“[I]n the traditional world we encounter the interpretation of life as a perennial struggle between metaphysical powers, between Uranian forces of light and order, on the one and, and telluric, dark forces of chaos and matter on the other. Traditional man yearned to fight this battle and to triumph in both the inner and outer worlds. A true and just war on the external plane reproduced in other terms the struggle to be waged within: it was a struggle against forces and people that in the external world presented the same traits as the powers the single individual needed to subjugate and dominate internally, until a pax triumphalis was achieved. From this follows an interdependence between the warrior idea and that of a certain ‘asceticism’, inner discipline, and superiority toward or control over one’s self. . . [T]he warrior idea may not be reduced to materialism, nor is it synonymous with the exaltation of the brutal use of strength and destructive violence. Rather, the calm, conscious, and planned development of the inner being and a code of ethics; love of distance; hierarchy; order; the faculty of subordinating the emotional and individualistic element of one’s self to higher goals and principles, especially in the name of honor and duty - these are all elements of the warrior idea, and they act as the foundations. . . The more original form of hierarchy is defined with essentially spiritual values (the Greek word for hierarchy means “sovereignty of the sacred”, hieros). However, it must be pointed out that in many civilizations even the hierarchies with a spiritual foundation either relied on hierarchies that were more or less warrior or reproduced their form at least externally” -Julius Evola
***
Struggle, when considered in this light, is not something to be avoided, but embraced, for just as man struggles with dark forces within, so he must inevitably struggle without. This necessitates the presence and action of the warrior element, which must subjugate the inferior and wage war against chaos, disorder, and their myriad manifestations. The warrior element thus becomes an instrument of the sacred, which must pervade every aspect of civilization. Such a civilization may then truly become a bastion of order, repelling malefic forces and maintaining the link to the divine. In the modern world this element, along with almost all influence from above, is lacking. The warrior element, when it is not entirely opposed, is at best connected with the mercenaries in the service of the bourgeois or plebeian castes. The superior is thus made subject to the inferior as it were dependent upon it, but this is reversal of justice. It is the inferior which needs the superior, never the inverse.

Furthermore, these mercenaries are not warriors except for in exceptional circumstances. As with most modern men, they do not know themselves, but are swayed by vague and empty ideals associated with their nations or else a confused desire to be what they are not. True warriors are so by blood, and it is this chrism which protects them from succumbing to the enemy within as lesser men are bound to do. What is needed, therefore, is the reaffirmation of superior principles, and the subjugation of inferior elements by a restored warrior nobility. It is only this nobility which can face the terrors of war as well as bring law and order to those under their dominion. All else amounts to injustice, which can never bring lasting peace or prosperity.

“Blessed be the Lord my God, who teacheth my hands to fight, and my fingers to war. My mercy, and my refuge: my support, and my deliverer: My protector, and I have hoped in him: who subdueth my people under me.” -Psalm 143:1-2

The surge in transgenderism and the malleability of gender is noticeable to us conservative normies as an infringement against the natural order because it is—to them—a relatively recent phenomenon. It is an obvious form of instilling disorder and chaos because it disrupts the foundational nature upon which a person bases his or her reality. Your gender is inherently a part of who you are. You ARE a man, or you ARE a woman. Casting doubt on such a basic truth significantly debilitates a person’s ability to perceive reality when they cannot safely do as little as understand a blatant, obvious component of his identity.

The same is true for race. Race is a biological characteristic that a person cannot change, and it is a element of his identity. A man IS white, or Asian, or whatever. The enemy pushes racial admixture to destroy whites, but it is a much deeper form of disorder than genocide. Attempting to racially mix people into an amorphous mass of nothingness disrupts a characteristic that is meant to allow people to not only identify themselves but also distinguish among one another.

Humans are limited in their ability to actively care and provide for others. Biological distinctions allow us to understand on whom we should expend what level of attention. Our families are the most similar to us, so we easily recognize their relative importance. Race is meant to allow us to perceive a broader sense of familial bond that directs our attention beyond our immediate relatives.

Without such distinctions, people would have a reduced ability to differentiate among peoples and correspondingly decide how to expend their effort. In the absence of such distinctions, I would guess that people would spread themselves so thin among others that their thousands of cursory interactions would have no impact on anyone.

A somewhat analogous version of this has already occurred with regard to the replacement of hobby with entertainment. Formerly, people could use deep investment in productive hobbies like woodworking, crafting, etc. Those hobbies require genuine understanding and development, and hobbyists can relate to one another to a greater degree than they may relate to people not engaged in that hobby. Now, millions of people “participate” in fandoms of shows and movies that require no effort to consume. Consequently, people end up relating to millions of others on an insignificant level, and their interactions consist of nothing more than likes and comments on social media regarding a certain character or plot point.

Our distinctions exist for a reason.

We've watched a social circle form within dissident right for the last 4 or 5 years, clearly inspired from old reactionary and proto-conservative literature fused with Machiavellianism, grope desperately to try and found areal movement in real life. Their leadership consists of a bunch of content creators, two of which our leadership knew of since 2016. As a whole, they seem more honest and sober than most other content creator communities, including (and much to the faithful's scandal) our familiar traditional Catholic grifters. Despite vain origins, these dissidents have organized meetups, exercised impressive doctrinal tolerance to maximize their in-group preference, and they've made several online and real-life, industry-specific nonprofits already. They might be hitting a bit of a wall when grafting their clearly minority [and in our traditionalist opinion, clearly ill-founded philosophical] worldview into the real world because, unlike us, they don't have any pre-existing infrastructure on the ground; nor is the American populace well acquainted with their approaches, and the same fortunately can't be said for the Church. They really are the definition of atomized individuals pushing into the darkness.

But what's most frustrating part is these dissidents understand the need to tangibly organize more intimately than traditionalists. They're clearly demonstrating how to behave as a common good better than we are, they demonstrate the materialistic imitation of something like our visible church at a time when traditionalists seem not to. It can be frustrating sometimes. What makes the dissidents so motivated to action? Are they closer in ideation to the enemy? Is the lack of a public god to draw their eyes up force their treasures into pure earthly affairs?