The Woke Right: How the Radical Left’s Playbook Became the Right’s Secret Weapon
Inside the Tactical Appropriation of Critical Theory, Identity Politics, and Continental Philosophy That’s Rewiring Western Populism
Introduction: The Rise of the Woke Right
The last decade has witnessed a profound shift in the ideological landscape of Western politics. Terms like “woke” and “wokeness,” once rooted in African American vernacular to describe an acute awareness of racial and social injustice, have become cultural flashpoints—invoked by both critics and supporters to signal a broader commitment to social justice, identity politics, and systemic critique. While the left has traditionally been associated with these ideas, a striking new phenomenon has emerged: the so-called “Woke Right.” This label, though sometimes used pejoratively or imprecisely, captures a real and growing tendency among certain right-wing thinkers, activists, and online influencers to borrow, adapt, and weaponize the very critical tools and rhetorical strategies pioneered by the radical left.
The “Woke Right” is not a monolithic movement, nor is it a simple mirror image of progressive activism. Rather, it is a complex, opportunistic blend—a tactical appropriation of leftist methods and continental philosophical concepts, redirected toward goals such as nationalism, traditionalism, theocracy, or even monarchical feudalism. Where the woke left frames its struggle in terms of marginalized identities versus systemic oppressors, the Woke Right recasts the narrative: now, it is the “real” citizens—often coded as white, Christian, or nationalist—who are besieged by a hegemonic liberal, globalist, or secret group of Jewish power elite. This inversion of the oppressor/oppressed binary is not merely rhetorical; it reflects a deeper intellectual genealogy that stretches from Marxist conflict theory and critical theory to postmodernism and the sprawling tradition of continental philosophy.
The emergence of the Woke Right is best understood as a dialectical attack—a negation of personal sovereignty and cognitive liberty, aimed at destabilizing the liberal order from within. In the context of “5th Generation Warfare,” where information, narrative, and perception are the primary battlegrounds, the Woke Right’s tactics are especially potent. They do not seek to restore a lost status quo but to fundamentally reconfigure the terms of political engagement, often by undermining the very foundations of classical liberalism: individual rights, constitutional values, and the ideal of objective truth.
What makes the Woke Right so distinctive—and so disorienting for traditional conservatives and liberals alike—is its selective embrace of critical theory, deconstruction, and postmodern skepticism. These are not mere rhetorical flourishes but deeply embedded strategies, borrowed from the intellectual playbook of the left and repurposed for new ends with shared telos. The result is a form of ideological jiu-jitsu: the Woke Right uses the momentum of leftist critique to throw its opponents off balance, all while advancing a vision that is, in many respects, antithetical to the liberal project.
This article aims to provide a comprehensive exploration of the Woke Right’s intellectual roots, tracing its connections to Marxism, neo-Marxism, postmodernism, and continental philosophy. By examining how these traditions have been appropriated, mutated, and weaponized, we can better understand the dynamics of contemporary ideological conflict—and the stakes of the struggle over the future of Western civilization.
Defining “Woke” and Its Migration Rightward The Origins of “Woke”
The term “woke” has undergone a remarkable transformation over the past century. Its origins lie in African American communities, where it signified a heightened awareness of racial injustice and a call to vigilance against systemic oppression. In the 2010s, “woke” entered mainstream discourse, coming to denote a broader sensitivity to all forms of social injustice—race, gender, sexuality, colonialism, and beyond. To be “woke” was to be attuned to the hidden structures of power that shape society, and to commit oneself to the project of social justice.
This sensibility was undergirded by a set of theoretical commitments, many of which can be traced to Marxist conflict theory, critical theory, and postmodernism. At its core, woke ideology posits that society is structured by systems of oppression—patriarchy, white supremacy, heteronormativity, capitalism—that must be relentlessly critiqued and ultimately dismantled. The tools of this critique include identity politics, intersectionality, deconstruction, and a deep suspicion of universal claims to truth, reason, or objectivity.
The Migration Rightward
What, then, does it mean to speak of a “Woke Right”? At first glance, the phrase appears oxymoronic. The right has long positioned itself as the defender of tradition, order, and universal values—often in explicit opposition to the relativism and identity politics of the left. As the political terrain has shifted, so too have the tactics and strategies of the right. In recent years, a subset of “conservative” and populist thinkers have begun to adopt the very methods and rhetorical frameworks once wielded by the radical left.
The Woke Right is characterized by several distinctive features:
Identity-Based Grievance: Like their left-wing counterparts, Woke Right figures frame politics as a struggle between oppressed and oppressor groups. The difference lies in the identities they champion: the “real” people (often white, Christian, or nationalist) are cast as victims of a liberal or globalist elite.
Moral Superiority: The Woke Right claims the moral high ground, presenting itself as the true defender of virtue, tradition, and the common good—against the decadence and corruption of the liberal order.
Rejection of Liberal Norms: Individual rights, free speech, and constitutionalism are dismissed as tools of elite domination. In their place, the Woke Right advocates for communal, “moral”, or theocratic orders.
Deconstruction and Systemic Critique: Borrowing from critical theory and postmodernism, the Woke Right engages in relentless critique of mainstream institutions, narratives, and values—questioning everything, “just noticing things,” and exposing hidden structures of power.
This migration is not merely superficial. It reflects a deep structural resonance between the tactics of the woke left and the emerging strategies of the right. Both are engaged in a project of delegitimization—undermining the authority of liberal institutions, destabilizing established norms, and mobilizing collective grievance as a source of political energy, creating a post-liberal society.
The Dialectical Turn (See preview of Courtenay’s book on Hegel’s Dialectic)
The Woke Right’s adoption of leftist critical tools is best understood through the lens of dialectics—a mode of thought that emphasizes conflict, negation, and the dynamic unfolding of history. In the Hegelian and Marxist traditions, dialectics is the engine of historical change: every thesis (established order) generates its antithesis (oppositional force), leading to a synthesis (new order). The Woke Right positions itself as the antithesis to liberal modernity, seeking not to restore a lost past but to negate the existing order and usher in a new synthesis—be it nationalist, traditionalist, theocratic, monarchical or feudalistic.
This dialectical posture is evident in the Woke Right’s rhetoric and tactics. They frame liberals as a hegemonic class oppressing “real” citizens, akin to the Marxist bourgeoisie versus proletariat dynamic. They use deconstruction to undermine liberal norms, while pushing for illiberal or post-liberal alternatives. They form alliances with historical figures and regimes—Franco, Orban—that blend authoritarianism with anti-liberalism, nodding to fascist or integralist ideals.
The Role of Continental Philosophy
Underlying this tactical convergence is a deeper intellectual affinity with continental philosophy—a tradition that emphasizes historical context, power dynamics, and subjective experience over the analytic rigor and universalism of American- Western thought. Continental philosophy is the intellectual soil from which Marxism, critical theory, postmodernism, and fascist-adjacent thought have grown. Its key features include:
Historicism: Truths and ideas are shaped by their historical moment (e.g., Hegel’s dialectic of history unfolding through conflict).
Subjectivity: Emphasis on lived experience over abstract systems (e.g., Kierkegaard’s leap of faith, Sartre’s existential freedom).
