Augusta DellÕOmo: Welcome to Right Rising a podcast from the Center for the Analysis of the Radical Right. I'm your host Augusta DellÕOmo. Today, I'm joined by Dr. Louis Dean Valencia-Garc’a, an Assistant Professor of Digital History at Texas State University. He's here with us today to walk us through how we should think about the histories of the far right. Louie, thanks for being here. 

Louis Dean Valencia-Garc’a: Thank you for having me. It's great. 

AD: Uh, so I wanted to start off with we're both historians. What is the role of historians in popular political discourse today? There's a lot of historians writing op-eds, thereÕs a lot about this idea of the Òpublic historian.Ó So what is our role in popular discourse now?

LDVG: I think one of the things that I've been having to say sort of repetitively is the role of the historian is not to tell the future, which I think has been sort of a common misconception maybe out there that somehow we have a magic crystal ball because we know how things once were. We know how things will be.

And I think that that's sort of where I start from, is this idea of, we don't know the future and even the past is sort of a different country entirely. I think that's a common trope. And to try to understand the past in its own terms, I think is really the ideal goal for the historian, but at the same time, because we want this to not just be some esoteric thing in the past, we need to be able to talk about sort of the implications of those histories and the ways that people use those histories in the present.

So I think kind of like in historian terms, it's the historiography, the history of history is really something that needs to be understood, not just at the academic level, but also at the popular level. How are these taught? How are these history is taught in textbooks? How are they portrayed in films and movies that are telling these types of stories in a way that sometimes it's haphazard?

So I think the role of the historian both has to be thinking about what do we understand about the past, but also what are the misconceptions of history and how do we sort of pinpoint the pressure points? 

AD: I think that's an absolutely great answer, Louie and I think it really situates the two frustrations historians have with the things that they're often asked to do, it's either on one hand, you know, predict the future, like you said, look into this crystal ball, doesn't the past inform the future, wanting us to make very linear projections, or on the other hand, it can turn just into kind of fact checking, like, is this accurate? Is this not? And most historians would say accuracy means taking into account all of these different arguments and interpretations of the past. Our job is not to just sit around and figure out when exactly something happened, but to construct these arguments and narratives about how we should understand certain movements, certain issues. And I think this leads me into my next question of, you know, as a scholar of the radical right,  what do you think the history of the radical right can teach us?

LDVG: I think one of the things that I like to think of is sort of, what I like to call Òfascistic tendencies.Ó So what are the things that we can learn from previous experiences with the radical right in history to understand in some way their manifestations and what could that look like? And I think that's one of the challenges for a lot of scholars and also people generally is trying to figure out what is, what is fascism? What is the radical right? What is the far right? And I think for the onlooker, it's very hard to even understand what the differentiation between fascist, conservative, far-right, radical right is. And then also at the same time it's been used in, I guess, a similar way that I'm talking about the way the history is abused and abused, these words have been used in such a way that it's hard for the everyday person to know the difference between fascism and authoritarianism. 

And so I think the role of the - one of the misconceptions, I guess, of the radical right - is today is sort of that these are topics that have a lot of nuances, but also at the same time, what we're talking about as scholars of the radical right, are oftentimes places where there's overlap, whether you're talking about Spain and the 1930s, like I often look at, or the 1950s or like your work in South Africa, right? What are some of the intersections between these types of things? I think that's really where a lot of the discourse on the radical right I think really can be better understood, is looking at sort of the variations of these common, uh, common appearances of or manifestations of right wing ideology and how they're used. Or how do they change? And some, and a lot, or of every instance, right? 

AD: I completely agree with that. And I think as you know, as a historian, I think we think about these kinds of issues in very similar ways and one of the great truths that I think our research into this kind of work shows is that while these groups have local grievances, local context and local manifestations, in some ways they're part of a global movement of far right groups. That they may not be speaking to each other all the time, they may not write to each other or communicate often, but they do have a shared, they have a shared language and a shared worldview that sometimes when we separate them, as you said into these fascists, authoritarian, far-right, radical right, conservative, you know, we dilute the shared qualities between them. And I think that's, what's so important about the work that you and I do is really drawing out what is the distinction, but then what are the similarities? 

You have a more recent book ÒFar-Right Revisionism and the End of History: Alt/HistoriesÓ that recently came out and so building on this question of the kinds of narratives that these groups have used, what are the types of far-right histories that you've been thinking about and that you've seen in your research, as of late.

LDVG: A lot of what I've been looking at is, so I became interested in probably around 2014 or so in the publisher Arktos, which many might know as sort of this right wing publisher, they publish things like translated texts by Julius Evola, Aleksandr Dugin. So the doing this type of work, that is what they call sort of, uh, identitarian in some instance, but what I'm really interested in their work is sort of how is it that they are, uh, we'll say resuscitating either works that had been less well known, and how they'd been trying to promote it with a sort of aesthetic update to some of these types of works.

