Journal for the Study of Radicalism

The Techno-Social Vanguard

Lawrence Quill, Hasmet Uluorta — Fri, 17 Jul 2026 00:00:00 -0400

The Avant-Garde and the Administrator

Phillip Gray — Fri, 17 Jul 2026 00:00:00 -0400

In contrast to earlier forms of vanguardism, particularly during the first half of the twentieth century, some types of vanguardists in contemporary politics appear to operate within – and indeed, with explicit support from – established centers of power within a given society. This paper provides initial deliberation upon how this symbiotic interaction has shifted vanguardist organizational structure and tactics in recent decades. Focusing on the rise and role of NGOs as providing a structural and personnel internetworking between vanguardist and managerial systems, this paper will note shared elements within both of these structures, particularly regarding totalistic aims, the imperative drive for compliance, and the use of social pressure as means of achieving preferred goals. This investigation will consider how these two systems modify each other (at the ideational and organizational levels), possible friction-points between these systems, and possible future directions for research into the symbiotic relation between the two.

Making Sense of Christian Nationalism: The Role of Academic Vanguards

Jack C. Byham, Desi Vásquez, Richard T. Marcy — Fri, 17 Jul 2026 00:00:00 -0400

Reactionary Vanguards and the Social Question (Contemporary Vulnerability Politics Between Left and Right Decontestations)

Richard Shorten — Fri, 17 Jul 2026 00:00:00 -0400

This article explores the sources of contemporary reactionism in the light of progressive political theories of vulnerability. Building on arguments set out in my The Ideology of Political Reactionaries, it asks: do ideological recruits to a range of contemporary hard-right formations have a plausible claim to being subjects of vulnerability? And if so, are the vanguards which aim to articulate their interests and/ or act for them in any way justified? The discussion proposes that they are not, primarily because reactionary vanguardists disseminate self-victimising ideas and tropes which are heavily implicated in blaming other likely victims. However, popular support does not start out from nothing; it is aspects of real-world experience that enable such political messaging. While two accounts are familiar already – that popular recruits to reactionism suffer cultural repression (by ‘wokeism’) or economic exploitation (such as in welfare provision stretched thin by migration or in undercut employment wages) – the discussion shifts the emphasis of vulnerability to three more subtle conceptions which progressive theorists have detected: marginalisation, humiliation, and complex violence. To consider these conceptions, the article turns to representations of recruitment to right-wing belief within fiction, foremost to try to profit from an interpretive virtue of empathy in the course of appraising motivations.

What Do Masculinists Want?

Josh Vandiver — Fri, 17 Jul 2026 00:00:00 -0400

Viewing Right-Wing Intellectuals Through a Dual Lens: Vanguard Leadership and Political Ideology

Tamir Bar-On — Fri, 17 Jul 2026 00:00:00 -0400

Using existing research on the leadership of socio-political vanguards, this paper explores three dissident right vanguard leaders (Benoist, Taylor and Sellner) and and contrasts their leadership goals, communication strategies, traits, and behaviors with political leaders on the conservative right. In addition, the paper discusses the three vanguard leaders in relation to their attachment to historical trigger events (e.g., the events of May 1968), ideological inspiration, and impact of their ideas on the radical right or revolutionary right, but in some cases, the conservative right (e.g., destruction of status quo assumptions around immigration or identity, awareness of new ideas such as “ethnopluralism” or “remigration,” and shifts in public consciousness). We argue that political ideas alone are insufficient to account for the success or failure of dissident right vanguards. Effective leadership, through behaviors such as narrative framing and symbolic action, plays a crucial role in transforming ideological positions into mobilizing strategies. In contrast, poor leadership may fragment movements, diminish legitimacy, and prevent long-term impact.

The paper proceeds in four steps. Given the primordial importance of right-wing ideology for all three thinkers, we first trace the main differences between the conservative right, the dissident right, the radical right, and the revolutionary right. Second, we highlight the goals, communication tactics, and rhetorical strategies of vanguard leadership. We compare vanguard leadership to conservative right leadership and apply these insights to our three dissident right vanguard leaders. Third, given that vanguard leaders aim to “shift the public’s consciousness” to make it more amenable to utopian political changes and the dominant ideology,[ii] we highlight the long-term vocation of changing mentalities inherent in our three dissident right vanguard leaders. This does not necessarily mean that metapolitics is a successful strategy, but is one that the dissident right has increasingly adopted on both sides of the Atlantic since the late 1960s due in part to the perception of rightists that more intellectualism was required to supersede the violent historical legacy of the radical right. Clearly not all three dissident right thinkers are directly indebted to Italian Marxist philosopher Antonio Gramsci (1891-1937) who argued that the key to revolutionary change was ultimately the control of attitudes, values, and worldviews in civil society. Of the three intellectuals, Benoist has most often cited and explicitly expressed his intellectual debt to the Italian philosopher. Yet, all three vanguard leaders consistently challenge mainstream liberal or conservative political narratives (in the cases of Benoist and Taylor since the 1960s and 1980s respectively) (“sensebreaking”). They all offer alternative and novel ideological perspectives that pay homage to the past and are simultaneously in tune with contemporary realities through the publication of books, peer-reviewed articles, interviews, or videos (“sensegiving”). In addition, the thinkers in question help to re-shape peoples’ interpretations of political or social issues (“sensemaking”) by challenging terms such as “right” and “left” as outdated (Benoist), introducing new vocabulary into the political lexicon such as “re-migration” (Sellner), or making racial or cultural identity primordial compared to the defense of liberal values inherited from the American or French revolutions (Taylor). We also analyze the trigger events, ideological inspiration, and impact of the three dissident right vanguard leaders. Finally, as there are few studies of vanguard leadership in respect of the dissident right, we conclude with recommendations in respect of vanguard leadership and studies of right-wing movements.

Death for a Dawn

JP ZUQUETE — Fri, 17 Jul 2026 00:00:00 -0400

This paper explores the life, work, and enduring influence of right-wing intellectual Dominique Venner (1935-2013). Initially, Venner engaged in street activism and militancy in France, later dedicating himself to a career as a historian and essayist, fiercely opposing what he saw as Europe’s “decadence.” By committing public suicide as a political protest against the trajectory of France and Europe, Venner cemented his status as a pivotal figure in the Identitarian Movement. His martyrdom sparked the “cult of Venner” among young activists, who now regard his life, words, and texts as ethical and spiritual guides for Europe’s “salvation.”

Editor's Preface

Arthur Versluis — Fri, 17 Jul 2026 00:00:00 -0400

Editor's preface to JSR 19.2

Everything Old is New Again: The Return of the Vanguards

Richard Marcy — Fri, 17 Jul 2026 00:00:00 -0400

[NA]