I only know what I have been presented with and I am not very interested in finding out more. From what I can see, the author opposes very basic social welfare policy that even 19th century hard right conservatives like Bismarck were in favour of. He seems to consider this a corrective and constructive political course of action which already speaks volumes. A lot of writers from the larper variety (NRx, Constitutionalist idolaters and others) follow this pattern of criticising basic, vital social policy under the pretext that it's "subversive" and leads to a gradual and inevitable turn to the left. "Traditionalism" for these people is just the bait they use to get others to endorse their psychopathic socioeconomic policy and dead-end political views. Among the NRx crowd you find these people who promote "aristocracy" conceived as upper middle class and above bourgeois leeches whose job is portrayed as that of "morally" lording their wealth over others and exploiting their labour for scraps. This is basically 19th century liberalism with a thin "traditionalist" coat of paint. Nothing separates their conception of "aristocracy" from people like Jeff Bezos and Mike Bloomberg except lots and lots of word salad. I have a strong suspicion that this guy is the same. At any case the vast majority of his views seem to fall into that category.

The rest of his analysis is also wrong or inaccurate. It doesn't matter what justification he has for his claim that leftism is egalitarianism, because by definition that is not what leftism is. Leftism does not have a claim to everything egalitarian, nor does it only consist in egalitarianism. His understanding of the power process is also very poor. Infiltrating organisations that are hostile to you is extremely unlikely and ineffective. The communists had common values with the liberals, which is why they managed to pull this off to such an extent. The conservatives on the other hand also have common values with the liberals rather than anyone further to the right, which is why this tactic is even worse on the right. Moreover, if you've observed the state of the "communist" movement today, you wouldn't be promoting their tactics as a successful model to be copied. Communism has been completely neutralised and transformed by progressive liberalism and its identity politics. The far left doesn't exist intellectually or organisationally in the West anymore - all of their thinking and planning is done by liberals and they can't even see it. It's over for them.