Whither the Right? or Wither the Right.

This is the first of what I hope will be a series of posts on the future of the Right following the collapse of the old Right positions that have held sway, really, since the 1970s. Today, Arky has the floor.

What is the Right? It is a widely assorted collection of people who can be categorised under the following:

1. Christian Right. Further divided under categories such as Catholic Right, Evangelical Right and the demoralised, disillusioned rump of what remains of the traditional protestant denominations such as Anglicans and Presbyterians.

2. The Libertarian Right. Further divided into true libertarians, free marketeer purists, and globalist pigs masquerading as libertarians.

3. RINOs. Leftists and opportunists pretending to be compassionate and reasonable versions of the right, seemingly unaware that their smug framing of themselves in this way comes with the presumption that the basic tenets of the right are mean and selfish, i.e, these are idiots, rogues, dullards and spivs.

4. Reptiles. These are the P.J. O’Rourke types who want all the taxation and ego policies they imagine belong on the right, with none of those pesky morals or beliefs which cramp one’s style. Basically sociopaths, perverts, and where they intersect with free marketeers: drug dealers and pimps.

5. Traditionalists and Nationalists. The Delcons. Allowed themselves to be bent over by every major right political party in the West and responded only with grumbling, letters to soon to be defunct papers which didn’t get published and withdrawing from volunteering at booths.

6. Pissed off old Labour and their children, befuddled traditional liberals in the American sense of the word, and Men and Women of a Practical Bent. That is anyone still trying to make a life for themselves that makes some sort of sense in the face of the current onslaught of utter insanity.

..

What possible future is there for this motley crew with few if any underpinning common interests or beliefs, other than a paralysing fear of what is currently occurring? The only possible pathway to success is some future unifying figure able to organise and galvanise most of them around the following: Countering the CCP. Late term abortions. Meaningful work. Ending the worst excesses of cronyism. Countering cultural Marxism in schools, public broadcasters, health and universities by privatising or defunding entire systems and handing out vouchers.

To do so that leader must avoid and ignore the leftist manufactured logic and word traps of: Identity politics, political correctness and anti- colonialism. And resist those on the right with obsessions about taxes, tariffs, useless foreign engagements and “free” trade. These are usually combined with some useless reflexive virtual signalling or other weirdness that no one in the category of Men and Women of a Practical Bent give a fig about.

Without some unifying religious beliefs, I’m not sure it can even be done. Trump may have come as close as any man possibly can.

10 thoughts on “Whither the Right? or Wither the Right.”

  1. Very good post Arky……

    ” Trump may have come as close as any man possibly can.”

    Yes he did and it is why the globalist elites had to get rid of him….by way of a virus from a laboratory. It worked a treat.


    Report comment

    3
  2. Without some unifying religious beliefs

    Well, I’m a Christian who actually believes in the power of the Gospel. Yep – we need to decide that to have the freedoms and rule of law that were once treasured amongst us, we have to want the Christian moral principles that gave us that.
    Did anyone else watch the Perth ACL meeting on Saturday night? They ran it live on Youtube and Facebook. Over 4,500 people at the meeting and over 3,500 watching on Youtube (I don’t know what the Facebook numbers were). That’s a lot of people realising that there’s a lot of likeminded folk out there in Australia.

    Martin starts speaking at about the 56 minute mark.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3B2XD3ZB6Fc

    “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” (John Adams)

    The 7 deadly sins and all their cousins enslave us from the inside out until we are slaves indeed.


    Report comment

    1
  3. ah yes Trump and man who did not understand let alone believe in a rules based trading system is and how vital it is for capitalism to work properly and he tried to destroy institutions needed for democracy to thrive.
    If you do not believe in either of those two important tenets you are a lot of things but a conservative you aint.


    Report comment

  4. The only comment I will make about former President Trump is one I made on Cat2: Mr. Trump was not the leader or saviour we are seeking, but rather the berserker, in the Scandinavian mythic sense. His role was to buy time for the rest of the motley crew of nail-biters to grow brain-testicles. Didn’t happen. Nuf sed.

    I wonder if we are spending too much time and energy on this identity crisis, when it is the ‘doing stuff’ bit we would be better focusing our neuroses on? I know that is simplistic, and it is important we can explain what we stand for and why, but our opponents are not beholden by centralized leadership or a rigid set of philosophies. Before anyone states ‘But our sense of morality is what sets us apart, we can’t discard that,’ I’m not suggesting we discard the underlying value system.

    I’m suggesting we spend more time on knowing – truly knowing – our opponents. The latter do not aim for one seemingly unachievable goal and then spend decades navel gazing when that goal is not achieved. They tweak their tactics and try again, and again, and …

    A handful of years ago, a poster going by the moniker of WX put forward a concept – very rough and quite abstract (with a failure to follow-up) for a civvy political intelligence group. My interpretation of the concept was that it could be like a neighbourhood watch type of group (loose-knit, with specific aims). Each group might share relevant information or ideas with the wider network.

    The difference between that concept and an online blog, is that such a network would have relatively narrow goals, in terms of the gathering, analysis, and distribution of political/social intelligence.

    Yes, that is still a vague concept, and yes, it is a somewhat radical change from the usual comatose citizenry. But how much more are we prepared to lose?


    Report comment

    1
  5. The post itself points to the major problem of the Right. Complaining and criticizing all the time, attacking anyone who claims to be a conservative because of positions that cross some ideological line like Trump vs. non-Trump, vax vs no vax, climate change, mask vs. no mask. Even the byline of this blog, destroy the Left, is an example of a preoccupation with overt aggressiveness that does not win friends. If you want to keep complaining and criticizing go right ahead but don’t expect it to work. Trump had it right when he started. MAGA: a message of hope and renewal. He, like so many on the Right, have since descended into endless criticism of their perceived opponents on both the Right and Left. Trump’s legacy is a fractured Right and until such time as he leaves the political stage there will be no new synthesis.


    Report comment

  6. “John H.says:
    August 17, 2021 at 7:59 am
    The post itself points to the major problem of the Right. Complaining and criticizing all the time”
    ..
    Have you looked around lately, you moron.
    We’re locked in our homes by Marxists.
    You tool.


    Report comment

  7. I very much disagree with John H’s assertion above about “overt aggressiveness that does not win friends.”

    While I do not known John’s thought pattern at all, where I have come across this previously, it has arisen from a profound misunderstanding of human nature and conflict, including the resolution of conflict.

    Simplistically put, our ideological opponents do not want to make friends. They do not want to participate in mutual compromise. They do not want us, their publicly declared enemies, to be an active part of any outcome. What do they want? Submission.

    I do agree that constant complaining and criticism, (the highlighting of hypocrisy, for example), will produce the outcome we want by themselves. Neither will continuing to compromise and submit.

    I wrote somewhere last week that the so-called ‘issues’ they identify – most recently critical race theory – are distraction squirrels. They are designed to waste our time with attempts at rational debate, while our opponents continue tunneling beneath the foundations of our society and culture.

    I don’t wish to get stuck on the topic of former President Trump, but to claim as John does that he, Mr. Trump, was responsible for the fracturing of the ‘right’ is ridiculous.


    Report comment

    2

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *