by Right Wing Fighter
In order for political activism to work, the activist must have a clear, concrete goal.
For years now the right has talked vaguely about the constitution, liberty, conservative principles, and so forth. But what has been the net result? How has it worked?
It hasn’t worked at all.
Before Trump, what were our presidential prospects?
Either Bush or Clinton.
All the vague talk on talk radio; all the magazine articles; all the speeches and fundraising appeals: and what was the result?
We were about to be saddled with either a republican globalist or a democratic globalist. Neither of them care about the constitution or some vague idea of liberty. What they do care about is power.
Tonight I was looking at Breitbart, and they had this quote from Mark Levin’s radio show today:
He [Levin] further criticized the media and Trump for preventing “the liberty message, the Constitution message, the conservative message, the Reagan principle message” from getting out.
What a bunch of vague nonsense. The “liberty message, the Constitution message,” what does that even mean? For years the right has been blathering about vague “principles,” but they (a) never get beyond principles of process; and (b), most of their “principles” at bottom lead to globalism.
First let me explain principles of process.
A principle of process is one that defines how something is done. For instance, the commonplace conservative principle of the free-market is a principle of process. It doesn’t say “we want to make 5 million jobs,” or ” we want to end Muslim jihadist attacks in the United States.” Instead, the free-market principle says “we want economic relations between the government and private industry to function like this.”
In short, a principle of process is one that defines how something is done. In this case, it is how commerce is conducted.
A principle of goal is a principle which defines a particular goal as important. For instance, the goal “eliminate the US debt within 20 years” is a principle of goal.
Principles of process aren’t bad, as long as they are subordinated to a goal. When you take a principle of process and just run around with it in your head, you ignore the needs of the situation and keep acting according to a process that may not apply at all.
The second problem listed above, is that most “conservative” principles today lead to globalism in the end.
When you apply free-market thinking to global markets, the nation-state will cease to exist because it is no longer an economic unit.
When you apply the commonplace principle of “freedom of movement” to everyone on the planet, then, in order to be principled, we have to let unlimited numbers of people immigrate to our country and, yet again, cease to be a nation-state.
When you apply the oft-stated “conservative” principle that the government is a necessary evil, people see themselves and each other as disconnected individuals, no longer living in a national community under laws that govern all. Instead, people see themselves as the victim of an ever-present governmental demon. Because of this, people cease to think of themselves as members of a national team, and instead as so many survivors scrambling along on their own.
And the list continues. As I said, “conservative” principles at bottom lead to globalism.
To come back to my original point: to have an effect on politics, one must have clear, concrete goals. I can’t stress enough how destructive vague goals are. Assume that if your goals are vague, your followers wont be able to understand you. In fact, that is usually the case, and usually why right wing political activism fails.