On Death And Gloating

Should we cheer and laugh at the deaths of our enemies?

In recent weeks I’ve noticed a tendency within the ‘‘Dissident Right’’ of people jeering, celebrating and giggling over the deaths of perceived enemies. A few weeks ago it was the daughter of Alexander Dugin, now it’s Queen Elizabeth II. I began, and then abandoned, an article after the death of the Darya Dugina celebrations — the fervour having subsided after a few days.

However, now that the Queen of the United Kingdom has died I see the same effusion of emotionalism, nihilism and the subsequent justifications on social media.

In both cases the justifications amounted to the recently deceased being the enemies of white people. Darya Dugina was scheming with her father and Putin to bring about the Eurasainist goal of undermining western civilization. The Queen sat passively for decades as Britain was demographically destroyed, thus both were enemies and laughing and gloating at their deaths is fully justified.

Personally, I find the idea that Alexander Dugin poses such an existential threat to my country that I should revel in the murder of his daughter to be ludicrous. Duginism is infinitely less influential within the West than Google, Amazon or The Guardian newspaper. The justification for why I should want Dugin’s daughter to be burned alive will then fall back on Putin’s ‘‘aggressive’’ foreign policy which is an even worse argument when we consider Dugin is not even in the Russian government and, in my view, Western powers have no business meddling in Ukraine in the first place. I do not see any chance or possibility that in an age of nuclear weapons Putin, inspired by Dugin, is about to roll the Russian army across Western Europe.

However, the fundamental question is not whether a given person is or is not an existential enemy, but the morality of publicly celebrating, mocking and joking about death. We can tortuously sift through the dynamics of Russia’s place within the 21st century just as we can recount the lamentable history of post-war Britain and the Queen’s role in it.

As I write, social media is awash in leftists, the so-called ‘‘woke mob’’ posting victoriously and feverishly over the death of the Queen. It’s repulsive, nihilistic and soul-crushing. However, we all know that that is just the left, and they are, after all, repulsive, impulsive, vindictive, cruel and degenerate.

I have to admit though, that it’s both dispiriting and depressing to see such emotional outbursts emerge on the right too.

Are there people alive today who I view as mortal enemies whose demise I yearn for? Absolutely. However in public I try (and sometimes fail) to adopt an aloof and stoic attitude because that is how my forefathers were.

Indeed, when we look back on the past, as people on the true right should, we see scant examples of emotionally charged public ejaculations celebrating the death of enemies. Especially among men with power and influence; histrionics were for the mob. It is the mob who bay for blood at the foot of the gallows and the guillotine awaiting their cathartic pound of flesh. Those with power and responsibility would, in public at least, adopt the air of having served justice or some greater good which was not to be taken lightly.

This is why the people who murdered Darya Dugina did not come out and shit-post about it in public. Conversely, this is also why Hillary Clinton looked like a lunatic when she gushed:

‘‘We came, we saw, he died!’’

In response to Gaddafi being publicly butchered.

The mob are allowed their hysteria and their excitement because they do not have power or responsibility. The powerful betray their position when they engage in jeering and gloating, we view it as crass, dumb and beneath them.

A meme such as ‘‘Ding Dong the witch is dead’’ whether posted by leftists in response to Thatcher dying or within our own circles in response to the Queen dying, is an admission of powerlessness, it is signalling that what you say carries no real weight or influence.

An understandable response to such a statement would be ‘‘But we don’t have power!’’. Which is obviously true and , indeed, an admission that we are a mere angry mob. However, Right-Wing thought is not rooted in plebeian notions of the mass-man but in hierarchical structures which require nobler, less baser reactions to serious events.

Death is a serious business, the death of one’s enemies doubly so.

Such thinking can of course lead to paradoxes and what could be perceived as dishonesty or a coldness. The trope of the ‘‘stiff upper-lip’’ of the British has become something of a cultural meme and joke in and of itself. Yet historically the British stiff upper-lip was not simply the adopting of stoicism during hardship, but the ability to carry-out ‘‘questionable’’ acts while retaining an air of dignity and superiority.

There are, of course, innumerable questionable acts we could name which British men have enacted throughout history while retaining an air of superiority. An example being the precise cause of Napoleon’s death. As Wikipedia puts it:

Napoleon's father had died of stomach cancer, although this was apparently unknown at the time of the autopsy. Antommarchi found evidence of a stomach ulcer; this was the most convenient explanation for the British, who wanted to avoid criticism over their care of Napoleon.

Subsequently French physicians spent years pondering over the mysteriously high levels of arsenic found in Napoleon’s corpse. It is not my purpose here to speculate on the death of Napoleon, but to illustrate that there was a cold and ruthless streak to the European, and especially British, character which was not rooted in emotional hysterics and the modern need to express your ‘‘feelings’’ like a drunken football fan.

Ironically, it was this characteristic in the Queen which so infuriated British nationalists. The Queen was aloof, unfeeling and silent as the country went to hell.

If tomorrow Bill Gates came to a sudden end via one of his own vaccines, or if Tony Blair met an unfortunate demise at the hands of the diversity he imported, what should our reaction actually be? Giggling and guffawing, screaming like teenage girls? Or should it not be the calm and cold:

‘‘Oh, an unfortunate bit of business that’’.

It wouldn’t be easy, but self-mastery never is.

At least Gates and Blair are obviously enemies. In the case of the Queen and Darya Dugina this is up for dispute. So not only do we have to accept the jeering and the gloating, we also have to accept the ideological frame which justifies it, while at the same time rejecting any form of pragmatism or thought as to how this will all be received by the wider public.

This is, as already stated, the mentality of an incoherent mob, and that won’t get us anywhere.