I am surprised that you do not mention some of the older school integralists. Many are still around and the influence of the deceased is still felt. An obvious example would be the late Michael Davies, though much of his writing was on other Catholic topics.
The long deceased Father Denis Fahey (+1954) may be making a minor comeback, mainly in his native Ireland. But the Internet can spread anyone's fame, though I suspect most people will now find Fahey's tomes nearly unreadable and further burdened with anti-Semitic tones. And there are other writers of Fahey's era who might be resurrected.
More recently we have Doctor Thomas Storck, with his 1998 Foundations of a Catholic Poitical Order and many other articles and essays. He is primarily a theorist on integralism. But even the theorists can't avoid strategy completely. They feel forced to come up with at least a few answers to practical questions and usually come seriously unstuck at that point.
Hence the appendix in "Foundations" describing the fictional country of Ruritania, an island way out in some ocean remote from any neighbours. Storck is very conscious of the corrupting influence of England on what used to be 90% Catholic Ireland. BBC TV could be picked up in parts of Eire long before Irish TV was created. But even after abolishing its own TV service, you can see that Ruritania's woes are just beginning. Abolishing fossil fuels and drastically rationing the hydro electricity supply come next, along with sacking and/or exiling subversive teachers. None of this is going to work.... Maybe if you tried integralism before the Greta Thunberg zealotry?? But that probably wouldn't save it.
The "left integralists" were very much aligned with the others (strategist and theorist both) for several years after 2016. The break between the two camps happened in 2020.
Oh? Many of the people I interviewed indicated Trump 2016 was the inflection point, including some of the ex-integralists. But I could be wrong about that. All I could go on is what people told me during interviews.
There were two major splits in this space; the first was the breakup of the Tradinista project, which did take place in 2016-17, but the participants in that movement generally referred to themselves as Catholic socialists or illiberals rather than integralists. One of the ex-Tradinista factions went on to identify with integralism (which I believe started to gain popularity after Pater Edmund's "Integralism in Three Sentences" post in 2016) from the aftermath of the Tradinista split through 2019 or so.
The second major break happened in 2020 between the left (often ex-Tradinista or affiliated with them) and right-integralists (including the strategists and theorists mentioned in this post) because of Covid, BLM protests, and the Biden/Trump election. This led a number of the left-integralists to stop calling themselves integralists at all and even to declare themselves liberals (which they previously abhorred).
I was around for almost all of this and recall it in a level of detail that is honestly somewhat embarrassing. Happy to discuss at greater length if you wish.
Ah, well, looks like I should have interviewed more people. I thought the Tradinista project began in part as a reaction to right-integralism and their general support for Trump. Is that false?
They were concerned somewhat with proto-right-integralism, but their concern was much more with Weigel/Novak/Neuhaus-style neoconservative Catholicism. The integralist theorists were around and had some critiques of the Tradinista project, but they were generally not pro-Trump, and most of the strategists were yet to come on the scene (Vermeule had just converted, Ahmari had just converted and still an avowed neocon, Deneen was a post-liberal but not yet an integralist).
The shift to Trump support and active alliance with right-wing politics among integralists (or at least the strategists) was mostly a later development.
I am surprised that you do not mention some of the older school integralists. Many are still around and the influence of the deceased is still felt. An obvious example would be the late Michael Davies, though much of his writing was on other Catholic topics.
The long deceased Father Denis Fahey (+1954) may be making a minor comeback, mainly in his native Ireland. But the Internet can spread anyone's fame, though I suspect most people will now find Fahey's tomes nearly unreadable and further burdened with anti-Semitic tones. And there are other writers of Fahey's era who might be resurrected.
More recently we have Doctor Thomas Storck, with his 1998 Foundations of a Catholic Poitical Order and many other articles and essays. He is primarily a theorist on integralism. But even the theorists can't avoid strategy completely. They feel forced to come up with at least a few answers to practical questions and usually come seriously unstuck at that point.
Hence the appendix in "Foundations" describing the fictional country of Ruritania, an island way out in some ocean remote from any neighbours. Storck is very conscious of the corrupting influence of England on what used to be 90% Catholic Ireland. BBC TV could be picked up in parts of Eire long before Irish TV was created. But even after abolishing its own TV service, you can see that Ruritania's woes are just beginning. Abolishing fossil fuels and drastically rationing the hydro electricity supply come next, along with sacking and/or exiling subversive teachers. None of this is going to work.... Maybe if you tried integralism before the Greta Thunberg zealotry?? But that probably wouldn't save it.
The "left integralists" were very much aligned with the others (strategist and theorist both) for several years after 2016. The break between the two camps happened in 2020.
Oh? Many of the people I interviewed indicated Trump 2016 was the inflection point, including some of the ex-integralists. But I could be wrong about that. All I could go on is what people told me during interviews.
There were two major splits in this space; the first was the breakup of the Tradinista project, which did take place in 2016-17, but the participants in that movement generally referred to themselves as Catholic socialists or illiberals rather than integralists. One of the ex-Tradinista factions went on to identify with integralism (which I believe started to gain popularity after Pater Edmund's "Integralism in Three Sentences" post in 2016) from the aftermath of the Tradinista split through 2019 or so.
The second major break happened in 2020 between the left (often ex-Tradinista or affiliated with them) and right-integralists (including the strategists and theorists mentioned in this post) because of Covid, BLM protests, and the Biden/Trump election. This led a number of the left-integralists to stop calling themselves integralists at all and even to declare themselves liberals (which they previously abhorred).
I was around for almost all of this and recall it in a level of detail that is honestly somewhat embarrassing. Happy to discuss at greater length if you wish.
Ah, well, looks like I should have interviewed more people. I thought the Tradinista project began in part as a reaction to right-integralism and their general support for Trump. Is that false?
They were concerned somewhat with proto-right-integralism, but their concern was much more with Weigel/Novak/Neuhaus-style neoconservative Catholicism. The integralist theorists were around and had some critiques of the Tradinista project, but they were generally not pro-Trump, and most of the strategists were yet to come on the scene (Vermeule had just converted, Ahmari had just converted and still an avowed neocon, Deneen was a post-liberal but not yet an integralist).
The shift to Trump support and active alliance with right-wing politics among integralists (or at least the strategists) was mostly a later development.