Power and Critique: Analysis of how structures (language, institutions) dominate and obscure (e.g., Foucault’s power-knowledge, Nietzsche’s genealogy).
Rejection of Universalism: Skepticism toward Enlightenment ideals like objective reason or timeless morality (e.g., Derrida’s deconstruction).
The Woke Right draws selectively from this tradition, adopting dialectics (history as struggle), existentialism (authentic identity against liberal abstraction), and postmodern skepticism (distrust of Enlightenment universalism, favoring narrative or myth). In practice, this means framing liberals as a hegemonic class, using deconstruction to undermine liberal norms, and praising historical regimes that blend authoritarianism with anti-liberalism.
The Limits and Contradictions of the Woke Right
It is important to note that most Woke Right influencers are not deeply engaged with the original texts of Marx, Foucault, or Heidegger. Their use of continental philosophy is pragmatic and self-serving, not doctrinal. Traditional conservatives often reject the Woke Right entirely, seeing it as a betrayal of liberty and constitutional order. The Woke Right label, while helpful as an identifier, obscures the larger scope of far-left and international movements likely driving dialectical negation. Nevertheless, for the purposes of clarity in the midst of 5th generation warfare, it remains a useful conceptual tool.
The Woke Right “openly support” these theories by borrowing their critical tools—conflict, power analysis, deconstruction—to attack liberalism, while redirecting them toward nationalist or traditionalist ends. This aligns with continental philosophy’s focus on historical struggle and critique of universalism. Ultimately, the Woke Right is a cherry-picked, opportunistic blend, not a coherent ideology, driven by political expediency rather than philosophical fidelity.
The emergence of the Woke Right marks a significant development in the evolution of Western political thought. By appropriating the critical tools of the left—dialectics, deconstruction, power analysis—and redirecting them toward new ends, the Woke Right has become a formidable force in contemporary ideological conflict. Its roots in continental philosophy, Marxist conflict theory, and postmodern skepticism provide it with a potent arsenal for destabilizing the liberal order. Yet, its lack of philosophical coherence and its opportunistic embrace of illiberal tactics raise profound questions about the future of conservatism, liberalism, and the fabric of our Constitutional Republic.
In the sections that follow, we will explore in greater depth the intellectual genealogy of the Woke Right, examining how the traditions of Marxism, critical theory, postmodernism, and continental philosophy have been appropriated, mutated, and weaponized in the ongoing struggle over the meaning and destiny of the West.
The Marxist and Neo-Marxist Roots of Modern Woke Ideology
To understand the Woke Right’s intellectual genealogy, one must start with the foundational insights of Marxist conflict theory and its evolution into neo-Marxism. These schools of thought, though originally developed as critiques of capitalism and class society, have provided the conceptual scaffolding for both leftist “woke” ideology and its right-wing mimics.
Marxist Conflict Theory: The Engine of Social Struggle
Karl Marx’s conflict theory posits that all societies are fundamentally shaped by struggles between groups over resources, power, and status. In classical Marxism, the central antagonism is between the bourgeoisie (owners of capital) and the proletariat (working class). Marx argued that the ruling class maintains its dominance not only through economic control but also by shaping the cultural and ideological “superstructure” to legitimize its power.
This framework of “oppressor vs. oppressed” became the template for understanding social conflict in the modern world. The binary logic—one group dominates, another is dominated—proved to be a potent analytical tool, easily adapted to new contexts and identities. In the 20th century, Marxist ideas migrated from the factory floor to the university seminar, evolving into neo-Marxism and critical theory.
Neo-Marxism and the Frankfurt School: Expanding the Battlefield
Neo-Marxists, especially those associated with the Frankfurt School (Theodor Adorno, Max Horkheimer, Herbert Marcuse, among others), recognized that economic exploitation was only part of the story. They argued that power is maintained as much through cultural “hegemony” (a term popularized by Antonio Gramsci) as through direct economic control. The ruling class, they claimed, shapes not only laws and institutions but also the very categories by which people understand themselves and their world.
Critical Theory, rooted in this tradition, seeks to expose and dismantle the hidden power structures that perpetuate inequality. It is characterized by:
Relentless Critique: Every institution, tradition, or narrative is subject to suspicion, as it may serve to reinforce the status quo.
Deconstruction of Legitimacy: The legitimacy of liberal democracy, the rule of law, and even scientific objectivity is called into question.
Expansion of Oppression: The binary of oppressor/oppressed is extended beyond class to include race, gender, sexuality, and other identities.
From Class to Identity: The Proliferation of Oppression Binaries
As critical theory migrated into the academy and popular culture, its analytic tools were increasingly applied to new forms of identity. The oppressor/oppressed binary was no longer limited to economics; it now encompassed:
White vs. Black (critical race theory)
Male vs. Female (feminist theory)
Straight vs. Queer (queer theory)
Western vs. Non-Western (postcolonial theory)
This proliferation of binaries allowed for the emergence of “intersectionality”—a concept developed by Kimberlé Crenshaw and others—which posits that individuals experience overlapping and compounding forms of oppression based on their multiple identities.
The Woke Right’s Appropriation: Inverting the Binary
The Woke Right has seized upon these tools, but with a crucial inversion. Where the left frames marginalized groups as the oppressed, the Woke Right recasts the “real” people—often coded as white, Christian, or nationalist—as the new victims of a hegemonic elite. This is not a simple reversal, but a tactical move that allows the Woke Right to:
Claim Victimhood: By positioning themselves as the oppressed, they tap into the moral authority that comes with victim status.
Justify Illiberal Policies: If the liberal order is a tool of oppression, then extraordinary measures—censorship, strong leadership, even theocracy—can be justified as acts of liberation.
Mobilize Collective Grievance: The language of systemic oppression and collective grievance, once the preserve of the left, becomes a rallying cry for right-wing “populism”.
Critical Theory as a Weapon
The Woke Right’s engagement with critical theory is pragmatic rather than doctrinal. They deploy its tools—constant critique, “just asking questions,” “questioning everything”—not to advance social justice, but to demoralize society by undermining liberal institutions and constitutional principles. They are “just noticing things,” and “asking questions” using the language of suspicion and deconstruction to destabilize the legitimacy of the status quo.
This weaponization of critique is not without precedent. Critical theory has always been a double-edged sword, capable of cutting against any established order. The Woke Right’s innovation is to turn it against the very liberalism that once seemed to be its natural ally.
The Paradox of the Woke Right
It is important to recognize the paradox at the heart of the Woke Right’s project. While they borrow the tools of Marxist and neo-Marxist critique, they do so in the service of goals—nationalism, traditionalism, theocracy—that are fundamentally at odds with the “emancipatory“ aims of the left. This is not a coherent ideology, but a tactical appropriation, driven by political expediency and the logic of dialectical negation.
