Defining The Right

The history of the political Right Wing is the history of a crisis of identity.

The intent of the current work is to identify and explicate the principial and universal definition of the political Right Wing, and to substantiate its complexity over that of the political Left Wing. It is necessary to first establish that the political Right and Left must be considered not as posterior groupings or placements of various ideas along a metaphorical spectrum, but as two diametrically opposed semantic formulations - that is, as two opposing formulas that apply in the political dimension one of two sets of philosophical and civilizational semantics. The formulas of Right and Left are therefore those singular principles to which all political thought is reducible, and it is these formulas which provide to the terms "Right" and "Left" their principial and universal definitions. It is possible for both of these formulas to participate in influencing the formation of the same political ideal; thus the placement of various ideas on the spectrum of Right and Left in relation to each other should be considered as an indication of which principle - that of the Right or that of the Left - had more influence over the formation of the given idea being considered. It is therefore necessary to understand the principles of Right and Left in isolation and in their universal and applicable mode to establish a cohesive and consistent positive vision for the future of the political Right Wing. What will follow hereafter is an examination and analysis of the nature of each political mode, in order to illustrate a holistic assessment of the formative principles which consist in all ideas within the political paradigm.

This is the fundamental basis on which the definitions of Right and Left can most appropriately and exhaustively be expressed: the Left is defined by an orientation towards human equality; the Right is defined by an orientation towards ontological propriety. The operation of the Left Wing formula is the reduction in value of all human types to the lowest possible degree, to the end of achieving "equality"; the operation of the Right Wing formula is the incorporation of all human types into the principially universal ontological design of the totality of Reality itself, to the end of achieving "ontological propriety" - the proper mode of being according to one's position within this grand ontological design. The Right Wing formula itself is, therefore, the political variant, manifestation, and expression, of the quintessential formula by which Reality operates in its totality, by applying this formula to the political domain, and adapting it accordingly.

The duality of the political Right and Left is not a differentiation that is established on a philosophically equilateral basis; the political spectrum is not an equitarian dyad, it is a qualitatively hierarchical dyad. Both political formulas are universal in their applicability to the totality of human civilization, however they are differentiated by the type of philosophical universalism that is essential to each formula. That which is essential to the Left is a reductive universalism, according to which the value of a thing is assessed on the basis of its most basic material components; that which is essential to the Right is an incorporative universalism, by which the value of a thing is assessed according to its principial function in a paradigmatic design. Thus, there is a fundamental difference in the application of each formula to the human domain, whereby the Left distributes value equally among all human beings, and the Right distributes value along the lines of distinct human types.

At the center of this dichotomy is the question of ontological propriety itself, which is answered by assertions of the logical order of Essence and Existence. Central to the Right Wing formula is the idea by which Essence is understood as ontologically prior to Existence, and central to the Left Wing formula is the idea by which Existence is understood to ontologically precede Essence. In the former understanding, Essence is equated in terms with "metaphysical design", and Existence is understood as that which is provided to this design through the formation of existential bodies, which must exist in a manner that affirms and fulfills the design which serves as their principial source; thus, in this understanding, the examination of principles is elevated to the objective and metaphysical plane, in which the "design" exists in a principial, or "essential" state, which positively affirms the notion of a "proper way of being" for all things that exist subsequent to this design. In the latter understanding, Reality is a disassociated conglomeration of things of a purely physical type which all happen to accidentally or coincidentally coexist at the same time, whereby Existence is defined by the presence of a physical body, and Essence is understood only as a purely psychological notion that assists in the human ability to categorize subjects, thus denying even the notion of a metaphysical design, and by extension denying the notion of a proper way of being; in this understanding, there is not only a negation of ontological propriety, but a negation of any objective standpoint from which to observe such a propriety.

According to the semantics which serve as the basis for the Right Wing formula, existence is provided to that which is less fundamental by that which is more fundamental; in the human dimension, the principial Quintessential Human is understood as being that unreachable fundamental archetype which produces and synthesizes varying lesser human types which must properly operate in accordance with each other in order to fulfill the Quintessential Human archetype. Thus, essential to the Right Wing formula is the idea that human value derives from the alignment of each human type with its proper role and function within the universal ontological design, ensuring that all distinctions and hierarchies are oriented toward fulfilling the Quintessential Human archetype in its ontological position in the more fundamental structure and design of Reality itself, as opposed to the Left Wing notion that every human being is a "blank slate" which inherently possesses the same propensities and ontological value as every other human being. The way in which the Right Wing formula applies to the human dimension is through the integration of the various human types into a larger and more holistic ontological design, each fulfilling a particular function therein, and each valued according to the way in which they do so. The way in which the Left Wing formula applies to the human dimension is through the rejection of determined human types and the relegation of all human beings to the lowest possible equilibrium.

Therefore, though both formulas are universally applicable to the totality of human beings, the ways in which they apply are diametrically opposing procedures. The Left applies to all human beings the same, whereas the Right applies to each human being in a particular style according to one's ontological design. Therefore, the expressions of Left Wing sentiments appear everywhere the same, whereas the expressions of Right Wing sentiments appear unique at every instance in which this formula is applied, both at the civilizational degree and at the intra-personal degree.

Each human type adheres to the Right Wing formula in a manner appropriate to their type; thus, the way in which a person of one particular type expresses Right Wing sentiments is, generally, from their own perspective, in their own typological mode. Thus, the varying expressions or definitions of Rightism which happen to exist in contrast to the singular definition of Leftism is the result of each human type expressing this sentiment according to their particular mode, from the perspective of their particular civilization. This does not mean that the Right can be defined by "particularism" in contrast to "universalism", but that the universality of the Right Wing formula is a much broader and more holistic type than that of the Left, which reduces all distinctions to the baseline of "equality".

Human civilization was established upon the Right Wing formula, upon (what, in essay "The Hourglass Analogy", we have referred to as) Traditional Semantics, and the universality of this political mode was understood quite thoroughly. Since the introduction of the reductive Left, and the discursive elevation of this formula to appear as the "equal opposite" of the Right, however, the Right has been unable to demonstrate the same level of understanding of its own formula and identity as well as the Left. In contrast to the Left's identity of "equality", the Right has been defined in a number of ways: "hierarchy", "authority", "religion", "preservation of the status quo (conservatism)", "hard work", "Capitalism" "race/nationhood", "family values", etc. Each of these definitions are given by individuals to whom their provided definition of the Right is the way in which the Right Wing formula of ontological propriety applies to them. These definitions demonstrate a restricted and limited frame of consideration which is not broad enough to incorporate the total universality, and which is not abstract enough to understand that which is applied in every definition.

Ancient civilizations differentiated human types on the basis of First, Second, Third, and Fourth Estates, which correspond to the archetypes of the Priest, Warrior, Merchant, and Commoner respectively. The Priest would define the Right as "authentic religiosity", the Warrior as "masculinity, chivalry, heredity", the Merchant as "Capitalism", the Commoner as "work ethic". The common man would express Rightism along lines of leading a family, the common woman would express it along lines of damehood, motherhood, wifehood, and proper femininity. All of these are ways in which certain human types achieve ontological propriety through proper praxis, and thus all of these are included within the political mode of the Right. The Left appears the same in every instantiation of its formula because its formula is, by nature, diminutive, rejecting every and all affirmation of propriety from the same baseline position of human equality, the only criteria for which is the possession of rudimentary vital faculties.