No Enemies To The Right?

[Curved_Sw0rd]

No Enemies to the Right? DC Miller vs Charles Haywood

Daniel Miller and Charles Haywood debate winning the Culture War

im1776.com

It's an older article less yesterday's news and more three months and several news cycles ago news. That said, I meant to post this, ask about it, feel for it. The long and short of how this article came to be was Rod Dreher seeing Haywood's thesis, "No Enemies To The Right", and disavowing it. This is Haywood response, and it offers some food for thought.

After all why concern yourself with what the Left thinks acceptable? Why hold the Left as morally equivalent at all? Why waste energy telling your Reactionary and other extreme peers that they're wrong, hurting your image, when your image, to the Left anyway, is worth nothing?

 

[Bacle]

Because sometimes you have to punch Right, and people's morality and willingness to call out bad actions should not be predicated on which political side you are on.

Not punching Right when needed is how you get fucktards like Nick Fuentes and Milo screwing with Trump and Kanye, and receiving no punishment for it.

 

[Cherico]

Because sometimes you have to punch Right, and people's morality and willingness to call out bad actions should not be predicated on which political side you are on.

Not punching Right when needed is how you get fucktards like Nick Fuentes and Milo screwing with Trump and Kanye, and receiving no punishment for it.

And that will die as an ideology as the left gets more and more extreme and unhinged.

The conservative movement is dead the populist movement is rising and all around you will notice that nuance and compromise will die too, culture and society will form their armed camps and in the long run only one of them is walking out alive.

The only way to stop it is to get the leftwing establishment to settle the fuck down but they have no desire or willingness to do that and we have no power there. So what will happen is action an reaction weather you like it or not.

 

[Circle of Willis]

Because sometimes you have to punch Right, and people's morality and willingness to call out bad actions should not be predicated on which political side you are on.

Not punching Right when needed is how you get fucktards like Nick Fuentes and Milo screwing with Trump and Kanye, and receiving no punishment for it.

Basically this. Some measure of gatekeeping & tard-wrangling (to use latter-day Internet parlance) is necessary if you want to ensure the integrity of any organization, and anything resembling an organized right would be no exception. It's not even a 'worrying about what the left thinks' deal or 'optics cucking' or anything like that, it's a question of not coming across as a completely unserious clown show that nobody in their right mind would vote for (which, yes, you do have to worry about if you aren't a reactionary terror cell actively plotting to overthrow the government rather than trying to play within the system in any way). As with political extremists in general, those on the right also tend to have spent a lot of time in political hugboxes where their views aren't rigorously challenged nor does anyone complain when they crack an off-color joke they'd never be able to get away with in normal RL company (not their fault usually, this was always how the Internet worked to a degree but the number of spaces where you can freely express right-of-center views has been dropping like flies), so they then think they can behave the same way as a public figure seeking office - invariably with disastrous results.

For one example, you can take a look at what happened to the UKIP after they let Sargon of Akkad in: instead of getting to discuss any serious issues they ended up wasting a ridiculous amount of time defending his casual jokes about raping Labour MP Jess Philips (which he quadrupled down on), which whatever you think about Philips personally or Labour & women generally, is not exactly the kind of thing that normie voters will laugh about or vote for. The result, of course, is that Nigel Farage quit to found a new party where such idiocy wouldn't fly and the UKIP was destroyed in short order. Or, indeed, the trainwreck that was YE24. Normies do not, in fact, enjoy it when you spout /pol/ talking points IRL, and they enjoy it even less when you associate yourself with absolute degenerates like Milo and Fuentes (people with huge Kiwifarms threads or an entire subforum in the latter's case, so it's not like those of a more rightward bent don't find them insufferable either) while still supposedly claiming to represent tradition, faith and fatherland. How exactly is one supposed to persuasively argue in favor of any of those things while having a white-nationalist catboy enthusiast who's been caught on camera throwing temper tantrums in restaurants as a lieutenant?