And that's really been one of the things that I've been interested in as of late. So like in Julius EvolaÕs case, he's sort of popularly been a lesser known fascist. Yes, many academics knew who Julius Evola is, but in the broader public sphere, he was not very well known, but Arktos had been publishing these books, these short little translated books that were really quite aesthetically attractive and trying to bring in new people to think about some of his old ideas. And it's sort of like an alternative fascism. He eventually becomes this esoteric thinker. So he stops using even the language of fascism explicitly, and is still very much so fascistic and using fascist ideologies and as a fascist thinker, But I think like one of the things that I've been interested in is sort of the through lines between how do you get from somebody like Evola who's becomes a sort of marginal figure in the fascist party by the end of MussoliniÕs reign, to somebody who is being read by the likes of Steven Bannon, right? Like this is a sort of a very long curve. 

And I've been really interested in sort of how do these publishers and I'm interested in print media generally, get their ideas out there. So it's not just through these small texts that are almost like aesthetic fanzines, but they also are working with YouTubers who are reading the texts and promoting the ideas. And they're also publishing blogs and pseudo-academic articles. And I'm really interested in sort of this echoes chamber that has been created around Arktos and how they've been interacting with other sort of identitarian or right-wing groups as well. And so a lot of my work, I guess, as of late, has been trying to think about how does the far right create alternative histories or alternative ways of understanding history and, and to call it history is even probably disingenuous because what they're really doing is throwing in conspiracy theories mixed in with sort of half-truths and, uh, really mixing up language in a way that it becomes an alt-history. So it's not even a fair to call it history itself, but it is a way it is presented as history. And that's really what I've been mostly interested in the last several years. 

AD: I think that's absolutely fascinating. And again, I am biased because this is a lot of what my work looks at and one of the stereotypes that people tend to have about the far-right, is that theyÕre very convoluted and backward looking and incapable of innovation, which in some cases is true. You do see groups that are incapable of adapting and reforming, but I think what you just talked about how these different zenes have ended up on YouTube, how Steve Bannon is referencing pieces of work from the 1930s, that these materials really do circulate in an intellectual ecosystem of its own, that is, as you said, a kind of alternate history - if we want to use those terms, even if you and I wouldn't consider it history, but they do see it as their own alternative history that is the truth about how the world actually operates. And it's so important to consider that world in its own terms so that way you can understand the mechanisms of how it operates, because these groups are distributing these kinds of materials whether we want them to or not. And it's important that as scholars, we actually understand how that process takes place. 

And I wanted to ask you what are some misconceptions that you've encountered because you're a public historian, you write, you appear on podcasts, you know, you appear on television, what are some misconceptions that you've encountered about how people understand the far-right? And you and I are coming from the American context, but you can expand it further out if you'd like. 

LDVG: Yeah. I think, uh, actually to kind of give an example, I was on an Australian local radio station about a month and some change back and they asked me, how did the - they thought they conceptualize the far right, as something other than Donald Trump. And one of the things that I try to talk about as well, in what ways is Trump's ideology part of this ecosystem. And I think maybe that's one way I like to think about it is I'm really more so in the line of trying to think about, well, what are the connections? I do a lot of work with digital history and I'm interested in sort of the circulation of ideas. And I think that one way we can concretely do that is look looking at graph theory - so how does one person, citing another person, citing another person, show how these ideas are spreading and moving. And I think that one of the ways that I like to think about sort of these misconceptions is it's oftentimes a game of telephone both on the part of the people within the radical right themselves, but also for the people who are trying to understand and observe it. It's, you're listening to something that somebody might have misinterpreted and by reading a text that was totally decontextualized. 

And I think that's one of the things that I always try to point to is trying to maybe always - I'm very active on Twitter, but try to look away from Twitter - to understand sort of what else is going on, but also thinking of those things as part of a whole context that they are integrated ideas that are circulating. Um, I don't know if that really answered the question or not, but I think that a lot of, 

AD: No, I, I think it definitely does, especially as you said, you know, does the view that we have - and as someone that also spends far too much time on Twitter - of what our world looks like and what people think about these far right groups in many cases in the United States is either completely welded to Trump that these groups are not independent of him, or that these groups are totally separate of him. And I would argue, and, you know, I would love to hear your thoughts on this, that they are almost two halves of the same whole, right? That it's impossible to say that Donald Trump would not have come to the presidency without the support of these groups, but the trends that Donald Trump is responding to, were already present in the American political sphere before he started running for office. 

So to take a very narrow view, maybe of what you see on social media, what you see on Facebook, it doesn't give you the whole picture of how these groups are operating, particularly in the American political spectrum, but also across Europe, across borders, across different regions, that it's not really just one specific thread that each group is following, but as you said, Louie, they're all kind of speaking to these same sort of texts and manipulating them and changing them to suit their own local context, so I think that's absolutely fascinating. Um, and just as a quick plug for who you are at CARR, you are there our Head of the History Research Unit, and I wanted to ask you, how do you see your work that you've been doing fitting into this new role that you have at CARR? And what kinds of things can we look forward to coming out of the history research unit? 

