“No enemies to the right” is a rule among rightists for a simple reason. As soon as “too conservative” becomes a legitimate objection that must be given serious consideration, leftist values immediately manifest themselves. It is only from a leftist perspective that something could ever appear “too conservative” in the first place. Neoreaction embraces the “no enemies to the right” dictum in order to create a space for the development and analysis of conservative thought from a singularly rightist perspective. Leftist values have nothing to add to the discussion. This leads to the corollary “no friends to the left,” meaning that “too liberal” is itself always a legitimate objection that must be given serious consideration. To be less than totally and absolutely right is to be less than optimal; of course one approaches rightism per se asymptotically, thus there is the incentive to develop more conservative analysis.

Why right? Because society should be arranged so as to produce the best. Leftism, which allies the rulers with the least against the middle, leads to the endless reproduction of the least in society while penalizing the reproduction of the best and subsumes the middle into the least. If this occurs during a period of unparalleled cultural acceleration, then an intense selection event triggered by Gnon shall occur. Gene-culture co-evolution entails that genes cannot get too far past culture, and culture cannot get too far past genes, without being snapped back to equilibrium. Culture is man’s environment, and a rapidly changing environment leaves many unfit. Rightists, contrary to the caricature by leftists, are not seeking only destruction; they only see that society is more expensive than can be realized by those at the bottom, who are truly beneficiaries of the best more than the best are ever benefited by the least.

The conscious and ceaseless striving towards the right is the animating principle of neoreaction. This leads to a number of conclusions.

First, neoreaction is not a movement. It cannot be identified with any individual person or group. It is a culture, with its own bywords and norms which are intended to exclude anyone who might shrink from the task of striving rightward. Individuals, groups, and organizations may persist within neoreaction, but neoreaction is always an idea beyond capture of any person, doctrine, or magisterium.

Second, neoreaction is not new. It is involved in a task which any interested in the purpose of civilization and its operation naturally find themselves pursuing. It might at this moment espouse a novel synthesis of old beliefs with new words and methods, but there have been others in the world that concerned themselves with tending towards the right.

Third, neoreaction is always to your right. It does not exist for any right-oriented group’s purpose. Rather, those on the right exist for it. Neoreaction is not even for so-called neoreactionaries. You are allowed to enter its salons and discuss ideas with other like-minded and intellectually virtuous individuals, but this not for your own purposes but the purpose of neoreaction. Neoreaction is memetically sovereign; it picks and chooses what it likes from you, and not you from it.

Fourth, neoreaction cannot ally itself with anyone, but you can ally yourself with neoreaction. It cannot be subordinated, but as it is the manifestation of an organic, rightward telos, whatever would subordinate it misunderstands neoreaction and thus fails. You simply cannot get to the right of neoreaction, because neoreaction already occupies the extreme limit of rightward thought. Or at least that is the intent, and if it has not yet gone as far as it can, it will find its way there.

Fifth, neoreaction doesn’t care what you think, whether you agree or disagree with it. Neoreaction is not about you, you may only be about neoreaction. If you cannot tolerate this asymmetry, it’s just not for you.

Neoreaction is the incarnation of no enemies to the right. This rule does not entail there can be no valid objections against a position which is to your right, only that “it is too far to the right/not far enough to the left” is always an invalid objection. The ideal of an objection to a position that happens to be to the right should be in order to improve upon it, either to produce an argument superior to the past formulation you are objecting to, or to go even further right than the previous doctrine had achieved. Likewise, to be to the left counts against a position, but it must still be soundly refuted according to the way it fails to be a tenable idea of society.

Finally, who is and who is not neoreactionary is not a matter of public knowledge or debate. Anyone can claim it, but true NRx knows itself. The boundaries are occult, and if you can perceive them, it is only because you are already inside. If for whatever reason you want to make yourself useful to neoreaction, some advice: read, write, discuss, question everything, efface yourself. If you’re meant for neoreaction, you’ll find yourself within it whether you want to be or not.