What is the worst thing about the right?

[Lemmingwise]

Take a look at a brief interview between two right wing figures of differing viewpoints. Nick Fuentes and Andy Ngo. You'll see why the Right is not "winning."

Could you give me a tl;dw?

I'll take a look at the video later but a rundown would be nice.

@The Last Stand is wrong, as usual. The video was from a time where the right was winning, and where the people involved in that video were doing right. What's going on is an exchange of ideas and opinions. This was surrounding Charlie Kirk's turning point USA events. That was essentially a conflict between the Fuentes ibs/gamercrowd vs. the neo-conservative elements a la ben shapiro who were originally never trumpers effectively running a lot of trump outreach now and making it a kind of lady maga and more immigration, but legal kind of platform.

What Fuentes and his crowd did was go to these TPU events and ask questions that were a little too spicy to handle:

TPU really had no way of dealing with it, besides removing fuentes from the first event and then later when followers started asking difficult questions, having to do away with audience questions altogether.

It was essentially just one of the areas where people who were promised a wall or restraints on immigration got unruly. On this particular thing, I think the fuentes crowd was absolutely right and they were achieving their goals in a smart way.

Things really took a strong nosedive after, but that video isn't an example of failing. It's actually one of the good traits that there can be disagreement and holding each other to account.

 

[Slimy Time]

For the American Right, focusing on "gotchas" and "look how hypocritical the left is" and then calling it a day. They are idealogues, they and their supporters don't care about double standards and hypocrisy so long as they push what they want.

Also a clear refusal to do anything to fix the rampant left wing political infiltration in institutions such as education. More than happy to bitch about it, yet when given power do nothing.

For the UK right wing, being this amorphous, always changing stances because it is politically expedient to do so, before sliding right back into a relative globalist agenda. The Overton window has shifted in the country to the point where it is arguable that they aren't really conserving much.

Also, more a libertarian point, but the continual pushing of the nanny state. Blair started it hard under his New Labour government and the conservatives, instead of trying to wipe the slate clean of his endless banning and retarded rules, have kept it going.

 

[Large]

The fact that there’s no such thing, at least not organically. “The Right” is just an artificial catch-all that anyone who disapproves of the Ruling Class is herded into so they can be isolated and marginalized. Of course, TPTB still want to give them an outlet to expend their energy and want to keep them spending money so they have their talking heads they can tune into and they have their “leaders” to vote for, same as the other “side”, but it’s all bullshit. About as real as WWE. I guess the worst thing about “The Right” is that none who accept that label realize any of this.

Is this a copy of a leftist social media post with some word search-and-replaced with ""The Right""?

 

[Spunt]

I don't know if it's the *worst* thing as such, but one thing that bothers me in particular is the recent trend (recent as in maybe the last 10 years) of conservatives rebranding themselves as "libertarians" without changing any of their opinions. I'm not sure why they do that, maybe because "libertarian" sounds smarter, more rebellious and has more heft in academia and they want some of that respectability. But then you get people like the guy who owned a music forum I used to post on, who said that he wanted to make pornography illegal and introduce the death penalty for drug possession. He also banned all criticism of Christianity or any discussion of any other religion on the site because that upset his religious feefees. Yet at the same time he wouldn't shut up about how he was a "libertarian" who was all about freedom.

Between people like that and the Ayn Rand fanboys, it's why I've stopped calling myself a libertarian in most company. I can't call myself a liberal (using the European definition) because that now means something completely different. And I can't call myself the more accurate "classical liberal" because of oafs like Sargon who don't really have any fixed views at all and are more made out by what they oppose than what they are in favour of.

Yes, yes, arguing the minutiae of what to call different schools of thought is a worryingly left-wing thing to do, but ultimately words do need meanings, and it pisses me off that the cause of liberty and respect for individual choice has been co-opted by people who just want to replace the left's authoritarianism with their own.

It also seems that the left have the same problem with the word "Socialism" which has been adopted by so many ideologies (including some not on the left at all) that it has lost all meaning and calling yourself one doesn't actually inform people of what your views are.

 

[spinch]

i don't consider myself a hardline 'leftist' but the think i hate about the right is that their policies are outright anti-human. they're all in their own selfish delusions of future wealth and success that they don't realize that Big Government has just pitted them against other poor people to keep them distracted. The whole concept of 'othering' people to advance your own life is insane, because the fact is when people work together they get more done.

not to mention the right is so splintered on every fucking issue that there is no unified right anymore. it's a ferris wheel of folks that ranges from 'your fiscally conservative dad' to 'man who is literally foaming horse dewormer from the mouth'

 

[Fetish Roulette]

I don't know if it's the *worst* thing as such, but one thing that bothers me in particular is the recent trend (recent as in maybe the last 10 years) of conservatives rebranding themselves as "libertarians" without changing any of their opinions. I'm not sure why they do that, maybe because "libertarian" sounds smarter, more rebellious and has more heft in academia and they want some of that respectability. But then you get people like the guy who owned a music forum I used to post on, who said that he wanted to make pornography illegal and introduce the death penalty for drug possession. He also banned all criticism of Christianity or any discussion of any other religion on the site because that upset his religious feefees. Yet at the same time he wouldn't shut up about how he was a "libertarian" who was all about freedom.

