Right Wing Fighter

Category: Conservatism

How the Right can Succeed

For the Right to succeed in politics, it has got to align itself completely with the people. For decades, it has refused to do so. It has always considered populism as something dirty or uncontrollable, and has shied away from it. The fact is, many on the Right would rather lose to the liberals than win with the common, everyday people of America. Why?

To start with, some of them are just snobs. They prefer the refined, “cultural” things in life that most Americans, myself included, don’t care about. Art, classical novels, and so forth, are nice and all but they don’t pay the bills. The right wingers that prefer such things I’ve dubbed the “High Right.” They’re basically American and patriotic, but they don’t like to descend below a certain level that they have in their minds. Their thinking tends to be abstract, intellectual, and completely useless. They can’t get anything done, because they never come down from the clouds of philosophy long enough to do it. They tend to be the gatekeepers of opinion on the right, since they give more time to intellectualism.

On the other hand, there’s what you might call the “Low Right.” To these people, the heart and soul of America is simply doing whatever you want, as long as nobody gets hurt. Many talk show hosts are part of the Low Right. Basically, their whole “philosophy” can be summed up as: do what you want, and let others do the same. They can’t fight the liberals at all, since liberalism is basically a headless, immoral version of their own philosophy. And so they mostly stagger around like slightly confused monkeys, not sure what to say or do next. Their minds and thoughts are never clear.

The average American, like yours truly, for instance, doesn’t care about the Right’s obsession with either (A), artistic living; or (B), freedom to do anything that doesn’t impede other people. Most of us know, for instance, that drugs must be illegal because they are destructive. The High Right sneers at drugs, as being dirty. The Low Right is a little worried about drugs, mostly from habit, but at bottom doesn’t oppose them as long as the user doesn’t hurt anybody. Of course, this is stupid. Whatever we do affects everyone around us. And to pretend that it doesn’t is just sticking their heads in the sand and humming loudly. Besides, there is no right to self-destruction.

In order for the Right to win, it must come back to normal, practical reality and look at the world the way the average American does. The Right needs to be both practical and tough, not whimsical and airheaded. There are real problems that must be solved. Some of them have to be solved by the government. Trump is succeeding because he’s being practical and tought. He’s looking problems in the face and dealing with them. He doesn’t care about the Right’s obsession with “liberty” or art. If the Right wants to win, it must learn from his example.

The Right Wing in America is Locked in the Cold War

The reason that the American right wing is so useless today is that they are still fighting yesterday’s battles. In the 80s there was a real threat of totalitarianism in the world. The Soviet Union was on the march, and many leftists here at home still hoped to bring about Soviet style communism here in America. American patriots were trashed day in and day out in the liberal press.

But Reagan ended all that. Now, the Soviet Union is gone, and communism only exists in backwaters like Venezuela. Nobody in America is serious about bringing about communism anymore. But the modern right, the X Generation, who are in their early to late 40s, think politics is still a struggle against a crushing, tyrannic philosophy. The problem is the X Generation came into adulthood right at the end of the Cold War. Thus their minds were shaped right before an epoch shift. Their view of politics was outdated almost as soon as they got it. This has led to a kind of trauma, where the world they had just settled into was suddenly ripped out from under them.

You can especially see this in their dealings with Bill Clinton in the 90s. The right was utterly lost. They didn’t get some kind of footing until he was already halfway through his administration. Even today, they still struggle to reconcile their Cold War thinking to the Obama administration. They never actually figured Obama out, because he didn’t fit the communist mold they carry around with them. If you listened to a lot of talk radio like I did for the first six years of Obama’s administration, you could hear them day after day trying to figure him out. You may have been surprised at this, like I was.

The thing is this: people like to get cozy with a particular frame of thinking. People don’t like to change their thinking once they’ve settled into it. The X Generation settled into Cold War thinking, and then like I said it was pulled out from under them. It became irrelevant. For years they stumbled along in the wilderness, so to speak, trying to find their footing. They’ve never actually managed to do so. They just get kinda used to a president after a while. Since the right was more or less in its youth during Clinton’s administration, their aimlessness was harder to see. During George W. Bush’s administration, they didn’t want to oppose him since he was a Republican, and so again it wasn’t very noticeable.

But with Obama, it was stark and clear, though very confusing to look at. I kept asking myself “Why don’t these guys really nail Obama? Why do they keep dancing around the edges?” The answer is they are lost, like I mentioned above. That’s why they look like a bunch of half-balding old guys, intellectually speaking. They look like people whose prime has long since passed. The fact is they never had a prime to begin with – Reagan ended that when he won the Cold War.

So now we have a bunch of irrelevant kooks trying to be relevent in a world that has passed them by. That is why they’re always, embarrassingly, trying to get people fired up by talk about “liberty” over and over again, like it is self-evidently the purpose of life. Declaring “liberty” over and over again made sense when the left in America was doing the exact opposite, and was trying to stampede us into a top-down society. But nowadays it’s out of date because communism is dead.

And that, as a side note, is why they can never stop talking about Reagan and communism: they’re going back, in their minds, to a time when they were relevant.

David Limbaugh, and the “Constitutional Conservatives”

From David Limbaugh’s column from today:

Apart from the endless question of who always will, who probably will, who may and who never will vote for Donald Trump, I’d like to call a temporary truce between the believers and the skeptics and warn against any conscious abandonment or neglect of our founding principles.

I sense that the Trump movement in some ways presents a false choice — that we either temporarily abandon our principles to save America or preserve our principles and lose America. To the contrary, even if we take drastic action, we must always do so within the constraints of the Constitution — being mindful that to restore America’s greatness, we must reclaim our founding principles.


Even if you disagree, Trump supporters, please humor us and understand we will always believe, like Larry Arnn, that neglecting our founding principles has imperiled our liberties and that learning and aspiring to what is noble and virtuous is necessary to perpetuate our freedom and our justice.

What has all this talk about founding principles done over the past few decades? Has America become more moral? Has it strengthened its economy? Has it built a wall and secured its borders? Has it punished bad, activist judges and replaced them with good judges? Has it, at bottom, done anything other than lose?

What power does constitutionalism have in politics? Have the constitutionalists won anything in the last 30 years? Of course I love the constitution. But this battle plan of “blather about the constitution, and the founding, and [awe filled sigh] limited government” hasn’t worked at all. The only time the conservatives have managed to win anything was with Reagan, and he left office 30 years ago. These guys should wake up, realize that their method isn’t working, and try nationalism instead.

And why don’t they? Why is nationalism beyond them? They love to blather about limited government, capitalism, and “founding principles.” But they should realize that all of these things are meant to serve the people. That is their mistake: they put the wagon before the horse. They think American voters should vote, not what is good for them, but for what will fulfill “conservative principles.” That, and no other reason, is why the conservatives fail. They don’t realize what most of the electorate realizes: that principles exist to serve people; people don’t exist to serve principles.

But listen to this crowd, and that is all you’ll get. Never a word about serving the people of America. Instead, it is always about voting for their principles. At bottom, principles, and not people, are all that matter to this crowd. That is why they fail.


Political Activism

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.