Despite their opposite moorings, Miller and nonoise are both models worthy of emulation. We should all aspire to think and to write with their clarity and precision, if without their amusing rancor, which they have both earned the right to deploy.
That said, it's rather puny to claim no more than that the contemporary "alt right" has been pissed since the Enlightenment. Your transitory "alt right" didn't exist in the 17th Century. You're thinking of Colossus: the Roman Church, whose orthodoxies imposed cultural hegemony for a thousand years. Church intellectuals are just as well-educated as their secular counterparts, but unlike the latter, they repudiate Sartre's dictum that the intellectual's duty is "to think -- to think without restriction." The Church insists that you think WITH restriction, that is, when Aristotelian inquiry contradicts Church doctrine, doctrine must prevail. Aquinas taught Churchmen how to finesse this trick in the 13th Century, after being inconveniently confronted with the newly rediscovered works of Aristotle.
That said, it's rather puny to claim no more than that the contemporary "alt right" has been pissed since the Enlightenment. Your transitory "alt right" didn't exist in the 17th Century. You're thinking of Colossus: the Roman Church, whose orthodoxies imposed cultural hegemony for a thousand years. Church intellectuals are just as well-educated as their secular counterparts, but unlike the latter, they repudiate Sartre's dictum that the intellectual's duty is "to think -- to think without restriction." The Church insists that you think WITH restriction, that is, when Aristotelian inquiry contradicts Church doctrine, doctrine must prevail. Aquinas taught Churchmen how to finesse this trick in the 13th Century, after being inconveniently confronted with the newly rediscovered works of Aristotle.