The Woke Right have drawn heavily from Marxist conflict theory and neo-Marxism, repurposing their focus on power struggles and systemic critique to attack liberal institutions and norms from a right-wing perspective. By adopting the tools of critical theory—such as constant questioning, deconstruction, and the framing of cultural hegemony—they mirror leftist strategies but redirect them toward nationalist, traditionalist, or theocratic goals. This approach is largely pragmatic and opportunistic rather than doctrinal, marking the Woke Right as a movement that selectively borrows from radical left intellectual traditions and tactics to challenge and destabilize liberalism, rather than advancing a coherent ideology of its own.
The Expansion of Oppressor/Oppressed Binaries
The expansion of the oppressor/oppressed binary is one of the most significant developments in the evolution of critical theory and its offshoots. This expansion has not only shaped the trajectory of leftist activism but has also provided the Woke Right with a potent arsenal for its own ideological battles.
From Class Struggle to Identity Politics
The original Marxist binary—bourgeoisie vs. proletariat—was rooted in economic relations. But as critical theory evolved, it became clear that power operates along multiple axes, not just class. The Frankfurt School and later theorists argued that culture, ideology, and identity are equally important sites of struggle.
This insight led to the proliferation of new binaries:
Race: White vs. Black (critical race theory)
Gender: Male vs. Female (feminist theory)
Sexuality: Straight vs. Queer (queer theory)
Colonialism: Western vs. Non-Western (postcolonial theory)
Religion: Secular vs. Religious (various theocratic critiques)
Each of these binaries became the basis for new forms of activism, scholarship, and political mobilization. The logic was simple but powerful: wherever there is a dominant group, there is an oppressed group, and the task of critical theory is to “privilege the underside” of these binaries.
The Logic of Binary Opposition
Jacques Derrida’s analysis of linguistic binaries—where meaning is generated by oppositions, and one side is always privileged—provided the theoretical foundation for this expansion. In Derrida’s view, Western thought is structured by binary oppositions (presence/absence, male/female, white/black), with one term always subordinated to the other. Deconstruction seeks to “privilege the underside,” to give voice to the marginalized and expose the arbitrary nature of these hierarchies.
This logic, when applied to social and political life, leads to a politics of inversion. The goal is not simply to achieve equality but to overturn the existing hierarchy, to elevate the formerly oppressed and decenter the formerly dominant.
The Woke Right’s Inversion: Claiming the Mantle of Oppression
The Woke Right has adopted this binary logic but turned it on its head. Instead of championing marginalized identities, they claim that the “real” people—white, Christian, nationalist, or traditionalist—are now the true victims of systemic oppression. This move accomplishes several things:
Moral Legitimacy: By claiming victim status, the Woke Right gains access to the moral authority that comes with being oppressed.
Political Mobilization: Collective grievance becomes a powerful tool for rallying supporters and justifying radical action.
Delegitimization of Opponents: If liberals, joos, or secularists are the new oppressors, then their claims to moral or political authority can be dismissed as self-serving or hypocritical.
This inversion is not merely rhetorical; it is a strategic adaptation to the logic of contemporary politics, where victimhood is a source of power and legitimacy.
Critical Theory and the Weaponization of Deconstruction
Critical theory’s core mission is to expose and dismantle hidden power structures. The Woke Right has seized upon this mission, but with a twist. Instead of targeting capitalism, patriarchy, or white supremacy, they target liberalism, secularism, and cosmopolitanism. Their tactics include:
Relentless Critique: Every liberal institution, tradition, or narrative is suspect, a potential tool of oppression.
Deconstruction: Borrowing from Derrida, the Woke Right takes apart established meanings to reveal their hidden biases and power dynamics.
“Questioning Everything”: The Woke Right adopts a posture of perpetual suspicion, undermining the legitimacy of mainstream narratives and institutions.
Paltering: actively using truthful statements to convey a misleading impression.
The result is a politics of suspicion and negation, where nothing is taken at face value and every claim to universality is dismissed as a mask for domination. It’s critical theory applied with a “right wing” veneer.
Postmodernism’s Influence: Relativism, Power, and Narrative
Postmodernism, as articulated by Lyotard, Foucault, Derrida, and others, is characterized by:
Skepticism toward Grand Narratives: Universal truths, progress, and reason are seen as tools of power, not neutral goods.
Power/Knowledge: Foucault’s insight that power shapes what counts as knowledge is weaponized by the Woke Right to attack “liberal cathedrals” and “deep state” institutions.
Deconstruction of Truth: All claims to truth are suspect, serving the interests of dominant groups. The Woke Right uses this to dismiss liberal democracy, constitutionalism, and even science as failed or fraudulent.
While postmodernism is often associated with leftist relativism, the Woke Right selectively adopts its tactics, using relativism to undermine their enemies while asserting their own absolute narratives—national destiny, divine order, or the will of the people.
Fascism, Integralism, and Anti-Liberalism
The Woke Right’s rhetoric often aligns with elements of fascism—authoritarianism, nationalism. Calls for strong leadership or a “new founding” to replace constitutional norms echo the fascist and integralist (Catholic theocratic) critique of liberalism as rootless and decadent. Many Woke Right figures frame the U.S. Constitution as a tool of oppressive elites.
Integralism, a Catholic-inspired framework, seeks a state subordinated to religious principles, often rejecting constitutionalism as secular and atomizing. The Woke Right’s flirtation with integralism and monarchy is a direct challenge to the classical liberal ideal of individual rights and the First Amendment of the constitution.
The Continental Philosophy Connection
Underlying all these developments is the influence of continental philosophy. Spanning figures like Hegel, Nietzsche, Heidegger, and Foucault, continental philosophy emphasizes historical context, power dynamics, and subjective experience over the analytic rigor of American founding thought. It is the intellectual soil from which Marxism, critical theory, postmodernism, and even fascist-adjacent thought have grown.
The Woke Right draws selectively from this tradition, adopting dialectics (history as struggle), existentialism (authentic identity against liberal abstraction), and postmodern skepticism (distrust of Enlightenment universalism, favoring narrative or myth). In practice, this means framing liberals as a hegemonic class, using deconstruction to undermine the current order, and praising historical regimes that blend authoritarianism with anti-liberalism.
Conclusion: A Tactical, Not Doctrinal, Movement
The Woke Right have adopted and inverted the left’s frameworks of identity politics, systemic critique, and the oppressor/oppressed binary. By weaponizing deconstruction and perpetual suspicion—tactics rooted in critical theory and postmodernism—they undermine institutions, positioning themselves as the new victims of elite oppression—thereby organizing a new “march through the institutions”. This approach is less about philosophical consistency and more about pragmatic, selective borrowing from Marxism, continental philosophy, and fascist-adjacent thought, all to justify illiberal or traditionalist alternatives. Ultimately, the Woke Right’s strategy is opportunistic and tactical, using these critical tools to destabilize and demoralize.
Critical Theory and the Weaponization of Deconstruction
The Woke Right’s ascent is inseparable from the intellectual legacy of critical theory, which originated within the neo-Marxist Frankfurt School and evolved into a broad project of social critique and cultural deconstruction. While the original architects of critical theory—thinkers like Adorno, Horkheimer, and Marcuse—were primarily concerned with exposing the hidden mechanisms of social domination and the subtle ways culture perpetuates inequality, the Woke Right has appropriated these methods for its own ends.
