you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]AFutureConcern[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

White votards elected the people who did this and then failed to repeal it. White votards adopted Leftism to get more people into their shops and businesses. White votards continue to virtue signal for Black Lives Matter and Antifa despite having no idea what they are talking about.

This is where the critique of democracy becomes obviously liberal - it criticises the voters, democracy and mass participation of politics by blaming everything on those factors, completely ignoring the structure of the US electoral system which has been blocking almost every serious attempt for reform over the past two centuries. You don't have to be a democrat to acknowledge that if it had been left up to popular opinion, the USA would never have ended up the way it has. Something like Hart-Cellar is possible only in a "representative" liberal system like the American one. There's also blame placed on the electorate for thoughtlessly falling for propaganda, but never any blame directed towards the powerful interests which promote and produce that propaganda.

I'm siding with you again on this one. The elites are to blame. Sure, I think democracy (at least as it currently exists) is a stupid system because it fails to empower the people, and where it does, they are merely "thoughtlessly falling for propaganda" - but as you point out, that propaganda is produced by the elites.

You people are like mainstream conservatives. You are just conservative-flavored Leftists. No matter how many grossly “racist” things you say, or taboos you break, you still want the current system with its flaws intact, and that will rapidly encounter the same problems. You will defeat yourselves, but you will also defeat the Right, opening the door for the final Leftist takeover.

This is the worst and most ironic example of projection I've seen in my entire life.

Yeah I think you've got a wrong read on this guy. But still, his targeting of the right in this article isn't exactly helping avoid the "final Leftist takeover".

We do not need more analysis; we know what the situation is and how to fix it, which is to adopt gradually more Right-wing leaders, starting with Trump.

If you want to know what type of mindset leads to the creation of articles like this - here you go. This is it. "We don't need more analysis."

Yeah we need more analysis, but we also need more action. I do agree with him that sitting around pontificating doesn't achieve much.

We take baby steps so that at each step, we prove that our plans are working better than crazy Leftism, and then we push further Right. That works

Really? How?

We need a simple plan, and here it is: push Right. Get involved, and push those organizations further Right. Always vote for the furthest Right candidate you can find.

For an anti-egalitarian and anti-democrat this "strategy" of subverting the GOP against the will of its elites and sponsors is both egalitarian and democratic. I am sure the author is completely unaware of the inherent cognitive dissonance.

It's incrementalist. Much how I don't think there's any contradiction in communists infiltrating capitalist corporations to gain wealth and power before they tear the system apart, I don't think there's any contradiction in a neo-feudalist infiltrating democratic institutions to gain power and influence before he reforges the system as he wills. Not to say it'll work, but you've got to work within the confines of the system you're in to some degree, else you'll never achieve anything.

[–]NeoRail 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

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.