One thing that's been at the back of my mind for a while is that you can't entirely separate out the Guénons and Evolas and Savitri Devis from a far wider current of galaxy-brained dissatisfaction with the metaphysical state of the world. Pound and Eliot is the least of it - you can find it as a tendency in almost every political camp. The one that especially makes me wince is that there are bits of Guénon objecting to the tyranny of quantification and the degenerate state of democracy that could have come straight from Badiou, who also thinks that individual life finds its deepest meaning in identification with suprapersonal values and so on. I know how to make the argument that Badiou is different, because he makes it himself (the right-wing take suprapersonal value to be a timeless feature of a static, hierarchical cosmic order; Badiou takes it to be the force of an absolutely unpredictable upheaval in the order of things which overturns all hierarchies - "love what you will never believe twice"), but the common theme is contempt and disgust for the "massification" of society, the corrupt institutions of liberal order, the administrative banalities which impose themselves on everything.
Liam Kofi Bright has a nice phrase about how some philosophers are "basically decent bureaucrats" while others are "sexy murder poets", and the Traditionalists I suppose are (or want to picture themselves as) the sexy murder poets of the right. Tradcaths don't see themselves as heart-stoppingly straight and boring, they seem themselves as existential heroes ready to throw off the false values of a degenerate age and pledge themselves to honour, beauty and fidelity. Well, who doesn't want to be a sexy murder poet?