Why Appearance Matters: Aesthetics in Ideology
“Art moves us because it is beautiful, and it is beautiful in part because it means something. It can be meaningful without being beautiful; but to be beautiful it must be meaningful.”
– Sir Roger Scruton
In dialogue with a seemingly kindred spirit, our conversation delved into the criticality of appearance and aesthetics within ideologies and political movements.
The discourse was sparked by the controversy surrounding the unmasking of the enigmatic right-wing figure known as ‘Raw Egg Nationalist.’
Many had much to say about his physical appearance and how it seemingly contradicted his online persona prior to the revelation. His fondness for ‘A10' eyes – an internet meme whimsically linking eye color to societal merit – had been viewed as harmless jest.
However, the unveiled truth revealed that Raw Egg Nationalist did not possess the coveted blue eyes, prompting reflection on the weight placed upon appearance in validating one’s convictions.
Keith Woods swiftly joined the conversation, contributing to the effort to discredit Raw Egg Nationalist by sharing past tweets, personal photographs, and highlighting inconsistencies in his rhetoric.
In retaliation, Raw Egg Nationalist’s supporters turned the spotlight on Keith’s own appearance, drawing comparisons between his image and the leaked photos of their icon, quipping, “Keith’s critique rings hollow when considering his own looks!”
If one were to draw parallels to an equally catty and frivolous, more politically charged rendition of ‘Mean Girls,’ the comparison wouldn’t be far off. Yet, beneath the surface drama lies a fascinating commentary on societal norms.
Returning to my initial discussion with a fellow thinker, our exchange was spurred by criticism directed at the lackluster appearances of figures like Keith Woods and Nick Fuentes – criticism notably voiced by a woman.
In response, someone asserted,
“This is why women shouldn’t have the vote. They prioritize appearance over principles and competence.”
I countered, arguing that such thinking only serves to weaken our faction within the right-wing.
In rebuttal, he sent a photograph from an NSDAP rally, complete with swastikas and cheering crowds, accompanied by the remark,
“You’re right, we need more ‘trad’ Jewish girls in leadership roles!”
His sarcasm was evident, suggesting that I advocated for such a leadership, a notion I promptly refuted.
Yet, the NSDAP’s success in harnessing appearance and aesthetics cannot be denied, as exemplified in the rally photo.
My point remains: neglecting aesthetics in favor of principles and competence alone spells failure.
Aesthetics must be as prioritized as principles and competence – a soul is meaningless without its manifestation.
This prioritization of appearance is not confined to women alone; the majority of the public are the same.
It is the rare artist, dreamers, and visionaries who are the idealists.
Ignoring this fact and bemoaning reality ensures ideological capsize; instead, we must lean into it, and reinvent societal standards from the top down, conforming to the mind of the true visionary.
“Nobody will vote their way out of this stranglehold. Most men shouldn’t vote either; catering to women’s frivolous preferences isn’t sound strategy,” he countered.
His oversight lies in mislabeling it as ‘women’s preferences’ rather than recognizing that Appealing Aesthetics = Correct Opinion, a principle applicable to all but a select few capable of rising above superficial impulses.
The NSDAP understood this inherent human tendency.
Our aim should not be to seek validation from specific demographics but to grasp the theory of the ‘Aestheticization of Politics’ – the exploitation of public perception and attraction to aesthetically pleasing visuals to mobilize mass support.
The mind behind the theory, Walter Benjamin, critiqued this phenomenon, yet its effectiveness remains undeniable – a tool for achieving our objectives.
Richard Wagner, Leni Riefenstahl, Albert Speer, Paul Ludwig Troost, Julius Langbehn – all understood and applied this principle.
Today, we inhabit a feminized, liberal society – a structure I vehemently oppose.
Yet, to reconstruct and revolutionize, we must wield available tools and resources, including the appeal of objective beauty.
Rather than futilely critiquing from the periphery, we must engage with and transform our society’s tools and subjects to effect genuine change.
My interlocutor has yet to respond to my analysis, but I find our exchange both enlightening and worthy of documentation.
Instances abound where attractive individuals enjoy what some term ‘pretty privilege’ – an authority denied to their less fortunate, less aesthetically pleasing peers.
Despite society’s descent into moral decay and anti-aesthetic sentiments, these artistic standards endure in the hearts of the healthy, the well-adjusted, and the soulful.
In time, these standards may cement themselves in our societal fabric, widely acknowledged, accepted, and ultimately embodied.