Between people like that and the Ayn Rand fanboys, it's why I've stopped calling myself a libertarian in most company. I can't call myself a liberal (using the European definition) because that now means something completely different. And I can't call myself the more accurate "classical liberal" because of oafs like Sargon who don't really have any fixed views at all and are more made out by what they oppose than what they are in favour of.

Yes, yes, arguing the minutiae of what to call different schools of thought is a worryingly left-wing thing to do, but ultimately words do need meanings, and it pisses me off that the cause of liberty and respect for individual choice has been co-opted by people who just want to replace the left's authoritarianism with their own.

It also seems that the left have the same problem with the word "Socialism" which has been adopted by so many ideologies (including some not on the left at all) that it has lost all meaning and calling yourself one doesn't actually inform people of what your views are.

It's good to hear that there are other people who have these concerns. I know from your (very entertaining) series of long posts on the UK that you're British, but I guarantee you that the people fucking up the label of "libertarian" aren't doing it for respectability. Here in the States, when people think of libertarians, they either think of this video from 0:59 onward or Vermin Supreme.

Calling people "not real libertarians" is almost a meme at this point, but I think it definitely applies to the ongoing conservative invasion of the movement. This has created real problems for actual advocacy for libertarian ideals. Even on a micro level, I recently bought myself a Gadsden flag. This shouldn't have been a huge decision, but I spent a good week or so worrying about how if I bought this libertarian flag meant to express libertarian ideals surrounding life, liberty, and property, friends and passersby who saw it would mistake me for one of the same retards who make up the target market for Back the Blue Gadsdens.


The Randroids are an entirely different story, but I have tried and true ways of weeding them out that aren't too intrusive or hard to pull off. My favorite metaphor for them is that they're people who learned how to read, but never progressed beyond simple picture books. Dr. Seuss and phonics books are meant to teach you how to read Jane Eyre and budget reports and all of the other documents that make up our everyday lives, in the same way that Ayn Rand is (supposed) to introduce people to Nozick, Spooner, and Hayek.

I know I've written you a bit of a novel in response, but I'd encourage you to keep fighting against the people seeking to co-op the label and political infrastructure of the movement. It's easy to pick out leftists because of their views on private property and freedom of association, but the right can be a more insidious threat precisely because they're better at masking their authoritarian tendencies.

 

[GHTD]

As with politics in general, the whole trying to frame people who don't agree with the party wholeheartedly as "not real right-wingers". Don't we say politics are a spectrum? Yet we don't treat it like a spectrum and instead treat it like this black-and-white "you're with us or against us" bullshit.

 

[mario if smoke weed]

The fact that the right and left are just two sides of the same coin. Similar ideas, similar motives, different details. They try to act like they're hot shit when they're only slightly better than the left. They boast about how "free speech" they are and make that their entire identity to one-up the left. The left might be bad, but with what they're pulling the right needs to step up their game and "be better"

Plus they're either total squares or totally obnoxious from what I've seen. People who don't regulate themselves to one part of the political binary are more my style, I'd say.

 

[AnotherOne]

they are so afraid of seizing power that the left inevitably wins. Ironically they don't take a capitalist approach to power like the left does. What I mean is that when they have some power they want to use it to achieve a specific policy. They want to use it as a means to an end but once its spent, its spent. The left takes the power it has currently and invests it so it can achieve more power in the future, they use power as an end in and of itself. If the right wants to start having more meaningful victories they gotta learn that the left relies on the rights principles in order to achieve one victory after another, they bring a gun to the knife fight because they know the right cares too much about its principles to ever do the same thing. They gotta at least try to be a bit more Machiavellian in their approach otherwise they might as well just let the one party socialist dictatorship happen now.

Lmao every leftie I talk to thinks the exact opposite. Republicans are the calculating cynics seizing the levers of power wherever they can while democrats harp about precedent and 'norms'.

 

[Tranimal Farm]

Lmao every leftie I talk to thinks the exact opposite. Republicans are the calculating cynics seizing the levers of power wherever they can while democrats harp about precedent and 'norms'.

this might closer resemble Trump style populists, who I'd barely call conservative but certainly not the old order republicans. And let's be honest most leftie's view of the right is as accurate as most religeous conservative's view of violent video games

 

[Mnutu]

I know I've written you a bit of a novel in response

Pretty brief, for a Libertarian.

On topic, the penchant for molding their whole value system around the current head of the party. The Left, for all of its leader worship and propaganda, never follows the leader as much as the leader follows “them”. The Right really morphs into whoever’s the president or most likely to become president. Also their chicken shit habit of operating anonymous Twitter profiles to shitpost on. Knowing the Zodiac Killer can and does talk mad shit on Twitter only endears him to me, and almost redeems him of those murders he did.

 

[mr.moon1488]

They stay loyal to shit that fucks them over.

• Jews run 24/7 propaganda against them

God-chosen people! More money for Israel!

