Perhaps a problem with the right is that it dwells on this question so much. The left adopts a position, by contrast, makes moralistic arguments to give themselves the moral high ground... 1/
...and regardless of whether "the people" support that position the left will, if given power, make their position law. Public opinion can be molded by law through habitual compliance with law 2/
The left enjoys the foundations of a cultural base on which to build their political superstructure, which the right does not. So the right's path forward, because it does not have time and the same navigable terrain the left enjoyed generations ago, is this top down approach 3/
There is something Aristotelian about this. Law as teacher through habit. It's not the most stable approach, it's kind of like charging at the problem with a wobbly wheel, but it's probably the only real way forward at this point 4/
Notice how ardently the left enforces compliance with laws that habituate people to live the way they want them to live. A weakness of the right is that it is not willing to do the same, because it is so in love with individualism and talk of "rights" 5/
The right, on the other hand, viciously fights over whether culture is first or politics is first, when it should snatch whatever weapon is available off the walls and start swinging. I prefer the cultural hegemony, but that might take time we don't have (generations) 6/
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
One immediate problem with secession is that the enemy is imperialistic and will never stop coming. For example, what neoconservatives did to Iraqis, they will want done to secessionists
What the left and neocons have in common is that they are imperialistic. You will also be on stolen land/a national security threat to these people
I raise this point because it seems like secessionists think separation would mean peace but I highly doubt that. In fact it would justify treating secessionists as foreign combatants. Something to consider
Everything bad happening is necessary: Trump turned around on his platform in 2017 and instead embraced the GOP's way: tax cuts, judges, conciliation with enemies 1/
Now corporations (beneficiaries of tax cuts), judges (they keep striking down Trump’s election-fraud efforts), and bad friends (think all the people Trump endorsed or brought into the fold who subsequently turned on him and now welcome Biden) are all working against him 2/
The best possible outcome, though it isn't certain at all, is that the right is completely disillusioned with trying to conserve anything and instead starts thinking and operating more like the left, desiring revolutionary change and not conservation of the rot 3/
1) I agree with this one tweet in the thread 2) I don't see why it's either-or. Trump initially, and unwittingly, touched the chord of a mythmaking when he told Americans he would "Make America Great Again," rebuild America, and gut the consensus. It was powerful, successful 1/
Trump's failure was in his governance--which was undisciplined, inconsistent, and transactional. Whenever this got brought up, Trump supporters would point to myths to justify bad governance, i.e., "Trust the Plan" 2/
But myths alone are not sufficient. You cannot point to paltry policy accomplishments and tell people over and over the best is yet to come and they have to keep trusting the plan and if they don't they're a Democrat or a shill or worse 3/
As I've been saying, the military is not a conservative institution. It is a reflection of the regime and the American regime and ruling class are as rotten as they come.
Conservatives need to see this and hear people like Petraeus tell them they are a bigger threat than Islamists because that's the only way to disillusion them
There is nothing so pathetic and deserving of contempt as white men who for whatever reason denigrate themselves, their ancestors, their religion, and their race. You won't see Latinos or blacks doing this, and there's no reason whites should participate in or entertain this 1/
It's a truly repulsive combination of narcissism, masochism, and, depending on the person, cynicism. You could not engineer a worse kind of social disease than this 2/
In my caliphate, Joe would suffer the logical consequences of what he's saying. His paycheck, his property, and his job would go to a nonwhite. How quickly would people stop talking like this? 3/
At the heart of this is the acknowledgement that conservatism functions as a pressure relief valve. There are periodic revolts against the establishment, and that's all well and good, so long as they conclude and with hobgoblins like Bill Kristol on top 1/
Trumpism frightened people because it looked like it had the ability to go beyond a kind of Tea Party thing, to reach beyond the occasional revolt and instead mark the beginning of something new and lasting 2/
But it's yet unclear what will become of Trumpism, if it will merely become another iteration of the Tea Party, or be refined into something else to be wielded by the next "Trump" against the establishment. People like Kristol understand the latter is a threat to themselves 3/