Critical Theory: Origins and Intent
Critical theory emerged in the early 20th century as a response to the failures of both classical Marxism and liberal democracy. The Frankfurt School, disillusioned by the inability of the proletariat to bring about revolution and alarmed by the rise of fascism, turned its attention from economics to culture. They argued that power is maintained as much through cultural “hegemony” (a concept developed by Antonio Gramsci) as through direct economic coercion. The culture industry, mass media, and even language itself were seen as tools by which the ruling class shaped consciousness and maintained dominance.
The mission of critical theory was to “make the familiar strange”—to reveal the hidden assumptions, power relations, and ideological underpinnings of everyday life. This entailed a relentless skepticism toward received wisdom, a suspicion of all claims to objectivity, and a commitment to “immanent critique”—the process of exposing contradictions within a system from the inside.
Deconstruction: From Derrida to the Digital Age
The method of deconstruction, most famously associated with Jacques Derrida, became a powerful tool for critical theorists and postmodernists alike. Deconstruction involves taking apart established meanings, binaries, and narratives to reveal their internal contradictions and the ways they serve to reinforce power. Derrida’s insight was that meaning is always deferred, never fixed, and that every text contains within it the seeds of its own undoing.
For the left, deconstruction was a way to challenge the authority of dominant discourses—patriarchy, white supremacy, heteronormativity, and so on. It was a method for “privileging the underside” of binary oppositions and giving voice to the marginalized.
The Woke Right’s Tactical Appropriation
The Woke Right has seized upon the tools of critical theory and deconstruction, but with a crucial inversion of intent and target. Where the left used these methods to critique capitalism and traditional hierarchies, the Woke Right turns them against liberalism, secularism, and cosmopolitanism. Their approach is characterized by:
Relentless Critique: Every institution, tradition, or narrative associated with liberal democracy is subject to suspicion and attack. The Constitution, the rule of law, and even the Enlightenment itself are framed as tools of elite domination or as “satanic” constructs.
Deconstruction of Legitimacy: The Woke Right employs deconstruction not to liberate, but to delegitimize. Liberal norms—free speech, individual rights, pluralism—are recast as mechanisms of control, designed to suppress the “real” people (often coded as white, Christian, or nationalist).
Weaponized Skepticism: The Woke Right adopts a posture of perpetual suspicion, “just asking questions,” “noticing things,” and exposing supposed contradictions in the liberal order. This is not a search for truth, but a strategy of destabilization.
This weaponization of critique has profound implications. It transforms the tools of emancipation into instruments of reaction, and it enables the Woke Right to claim the mantle of resistance and victimhood even as it advocates for illiberal or authoritarian solutions.
From Critique to Grievance Politics
The Woke Right’s use of critical theory is not merely academic; it is deeply entwined with the politics of grievance and identity. By framing themselves as the oppressed—victims of a hegemonic liberal elite—they tap into the moral authority that comes with victim status. This allows them to justify extraordinary measures, from censorship to calls for a “new founding” or theocracy, as acts of liberation rather than repression.
This dynamic mirrors the left’s use of critical theory to mobilize marginalized groups. The Woke Right’s grievances are rooted in a sense of lost status, cultural displacement, and perceived existential threat. Their critique is not aimed at achieving equality, but at restoring a lost order or establishing a new hierarchy.
The Limits of Deconstruction
There is a paradox at the heart of the Woke Right’s project. Deconstruction, when taken to its logical extreme, undermines all claims to authority, including those of the Woke Right itself. The relentless suspicion that animates their critique can just as easily be turned against their own narratives, exposing them as self-serving or hypocritical. This is the danger of a purely negative politics: it can destroy, but it cannot build.
Nevertheless, the tactical use of deconstruction has proven effective in the digital age, where information warfare and narrative control are paramount. The Woke Right’s ability to destabilize norms and institutions, to sow doubt and confusion, and to mobilize collective grievance has made it a formidable force in contemporary politics.
Conclusion: Critical Theory and Deconstruction as a Toolkit
The Woke Right have pragmatically adopted the methods of critical theory and deconstruction—once the preserve of the radical left—to relentlessly critique, destabilize, and delegitimize liberal institutions and norms. By using perpetual suspicion, “just asking questions,” and exposing hidden power structures, they mirror leftist strategies but direct them toward nationalist, traditionalist, or theocratic ends. This approach is less about philosophical consistency and more about tactical advantage, leveraging the tools of critique and deconstruction not to liberate, but to undermine, demoralize and destabilize.
Postmodernism’s Influence: Relativism, Power, and Narrative
If critical theory provided the Woke Right with the tools of cultural critique and deconstruction, postmodernism furnished it with a powerful skepticism toward grand narratives, universal truths, and the very possibility of objective knowledge. The postmodern turn, associated with figures like Jean-François Lyotard, Michel Foucault, and Derrida, marked a decisive break with the Enlightenment project of reason, progress, and emancipation.
The Postmodern Condition
Lyotard famously defined the postmodern condition as “incredulity toward metanarratives”—a skepticism toward all-encompassing stories that claim to explain or justify the world. For the postmodernist, claims to truth, reason, or objectivity are always situated, contingent, and implicated in relations of power. Foucault’s analysis of “power-knowledge” revealed how institutions—from prisons to schools to hospitals—produce and enforce regimes of truth that serve the interests of the dominant.
Derrida’s deconstruction further destabilized the idea of fixed meaning, showing that every text is haunted by ambiguity, contradiction, and the play of difference. The result was a profound suspicion of all claims to universality, whether they came from science, religion, or politics.
Selective Embrace by the Woke Right
At first glance, postmodernism would seem antithetical to right-wing absolutism. The Woke Right, after all, often asserts strong claims about national destiny, divine order, or the essential character of the people. Yet, in practice, the Woke Right has selectively embraced postmodern tactics, using relativism and skepticism as weapons against their enemies while asserting their own narratives with absolute certainty.
Dismissing Liberal “Truths”: The Woke Right is adept at exposing the contingency and partiality of liberal claims—universal rights, progress, equality—by framing them as power plays, not neutral goods. They argue that these ideals are masks for elite domination, not genuine universals.
Weaponizing Relativism: While the Woke Right does not reject all truth, it is skilled at “paltering”—mixing truth with falsehood, using ambiguity to undermine opponents, and exploiting the uncertainty of the postmodern condition to advance its own agenda.
Asserting Alternative Narratives: Having undermined the legitimacy of liberal narratives, the Woke Right asserts its own: the nation, the faith, the tradition. These are presented not as contingent or constructed, but as authentic, rooted, and self-evident.
This is not a coherent philosophical position, but a tactical maneuver. The Woke Right uses postmodernism’s skepticism to clear the ground, then plants its own flag in the cleared space.
Fascism, Integralism, and the Attack on Liberal Democracy
The Woke Right’s embrace of postmodern tactics is often accompanied by rhetoric that echoes fascism and integralism. Fascism, with its authoritarianism, nationalism, and rejection of liberal democracy, finds a new resonance in calls for strong leadership, a “new founding,” or the restoration of national greatness. Integralism, a Catholic-inspired vision, seeks to subordinate the state to religious principles, rejecting liberal constitutionalism as secular and atomizing.
Anti-Constitutionalism: Many Woke Right figures frame the U.S. Constitution as a tool of oppressive elites. This is a direct challenge to the liberal ideal of individual rights and secular governance.
Praise for Authoritarian Regimes: The Woke Right often looks to historical figures and regimes—Franco, Orban—that blend authoritarianism with anti-liberalism as models for the future.
These positions are justified not through appeals to universal reason, but through narrative, myth, and the invocation of a higher order—be it national, religious, or civilizational.
Continental Philosophy: The Intellectual Soil
The Woke Right’s selective embrace of postmodernism is rooted in the broader tradition of continental philosophy, which emphasizes historical context, power dynamics, and subjective experience. Continental philosophy is the intellectual soil from which Marxism, critical theory, postmodernism, and even fascist-adjacent thought have grown.
Key features of continental philosophy include:
Historicism: Ideas and truths are shaped by their historical moment (e.g., Hegel’s dialectic of history unfolding through conflict).
Subjectivity: Emphasis on lived experience over abstract systems (e.g., Kierkegaard’s leap of faith, Sartre’s existential freedom).
Power and Critique: Analysis of how structures (language, institutions) dominate and obscure (e.g., Foucault’s power-knowledge, Nietzsche’s genealogy).
Rejection of Universalism: Skepticism toward Enlightenment ideals like objective reason or timeless morality (e.g., Derrida’s deconstruction).
The Woke Right draws selectively from this tradition, adopting dialectics (history as struggle), existentialism (authentic identity against liberal abstraction), and postmodern skepticism (distrust of Enlightenment universalism, favoring narrative or myth).
Mechanisms of Influence and Cultural Osmosis
Continental ideas entered mainstream thought via Marxism, critical theory, and postmodernism. The Woke Right, in turn, adapts these tools to attack their opponents, often with little concern for philosophical consistency. Their foes—so-called “cultural Marxists”—use these tools, so they adapt them in response, creating a feedback loop of critique and counter-critique.
Anti-Liberalism/Post-Liberalism: Both continental philosophy and the Woke Right share a distrust of Enlightenment universalism, favoring rootedness in nation, tradition, or faith over abstract principles.
Rhetorical Style: The dramatic, narrative-driven tone of continental thinkers suits the Woke Right’s apocalyptic rhetoric about “the end of the West” and the need for civilizational renewal.
The Dramatic Style and Existential Urgency
The Woke Right’s rhetoric is often marked by a sense of existential urgency, a call to action in the face of civilizational decline. This mirrors the existentialist tradition—Sartre, Camus, Heidegger—which emphasizes radical freedom, authenticity, and the need to forge meaning in an absurd or hostile world.
Radical Freedom: The existentialist emphasis on radical freedom and responsibility is echoed in the Woke Right’s urgent calls for action—“take back our country”—and their willingness to forge meaning through decisive, revolutionary, acts, aligning the notion of “freedom” with Nietzchean “will to power” or Crowlyian (Thelma) “do what though wilt” vs. individual freewill.
Authenticity and Alienation: Heidegger’s critique of modern technology and inauthenticity inspires right-wing romanticization of rural life, national heritage, and rootedness, often as a reaction against globalized “technopoly.”
Practical Manifestations: Rhetoric, Tactics, Alliances
The Woke Right’s embrace of postmodernism and continental philosophy is not merely theoretical; it manifests in concrete tactics and alliances:
Framing Liberals as Oppressors: The Woke Right casts liberals as a hegemonic class oppressing “real” citizens, mirroring the Marxist bourgeoisie-proletariat dynamic.
Deconstruction of Norms: They use deconstruction to undermine liberal norms, while advocating for illiberal or post-liberal alternatives.
Praising Authoritarian Regimes: There is open admiration for historical figures and regimes—Franco, Orban—that blend authoritarianism with anti-liberalism, sometimes nodding to fascist or integralist ideals.
Limits and Contradictions
As previously mentioned, most Woke Right influencers are not deeply engaged with the original texts of Marx, Foucault, or Heidegger. Their use of continental philosophy is pragmatic and self-serving, not doctrinal. Traditional conservatives often reject the Woke Right entirely, seeing it as a betrayal of liberty and constitutional order. It’s important to acknowledge that the Woke Right label, while helpful as an identifier, obscures the larger scope of far-left and international movements likely driving dialectical negation.
The Woke Right “openly support” these theories by borrowing their critical tools—conflict, power analysis, deconstruction—to attack liberalism, while redirecting them toward nationalist or traditionalist ends. This aligns with continental philosophy’s focus on historical struggle and critique of universalism. Ultimately, the Woke Right is a cherry-picked, opportunistic blend—of some of the most anti-realist, destructive philosophical tenets— driven by political expediency rather than philosophical fidelity.
Conclusion: The Woke Right’s Selective Embrace
The Woke Right have strategically adopted postmodernism’s skepticism toward grand narratives and universal truths, using relativism and deconstruction not to reject all meaning, but to undermine, historical truth, objectivism, and liberal ideals while asserting their own alternative visions of order and identity. By dismissing liberal concepts such as universal rights or progress as mere tools of power, and selectively asserting their own narratives—whether national, religious, or communal moral hierarchies—they mirror the left’s fusion of postmodernism and critical theory. This approach is less about tactical advantage, weaponizing postmodern doubt to destabilize liberalism and legitimize illiberal/ post-liberal, nationalist, or theocratic alternatives.
Fascism: Authoritarianism, Nationalism, and the Rejection of Liberalism
Fascism, as it emerged in early 20th-century Europe, was defined by its authoritarianism, nationalism, and a vehement rejection of liberal democracy. Fascist movements sought to replace the pluralism and proceduralism of liberal societies with a unified, mobilized body politic under strong, charismatic leadership. They viewed liberalism as decadent, weak, and corrosive to the organic unity of the nation.
The Woke Right’s rhetoric often mirrors these fascist themes. Calls for “strong leadership,” a “new founding,” or the restoration of national greatness are not merely nostalgic—they are strategic. They signal a willingness to discard constitutional norms and liberal safeguards in favor of decisive, even authoritarian, action. Figures such as Francisco Franco in Spain or Viktor Orbán in Hungary are sometimes held up as models for how a society might reclaim its “authentic” character through illiberal means.
This alignment is not accidental. As contemporary scholarship notes, authoritarian populism and fascism share several key characteristics: conservative enabling, enforcement of capitalism (often with a collectivist, authoritarian twist), rationalization of violence, rejection of liberalism, enforcement of traditional gender roles, and rampant corruption. The Woke Right, like its fascist predecessors, often frames its struggle as a defense against existential threats—whether from globalism, secularism, or demographic change—requiring extraordinary measures to preserve the nation.
Integralism: The Theocratic Critique of Liberal Order
Integralism, particularly in its Catholic form, offers a parallel but distinct critique of liberalism. Where fascism centers the nation, integralism centers the faith. Integralists argue that the liberal separation of politics from questions of ultimate purpose is a fatal error. Instead, they maintain that political rule must order society toward its final, transcendent end—salvation. This requires a hierarchy of powers: the temporal (state) must be subordinated to the spiritual (church).
Modern integralists explicitly reject the foundational principles of political liberalism: individual rights, freedom of conscience, the separation of church and state, and the legitimacy of government by consent. They see these as corrosive to the true common good, which can only be realized when the state is oriented toward, and ultimately governed by, religious truth. The liberal ideal of neutrality is, for integralists, a mask for secular domination and spiritual impoverishment.
The Woke Right’s flirtation with integralism is evident in its frequent attacks on the U.S. Constitution as a tool of “satanic” or “Masonic” elites, its advocacy for a return to a moral or communal order, and its open discussion of theocracy or monarchy as alternatives to the liberal state. These positions echo Marxist critiques of bourgeois law, but with a theocratic or traditionalist twist.
Neo-Fascism, Authoritarian Populism, and the Global Context
While the Woke Right draws heavily from fascist and integralist sources, it is also shaped by contemporary dynamics of authoritarian populism and the global resurgence of illiberal movements. In countries like Brazil, for example, the legacy of integralism—an ideology blending fascist corporatism with Catholic traditionalism—continues to influence right-wing extremism, even if the original movements never fully seized power. These modern iterations adapt fascist paradigms to local contexts, blending old and new grievances, and responding to both global and local crises.
The interplay between historical fascism and contemporary right-wing extremism is complex. As scholars note, it is not always accurate to classify today’s far right as simply “fascist” or “neo-fascist.” Rather, these movements selectively borrow from fascist and integralist traditions, adapting their rhetoric, aesthetics, and organizational styles to the challenges of the present. The result is a hybrid form—part nostalgia, part innovation—that seeks to harness the mobilizing power of authoritarian, anti-liberal narratives.
Integralism as Reaction: The Negation of Liberalism
Integralism, in particular, reveals itself as fundamentally reactionary—defined by its opposition to liberalism rather than by a positive vision of the good society. Modern integralists often play directly into liberal caricatures, defending the abuses liberalism expects them to defend (such as the Inquisition or the Mortara case) and opposing the ideals liberalism expects them to oppose (freedom, autonomy, pluralism). In this sense, integralism and liberalism are locked in a dialectical struggle, each defining itself against the other as the dialectical poles churn.
This dynamic highlights a key limitation of both fascist and integralist projects: they are determined by the negation of their opposite. They cannot take society “beyond” liberalism; they can only entrench themselves more deeply in the battle lines drawn by liberal modernity. The Woke Right, in adopting these frameworks, risks becoming a caricature of the very forces it seeks to oppose, confirming liberalism’s worst fears about the dangers of unchecked authority and enforced orthodoxy.
The Dangers of Inverted Fascism
The Woke Right, in its most extreme forms, represents a kind of “inverted fascism”—a movement that adopts the tactics and structures of fascism, but with a different set of targets and justifications. Where classical fascism sought to impose a singular national or racial identity, inverted fascism may seek to enforce a new orthodoxy—whether religious, cultural, or ideological—through state power, censorship, and the suppression of dissent.
This dynamic is evident in the Woke Right’s embrace of grievance politics, its willingness to use state power to enforce moral or cultural conformity, and its tendency to frame opponents as existential threats deserving of exclusion or punishment. The risk, is that the movement becomes indistinguishable from the authoritarianism it claims to resist, perpetuating cycles of repression and backlash.
Conclusion: Echoes, Adaptations, and the Future of the Woke Right
The fascist and integral Catholic echoes within the Woke Right are not mere historical curiosities—they are living influences, shaping the movement’s critique of liberalism, its vision of authority, and its strategies for social transformation. Whether through calls for strong leadership, theocratic governance, or the rejection of the Constitution (or its values), the Woke Right draws on a deep well of anti-liberal/ post-liberal thought, adapting it to the challenges and anxieties of the present.
This inheritance is fraught with contradictions. The Woke Right’s reliance on negation—defining itself against liberalism, modernity, and pluralism—limits its capacity to articulate a genuinely new or positive vision for society. Its selective appropriation of fascist and integralist themes may provide rhetorical power and mobilizing energy, but it also risks repeating the very abuses and failures that liberalism was ostensibly designed to prevent. As the boundaries between left and right, tradition and innovation, authority and liberty continue to blur, the Woke Right’s engagement with these legacies will remain a central—and contentious—feature of the ideological battles to come.
Continental Philosophy: The Intellectual Soil of the Woke Right
Continental philosophy, a sprawling tradition that emerged from mainland Europe over the past two centuries, is the intellectual bedrock from which both radical left and right critiques of liberalism have grown. Unlike the Anglo-American “analytic” tradition, which prizes clarity, logic, and empirical rigor, continental philosophy is characterized by its engagement with history, subjectivity, power, and the limits of universal reason. Its influence is global, shaping not only academic thought but also the rhetoric and tactics of contemporary political movements—including the Woke Right.
What Is Continental Philosophy?
Continental philosophy is not a single doctrine but a constellation of approaches, including German Idealism, existentialism, phenomenology, hermeneutics, structuralism, post-structuralism, postmodernism, and critical theory. Its key features include:
Historicism: Truths and ideas are seen as products of their historical context. Hegel’s dialectic, for instance, views history as a process of conflict and transformation, with each era producing its own values and contradictions.
Subjectivity: Continental thinkers emphasize lived experience, meaning, and the individual’s confrontation with existence (e.g., Kierkegaard’s leap of faith, Sartre’s existential freedom).
Power and Critique: They analyze how structures—language, institutions, social norms—dominate and obscure, as in Foucault’s “power-knowledge” or Nietzsche’s genealogy of morals.
Rejection of Universalism: There is a deep skepticism toward Enlightenment ideals of objective reason, timeless morality, and progress (e.g., Derrida’s deconstruction, Lyotard’s incredulity toward metanarratives).
This tradition is “continental” in origin—rooted in Germany, France, and elsewhere in Europe—but its reach extends worldwide, shaping Marxism, psychoanalysis, literary theory, and, increasingly, political activism.
Major Movements and Thinkers
Continental philosophy’s diversity is reflected in its many schools and figures:
German Idealism: Kant, Fichte, Schelling, and Hegel explored subjectivity, history, and dialectics. Hegel’s vision of history as a dialectical struggle is foundational.
Existentialism: Nietzsche, Heidegger, Sartre, de Beauvoir, and Camus focused on authenticity, freedom, and the individual’s confrontation with meaninglessness.
Phenomenology: Husserl, Merleau-Ponty, and Edith Stein emphasized lived experience and intentionality.
Hermeneutics: Schleiermacher, Dilthey, Gadamer, and Ricoeur developed theories of interpretation and historical understanding.
Critical Theory and Marxism: Marx, Gramsci, Adorno, Horkheimer, Marcuse, and Habermas analyzed ideology, culture, and power.
Structuralism and Post-Structuralism: Saussure, Lévi-Strauss, Barthes, Foucault, Derrida, Deleuze, and Guattari examined language, myth, and the instability of meaning.
Postmodernism: Lyotard, Baudrillard, and Kristeva questioned the legitimacy of grand narratives and highlighted the constructed nature of reality.
Other notable figures include Hannah Arendt, Emmanuel Levinas, Simone Weil, Giorgio Agamben, Slavoj Žižek, and Alain Badiou, each contributing unique perspectives on politics, ethics, and society.
How Continental Philosophy Inspires the Woke Right
While the Woke Right is not necessarily composed of professional philosophers, its rhetoric and tactics are deeply indebted to continental thought. This influence is less about doctrinal fidelity and more about adopting a toolkit of ideas—dialectics, critique, deconstruction, and authenticity—that can be wielded against liberalism and modernity.
Dialectics and Historical Struggle
Hegel’s Influence: Hegel saw history as a dialectical process, driven by conflict between opposing forces. The Woke Right echoes this by framing politics as a clash between authentic tradition (nation, faith) and corrosive modernity (liberalism, globalism). Their project is not to reach a Marxist utopia, but to reclaim a lost essence or restore a perceived natural order.
Nietzsche’s Will to Power and Critique of Modernity
Nietzsche’s Revaluation: Nietzsche critiqued Enlightenment morality as a “slave morality” that shackles the strong and vital. He called for a revaluation of values and the assertion of the will to power. The Woke Right channels this energy in its contempt for Enlightenment inspired classical liberalism—such as equality and tolerance—which it sees as tools of cultural decay. The celebration of unapologetic identity and strength, visible in some right-wing subcultures, is a direct echo of Nietzschean themes.
Heidegger’s Being and Authenticity
Authenticity and Alienation: Heidegger’s exploration of Being (Dasein) and his critique of modern technology’s alienating effects inspire right-wing romanticization of, Middle Ages, rural life, national heritage, and rootedness. The longing for an “authentic” existence, against the backdrop of a soulless, globalized technopoly, and power elite of “joos” is a recurring motif.
Foucault’s Power-Knowledge and Deconstruction
Regimes of Truth: Foucault argued that institutions enforce “regimes of truth” to dominate society. The Woke Right adapts this critique, attacking liberal institutions as oppressive “cathedrals” that impose woke dogma. Their deconstruction of mainstream narratives—whether about history, science, or politics—mirrors Foucault’s method, but is used to elevate alternative, often illiberal, narratives.
Postmodern Skepticism of Grand Narratives
Lyotard and Derrida: Both questioned the legitimacy of universal stories—progress, reason, democracy—seeing them as masks for power. The Woke Right’s dismissal of liberal democracy and constitutionalism as failed or fraudulent aligns with this skepticism, even as it asserts its own grand narratives (national destiny, divine order).
Existentialism’s Call to Action
Radical Freedom: Sartre and Camus emphasized the need to forge meaning through decisive action in an absurd world. The Woke Right’s urgency—calls to “take back our country” or launch a “new founding”—reflects an existential stance: the world is broken, and only radical action can restore meaning or order.
Mechanisms of Influence
Continental ideas have entered the mainstream through Marxism, critical theory, and postmodernism—currents that the Woke Right both critiques and borrows from. Their foes (“cultural Marxists”) use these tools, so they adapt them in response, creating a feedback loop of critique and counter-critique.
Anti-Liberalism/Post-Liberalism: Both continental philosophy and the Woke Right share a distrust of Enlightenment universalism, preferring rootedness in nation, tradition, or faith.
Narrative-Driven Rhetoric: The dramatic, apocalyptic tone of continental thinkers suits the Woke Right’s style—decrying “the end of the West” or warning of existential threats in Heideggerian gloom.
Pragmatism Over Doctrine
It is crucial to note that most Woke Right influencers are not reading Being and Time or Marx’s Grundrisse. Their engagement is practical, not scholarly. Continental philosophy provides a toolkit—dialectical conflict, power critique, authenticity fetishism—that can be used to dismantle liberalism and assert a counter-vision. They perceive history as struggle, modernity as alienation, and truth as contested. This resonance allows them to mirror woke left tactics while pursuing right-wing ends, making continental thought a muse for a fractious, emergent ideology.
Conclusion: Continental Philosophy as a Double-Edged Sword
Continental philosophy’s legacy is paradoxical: it has inspired both the radical left and the reactionary right, providing the conceptual resources for critique, resistance, and the assertion of new orders. For the Woke Right, it offers a tactical arsenal—tools for deconstructing liberalism, mobilizing grievance, and legitimizing illiberal alternatives. As the boundaries between left and right continue to blur, and as the struggle over meaning and power intensifies, continental philosophy remains the intellectual soil from which new political formations will continue to grow.
How the Woke Right Mirrors and Mutates the Left’s Playbook
The “Woke Right” is not simply a reactionary movement; it is a sophisticated, adaptive phenomenon that mirrors, mutates, and weaponizes the very strategies and intellectual frameworks of the progressive left. The Woke Right appropriates leftist critical theory, identity politics, and postmodern skepticism—redirecting them toward nationalist, traditionalist, and theocratic ends. In doing so, it blurs the boundaries between left and right, creating a new hybrid form of ideological conflict that is as destabilizing as it is difficult to categorize.
Identity Politics and Victimhood Inversion
At the heart of woke leftism is the politics of identity and systemic oppression: marginalized groups are encouraged to “speak their truth,” challenge dominant narratives, and demand redress for historical and ongoing injustices. The Woke Right has adopted this framework. Rather than focusing on racial, sexual, or gender minorities, the Woke Right recasts white, Christian, rural, or nationalist identities as the new “oppressed.” Liberals, globalists, and secular elites are framed as a hegemonic class, wielding cultural and institutional power to marginalize “real” citizens—much as Marxists once described the bourgeoisie’s domination of the proletariat.
This inversion is not simply rhetorical; it is tactical. By claiming victimhood, the Woke Right taps into the moral authority and mobilizing power that the left has long wielded. Grievance becomes a tool for justifying radical action, delegitimizing opponents, and rallying supporters around a shared sense of loss and injustice.
Moral Absolutism and the Rejection of Liberal Norms
Both the woke left and the Woke Right reject the procedural neutrality and pluralism of classical liberalism. For the left, liberalism’s claims to neutrality are exposed as masks for systemic oppression; for the Woke Right, they are dismissed as tools of elite control, designed to suppress authentic community, tradition, or faith. In both cases, the result is a politics of moral absolutism: compromise is weakness, and only the total defeat of the enemy will suffice.
The Woke Right’s calls for a “new founding,” theocracy, or monarchy echo the left’s revolutionary aspirations, but with a different set of values at stake. The Constitution and Enlightenment principles are recast as instruments of oppression—sometimes denounced as the work of “satanic Masons”—and replaced with appeals to a higher moral or communal order, whether religious or nationalistic in character.
Deconstruction, Critique, and the Weaponization of Theory
One of the most striking features of the Woke Right is its embrace of deconstruction and perpetual critique—tools originally forged by the left in the workshops of critical theory and postmodernism. The Woke Right is “just noticing things,” “just asking questions,” and “questioning everything”—not as a search for truth, but as a strategy for destabilizing the legitimacy of liberal institutions and narratives to mobilize their own “long march through the institutions”.
Since most Woke Right influencers are not deeply versed in Marx, Foucault, or Derrida, their use of theory is opportunistic. This weaponization of critique is pragmatic cherry-picking concepts that serve their immediate goals, resulting in a politics of suspicion and negation, where every claim to universality or objectivity is dismissed as a mask for domination.
Selective Embrace of Postmodern Relativism
Postmodernism, with its skepticism toward grand narratives and truth claims, might seem antithetical to right-wing absolutism. Yet the Woke Right has learned to wield postmodern tactics with skill. They dismiss liberal “truths” about universal rights, progress, or equality as mere power plays, while simultaneously asserting their own narratives of national destiny or divine order.
This is not a wholesale rejection of truth—indeed, the Woke Right is often adept at “paltering,” mixing truth with falsehood, or selective use of truthful statements intending to mislead—a weaponization of relativism against enemies. The same deconstructive skepticism that undermined traditional authority is now turned against the liberal order itself.
Rhetoric and Tactics: Mirroring the Left
The practical manifestations of this mirroring are evident in the Woke Right’s rhetoric and tactics:
Framing liberals as oppressors: Liberals are cast as a hegemonic elite, oppressing “real” citizens in a manner reminiscent of the Marxist bourgeoisie vs. proletariat dynamic.
Deconstruction of norms: Liberal institutions, values, and narratives are relentlessly critiqued and undermined, clearing the ground for illiberal or post-liberal alternatives.
Praise for authoritarian regimes: Historical figures and regimes that blend authoritarianism with anti-liberalism—such as Franco or Orban—are held up as models, nodding to fascist or integralist ideals.
Alliances and the Dark Enlightenment
The Woke Right’s opportunistic approach dovetails with movements like the Dark Enlightenment and neoreaction, which advocate for technocracy, monarchy, or other illiberal alternatives to democracy. These alliances have a shared sense of opposition to liberal modernity and a willingness to experiment with any tool that might bring about its demise.
Critiques, Contradictions, and Limits
Traditional conservatives often reject the Woke Right, seeing it as a betrayal of liberty, individual rights, and constitutional order. The Woke Right’s tactics—borrowed from the left—are viewed as corrosive, undermining the very foundations of the conservative project. Its engagement with critical theory and continental philosophy is pragmatic, not principled; its ideology is a patchwork, driven by expediency. This cherry-picked, opportunistic blend allows the Woke Right to adapt quickly, to mirror and outflank the left, but it also leaves it open to charges of hypocrisy, inconsistency, and nihilism.
The Dialectical Feedback Loop
Perhaps most intriguingly, the Woke Right’s strategy creates a dialectical feedback loop: as the left deploys critical tools to challenge the status quo, the right adapts those same tools to challenge the left’s new hegemony. The boundaries between left and right blur, as each side borrows from and reacts to the other in an escalating cycle of critique, grievance, and counter-grievance.
Conclusion: A Tactical, Not Doctrinal, Movement
Woke Right is not a coherent ideology but a tactical adaptation—a pragmatic appropriation of the left’s most powerful weapons, repurposed for a new set of ends. Its embrace of identity politics, deconstruction, and postmodern skepticism is not principled but instrumental, aimed at undermining liberalism and advancing nationalist, traditionalist, or theocratic visions. As such, the Woke Right stands as a testament to the fluidity and unpredictability of contemporary ideological conflict—a movement defined not by what it believes, but by what it opposes, and by its willingness to mirror and mutate the strategies of its adversaries to serve dialectical negation— aufhebung.
Case Studies: The Woke Right in Action
The theoretical underpinnings of the Woke Right—its blend of critical theory, postmodern skepticism, and continental philosophy—are not confined to the realm of abstract thought. They manifest in concrete movements, organizations, and influential personalities whose actions and rhetoric vividly illustrate this ideological hybrid. By examining key case studies, we can see how the Woke Right’s tactics and worldview play out in real-world contexts, from Christian nationalism to online identity movements and the broader landscape of American and European politics.
Christian Nationalism: The New Theocratic Populism
Perhaps the most visible and organized manifestation of the Woke Right in the United States is the rise of Christian nationalism. This movement is rooted in the belief that America was founded as a Christian nation and should be governed according to Christian principles. Its adherents advocate for laws and policies explicitly based on their interpretation of Christian values, often at the expense of pluralism and religious liberty for others.
A prominent example is the advocacy for a “Christian Prince” or “theocratic Caesarism” by figures like Stephen Wolfe. Wolfe, drawing from Reformed theology, has argued for a system in which arch-heretics and non-Christians could be punished with banishment, imprisonment, or even death. He has also justified violent revolution and emphasized the importance of bloodlines and kinship as the foundation of national identity. This is not a fringe view: similar ideas have found traction in books, conferences, and online communities, with networks extending into influential think tanks, media outlets, and religious institutions.
The movement’s goals are not limited to moral reform. There is an explicit desire to reshape the American constitutional order, stripping away what are seen as “liberal” guarantees—such as free speech, women’s suffrage, and religious liberty for non-Christians. The rhetoric is one of grievance and existential threat, painting white Christian men as strangers in their own country, besieged by a hostile elite. This mirrors the left’s identity politics, but with the axis of victimhood inverted.
White Identity Movements and “White AntiFragility”
Another vivid case study is the emergence of explicitly white identity movements that adopt the language and tactics of critical race theory, but invert its moral logic. For instance, a cohost of the Ars Politica podcast published an article under a pseudonym at the website Identity Dixie, advocating for “White AntiFragility.” He argued that white people should explicitly embrace the ideas of Robin DiAngelo’s White Fragility, but use them to cultivate a sense of group resilience and resistance to critique. The goal is not to transcend identity politics, but to weaponize it for the defense of white, Christian, or “traditional” identities.
This approach is not limited to obscure corners of the internet. It is echoed by mainstream influencers who urge white Americans to internalize their status as victims, to see themselves as besieged and marginalized, and to organize politically on that basis. The language of “adversarial identities” and “grievance politics” is central, reinforcing a collective sense of loss and righteous anger.
Online Ecosystems and the Spread of Woke Right Ideology
The Woke Right’s influence is amplified by a dense network of online platforms, podcasts, and social media influencers. Sites like Gab, the Ars Politica podcast, and broader networks such as the Claremont Institute, the National Conservatism Conference (NatCon), and American Reformer serve as hubs for the dissemination of Woke Right ideas. These platforms foster a sense of community and shared purpose, while also providing a space for the development and propagation of new strategies and narratives.
A striking feature of these communities is their intersectional approach to grievance. As James Lindsay and others have noted, the Woke Right is “roughly intersectional” in its obsession with identity politics, but the identities in question are whites, Christians, men, and straight people. They accept as fact that there is a conspiracy against people like them, and that their only hope is to lean into their group identity and advocate for collective power. This mirrors the left’s intersectionality, but with the categories reversed.
Christian Nationalism and the New Apostolic Reformation
Keep reading with a 7-day free trial
Subscribe to Courtenay’s Substack to keep reading this post and get 7 days of free access to the full post archives.