• Tyrone and Paco make their lives a living hell

Democrats are the real racists! Martin Looter Kang would be rolling over in his grave!

• Uncle Schlomo takes money from them to give to groups working against them

God bless America! Greatest country ever!

• Son gets killed in a golobohomo war

He died fighting for the country he loved, he will be missed *sound of Jews counting weapon's sales money in background*

• Republican party constantly cucks on shit that matters

We gotta keep supporting them or the Democrats will get power!

• Police ignore tranny rioter mobs while aggressively hunting down right-wingers

Blue Lives Matter!

 

[usernames can change now!]

The lingering unholy alliance between libertarians and moral puritans. Sure, most of the annoying moralizing and virtue signaling belongs to the left these days; but occasionally the Fundies remind us they exist.

 

[Unyielding Stupidity]

They stand for nothing. Name one thing that they haven't backpedaled on in the last 50 years. In 2050, these same right-wingers will be supporting literally everything they're currently against, and demonizing everything they currently support.

That, and the fact that they use "muh glowies" as their reason to never do anything.
Protest something? We can't do that, the glowies will identify all of us and get us thrown in a blacksite.
Start a petition? Those don't do anything, and the glowies will just use it as an excuse to get us fired.
Literally do anything other than take it up the ass like a bitch? Hey now, that's just asking for me to be arrested by glowies.

 

[Sweetpeaa]

Often no platform

 

[Shamash]

One thing I’ve noticed amongst far right internet denizens is a deep alienation from the mainstream. Mainstream cultural past times, mainstream norms and so forth. Some of that is due to their beliefs-having a Hitler anime and autistically repeating “109” does make you a social pariah.

That said a lot of the right’s energy I think comes from young people(meaning young men) who are already alienated from society and find little solace or pleasure in it. Hence their contempt for “normies” or the “npcs”.

While I agree with the sentiments-just look at who is popular on Instagram, it has a self defeating effect.

You don’t win by coming across as a resentful autist who shouts non stop about I dunno the Jews or race or whatever, Doesn’t matter if your right, you simply alienate yourself by your own attitude and anti social presentation.

Of course the views such men hold alienate them, as they are rejected and then they reject society(or solidify their rejection of it) and it continues in this destructive spiral until they find themselves in little silos completely cut off from any engagement with the masses.

This ultimately means you achieve nothing. Or you fight in ever smaller little e sects with ideologies and ideas that would leave “normies” scratching their heads in confusion or outright disgusted.

Doesn’t help that Pol and adjacent spaces are saturated with “getting a GF” posting. It leads one to suspect the only reason one would hold such beliefs is because they aren’t having sex or didn’t get enough hugs or therapy or something and that if they got these things they’d totally abandon their beliefs.

I get it, mainstream society sucks and I relate completely, but it’s a self destructive attitude to hold contempt for the very people you presume to care about.

 

[ClownBrew]

Israel and Q. It all boils down to that.

 

[Seventh Star]

Theyre against government regulation of the internet and net neutrality, until they perceive social networks are biased against conservatives and start talking about laws forcing social networks to host Conservative opinions which violates their freedom of speech.

That's not hypocritical. That's just wanting to have freedom of speech on the internet and no monopolies completely dominating and dictating public discourse on the net, and there are different ways/solutions to obtain it. Clearly the idea is to just let any opinions fly on the net, and you have seen Null's announcement on the subject, you can't just lay down and take it. The first option is implying that there are multiple companies that will support you, the second option implies that when they aren't available, the government must step in. That's how economies act too, it's a balancing act to avoid either the government or companies becoming too powerful.

Theyre against employee rights and support employers right to fire anyone for any reason they chose, until employers insist their employees get vaccinated.

Again, that only applies under the idea that monopolies won't pop up and people can choose sympathizing business to their cause and everyone ends up happy. That's not necessarily hypocritical, that's just attaining a core concept at all costs: freedom for employees to seek work. Like with internet regulation/censorship, the best alternative is for non-centralized alternatives to pop up.

 

[Cyclonus]

You're against monopolies? Wow, it's almost like you've spotted a flaw in that "unregulated capitalism" the right is always pushing. If you want to stop monopolies you need government intervention. Government intervention is left wing by definition.

 

[Opticana]

I guess my basic issue with "the right" (i.e, A&H posters) is that their dislike of non-whites is fundamentally hypocritical, and they won't make any progress until they get over it. Let's be honest here, Europeans lorded it over the rest of the planet and treated non-Europeans like shit for four centuries. Certainly, every civilization had its racial animosities and conflicts, but white people took it to a new height with things like Apartheid or Leopold II's Congo. The people who sperg out endlessly about how the Jews deserved it because they were usurers or muh 13% of the population are totally incapable of any self-reflection. When Africans living in straw huts rape, pillage and practice human sacrifice it's "lol stupid nigger apes" but when Scandinavians do it it's le epic based Nordic warriors. I'm not saying you should embrace CRT, but get over yourselves and look at things a bit more proportionally. No one race has a monopoly on good or evil.