Agreeing and disagreeing with Alain de Benoist

Generally speaking, I think Alain de Benoist is the best of the “New Right” thinkers.

I believe he was right in his attack on globalism, liberalism, the melting-pot, and he was right in his support of ecology, and right in supporting federalism, with his belief in a Europe of specific peoples each with their own identity, with a kind of universal ethnostatism, defending the right of all peoples to their own “distinctness.” I would say it another way, as being against racial supremacism and imperialism, where one race is seen as noble or chosen and all others are not. The right of all races to live and evolve with variety needs to be affirmed.

I think Benoist was wrong in his criticism of capitalism in the United States, which has brought the highest standard of living to the world in human history, and in the shortest time. The problem comes when capitalism is the sole cultural interest without religion or art, and when capitalism steps beyond its natural bounds of economic nationalism, intruding on the independence of other nations.

I think Benoist made the mistake of radicalism when he rejected Christianity outright, the religion of the West, preferring to go back to Indo-European paganism.  It is better to affirm the Revealed Religions as well as the natural world of the evolution of life to Godhood, in the Twofold Path of Evolutionary Christianity, which takes science into account as well. Revitalized Conservatism takes the middle way, altering the new to the old, and the old to the new, and  promotes all races and cultures, living in small states, connected by a light federalism, evolving all the way to Godhood, affirmed by a revitalized religion.