LDVG: I think that's one of the most exciting things that I've been doing, uh, during this whole pandemic is working with different scholars who are affiliated with CARR and we're hoping to basically create a series of history podcasts on the radical right that'll be included in Right Rising, probably more toward the spring, so we're kind of building up this list of different topics that we want to write about, and talk about on that, on the podcast. And also think about sort of not just individual cases, but also really think about these historical moments outside of the context of how does it relate to this current moment.

So, maybe not just only is a, I think this is one of the challenges with a lot of historians is, we get called into the room, whenever something happens that's related to a topic and we have to relate the current moment to the past, but really with what we're hoping to do with the podcast is have individual episodes that just give a nice delve into the history without having to necessarily justify it based upon the current Trump crisis on Twitter.

AD: And it is a full crisis on Twitter at all times.

LDVG: At all times there is a crisis and it changes every single day. So I think like really that's one of the goals is using the unit to focus in on individual histories to be able to better give people an idea of sort of, how does a historian and think about the past and how do we tell a narrative? And I think that's one of the exciting things about it, and hopefully we'll also be inviting guests on who are not necessarily affiliated with CARR, but have expertise that can help round out sort of these visions of what had happened in the past

AD: And I'm incredibly excited to listen to these episodes. One of the great things about this podcast, Right Rising, is I'm not the only co-host. YouÕll hear from Louie, you'll hear from James Downes, who you also hear in a future episode about populism. There's going to be people coming in to talk about their work. And as Louie said, one of the things that is really important to all of us, especially the historians who are a part of CARR is taking the history of these movements and not feeling a compulsion all of the time to apply it to contemporary events. As, as Louie said, you know, it's tempting to make everything about Donald Trump, but that's not the only focus and we have so many incredible scholars at CARR who are political scientists who are in terrorism studies, communications, that all of their work is very contemporary. And I think it's going to be really great for people to get a historical grounding, to learn about where these movements came from. And, you know, there's people in our research unit that are specialists in Hungary, in South Africa, in Spain. We'll get a really great global picture of what the Òradical rightÓ in quotes looks like all over the world. So I'm also incredibly excited to hear the episodes that you're going to be working on Louie. 

LDVG: And I hope you get to contribute a history of your own from South Africa. I really want to learn a little bit more. 

AD: Yeah, we can, we can talk about my, my research into televangelism and you know, all of the, the dark corners that we both have gone into in our research. And I think that's also one of the things that I really appreciate as historians is, you know, you and I think about things very similarly as historians, but we've also taken such different approaches to how we want to analyze the radical right. And there's so many different ways to look at these groups, look at these organizations, contextualize them that I think it's really exciting that Right Rising is going to give us and give our listeners a chance to delve into all of these different pockets and really have a strong grounding for how they should understand how these movements develop.

LDVG: Yeah, I'm super excited and I think we've been having such really good conversations all summer long - granted separated in our quarantine lives, but I think that the type of work that's coming out is not only just really interesting, but it really helps people to better navigate sort of what is oftentimes uncertain, an uncertain time.

AD: And I also think that we have something to offer, even if it's not a contemporary parallel all the time. Historians have really robust analytical tools to how to navigate these disinformation spaces. You know, a lot of what you and I read is conspiracy theory. And a lot of it is of what we would call now fake news, and it can be hard to orient yourself in that space and really keep your grounding and understand what is true and what's not. And I think that's something that we all could use a little bit more truth in our lives and how to navigate a world in which there's, there's so much information and it can be really overpowering, so I think even when it's not contemporarily connected, it's really going to help all of us being informed consumers in this completely saturated space. So, Louie, I wanted to thank you for being here and we've mentioned Twitter, so can you tell our listeners where they can find more from you where they can read your work, um, where they can tweet at you.

LDVG: So, um, my Twitter is @BurntCitrus, B U R N T citrus. And just a fair warning, I do post both important topics about the history of fascism and the radical right, but also Harry Styles memes as well. So just like a fair warning, I am a One Direction fan. 

AD: It's an important, it's an important balance to have. Let's be clear. That is an absolutely critical component of our mental wellbeing and our scholarly pursuits is, you know, Harry Styles 

LDVG: And also curiously, I've even been doing research on radical right groups that have organized against Harry Styles. This is just kind of a weird side project.

AD: So this is a personal vendetta for you as well. You want to make sure that these groups are brought to justice. 

LDVG: Yes! Thank you again for having me. 

AD: Louis, thank you so much for being here. I know we're all very excited to hear the rest of the episodes that are coming out of the history research unit. Uh, if you go online, you'll see a schedule of what's coming up and we have episodes every two weeks at a minimum. So it's going to be a lot of great content coming out of the podcast. So thank you all for joining me and Louie today on Right Rising a podcast from the Center for the analysis of the Radical Right. We'll see you next time.