming an innocuous intellectualism, arrogant erudition of amateur philosophy. It must serve the political objective, possibly forming the main ideas and central concepts of social or civil particularities of its civilizational project.

Further, Luís suggested a synthesis of Faye’s text and disclosed the purpose of Metapolitics: “In a nutshell, the structure of power is Metapolitics, and whoever holds Metapolitics, defines the political game, the Zeitgeist and the Weltanschauung. Deprived of Metapolitics, politics becomes a mere formalism and mechanism of legislation.

Thus, lacking the metapolitical component, some political force can even win elections, but, in the end, will face many difficulties. In the case of right-wing populism, its relevance is very small, and when prime ministers or presidents get elected, they almost always cannot govern in a country no matter how much power they have. Giving the example of Trump, the pressure of the media, civil associations and institutions is so strong that his government can be nothing but unstable. Making politics without Metapolitics is the same as swimming against the tide.”

Proceeding to an analysis of the Leftist use of the idea, he said as follows: “And the Left enthusiastically adopted this approach, starting with the liberal demands of the 20’s and 30’s and ending with the 60’s revolution by means of Cultural Liberalism (I don’t like the expression ‘Cultural Marxism,’ I believe it’s much more complicated), the dilatation of the Overton Window, creating a public debate on taboo subjects and normalizing their axiology. Eventually, they have become the dominant ideology. Not only did they took over but also cemented their positions with political correctness. As a result, their ideology transformed into a dogma and an absolute truth, so whoever questions such ideas gets repressed. And sometimes (or mostly) it is regulated not by political forces or institutions but by society itself employing a great psychological pressure that is not even questioned and perpetuates itself.”

Next, Luís connected the cultural revolution by the Left to the fall of the Estado Novo regime: “And the entity that learnt in the worst way this unending fight for culture by the Left was the Estado Novo. In an attempt to restrict its effects, the regime ditched its matrix and cultural aspect. And the Left filled that emptiness.” Evoking the work by Riccardo Marchi, “Império Nação Revolução,” in which the author argues that the Estado Novo lost its cultural war appliance, Luís reiterates that the regime tried to change the paradigm only as late as during the student crisis of the 60’s. Besides, he mentioned heavily missed Captain Luís Fernandes whose activities in times of the Estado Novo were censored and repressed by this regime.

Approaching the end of his speech, Luís quickly analysed the metapolitical attitudes of the post-Estado Novo era:

“Without palliatives or shame”

  • In spite of a great cultural baggage, they failed in implementing their ideas, in politics, universities and institutions. Disconnected from the social tissue of the population, alienated in their closed groups and old inadequate doctrines, some of them try to import new ideas from the rest of Europe but, again, the latter are often already worn-out and superficial.
  • A phase of no activism in the streets is followed by sporadic actions that lack dynamism, cohesion and persistence.
  • Even worse than street activism, with many failed attempts.
  • Adaptation to new technologies/social networks. Still far from ideal and a long path ahead to walk, but nationalist forces already feel the potential of these tools.
  • Influence groups in a society are almost non-existent, with the exception of some groups and associations, but they have never managed to succeed in their efforts.

Luís concluded his speech by presenting the movement to which he belongs:

“Escudo Identitário noticed what was wrong and defined new strategies, including the idea that the fight for true power must be waged in the metapolitical domain. Action and thought; excellence, aesthetics and discipline. We have the ambition to start a public debate on controversial topics, to create a publishing house, to invest in professional short films that expose fracturing messages, as well as to increase social interaction and to hold more actions. We will continue improving our work on the image, capitalizing in social networks, understanding of new technologies, cultivating irreverence and the spirit of the ‘Faustian mission.’ And, in the long-term perspective, it will be political parties that support our ideas who will benefit from it. Because Escudo does not promote a generational conflict, because Escudo is not splitting, because Escudo is not egocentric! Escudo is here to serve the cause, and that’s the true essence of Metapolitics.”

Leave a Reply

Ваш e-mail не будет опубликован. Обязательные поля помечены *