Not coincidentally, the left had to play by the same rules to get as far as they have. As a counter-example to the above, the gay rights crowd had to firmly and in no uncertain terms dissociate from NAMBLA and its ilk in the 90s in order to deny the right the ability to easily and accurately accuse them of being pedophiles or, at 'best', pedo-adjacent (which would have been absolutely true had they not done so). It's also absolutely not a coincidence that the idea of civil unions, gay marriage, etc. started gaining mainstream acceptability only after that point. Does anyone really think the push for gay marriage could have happened if the albatross of literal overt pedophiles had been something those guys embraced, rather than ran away screaming from?

 

[Curved_Sw0rd]

Because sometimes you have to punch Right, and people's morality and willingness to call out bad actions should not be predicated on which political side you are on.

Not punching Right when needed is how you get fucktards like Nick Fuentes and Milo screwing with Trump and Kanye, and receiving no punishment for it.

There's a proper way to check people to your Right, and that isn't loud, public denouncements like one is Hasan screaming about some chud he found. The proper way is quieter, one on one discussions that help people be useful and direct their energy in a serious way.

 

[Bacle]

There's a proper way to check people to your Right, and that isn't loud, public denouncements like one is Hasan screaming about some chud he found. The proper way is quieter, one on one discussions that help people be useful and direct their energy in a serious way.

That doesn't work when the PR damage is public.

 

[Curved_Sw0rd]

That doesn't work when the PR damage is public.

Why doesn't it work? Explain it to me like I sniff model airplane glue. Because from where I stand, you yourself can disavow Kanye, Fuentes, Milo, all damn day. But forget the hard Left type, the average normie? You're still too Right for them, you're too transphobic, you're too racist, you're too Pro-Life, and so on, despite how much you sneer at these guys. The needle does not move, anyone who thinks you're "respectable" for speaking up and punching in that direction, loudly, is not going to stick around to hear you out for anything less than a return to the 90s.

 

[Bacle]

Why doesn't it work? Explain it to me like I sniff model airplane glue. Because from where I stand, you yourself can disavow Kanye, Fuentes, Milo, all damn day. But forget the hard Left type, the average normie? You're still too Right for them, you're too transphobic, you're too racist, you're too Pro-Life, and so on, despite how much you sneer at these guys. The needle does not move, anyone who thinks you're "respectable" for speaking up and punching in that direction, loudly, is not going to stick around to hear you out for anything less than a return to the 90s.

You think that matters to me?

I'm already a pariah to them, I know that, and I'm just trying to keep people better position to fix shit from fucking things up because they only hear from inside Right Wing echochambers.

Like, I had never even heard of the linked website or personalities before now, but the premise you say they discuss is enough to know the sort of echo-chamber BS they are trying to sell.

I care about trying to keep the only sane options our society has left from making the job of saving it harder by committing unforced errors, more than what the Left thinks.

 

[Curved_Sw0rd]

You think that matters to me?

I'm already a pariah to them, I know that, and I'm just trying to keep people better position to fix shit from fucking things up because they only hear from inside Right Wing echochambers.

Like, I had never even heard of the linked website or personalities before now, but the premise you say they discuss is enough to know the sort of echo-chamber BS they are trying to sell.

I care about trying to keep the only sane options our society has left from making the job of saving it harder by committing unforced errors, more than what the Left thinks.

Do you believe steering the Right to the center is a more winning move than just slapping the fuck out of the Left, as Haywood proposes? What utility is there?

 

[Bacle]

Do you believe steering the Right to the center is a more winning move than just slapping the fuck out of the Left, as Haywood proposes? What utility is there?

Yes, because the center is larger than either fringe, most of America society exists in the middle, and you don't win elections via subtraction, nor culture wars via becoming political hermits.

The Right is not large enough, or powerful enough, to dominate the Left without the center coming onboard, no matter what accelerationists or their friends think

 

[King Arts]

Basically this. Some measure of gatekeeping & tard-wrangling (to use latter-day Internet parlance) is necessary if you want to ensure the integrity of any organization, and anything resembling an organized right would be no exception. It's not even a 'worrying about what the left thinks' deal or 'optics cucking' or anything like that, it's a question of not coming across as a completely unserious clown show that nobody in their right mind would vote for (which, yes, you do have to worry about if you aren't a reactionary terror cell actively plotting to overthrow the government rather than trying to play within the system in any way). As with political extremists in general, those on the right also tend to have spent a lot of time in political hugboxes where their views aren't rigorously challenged nor does anyone complain when they crack an off-color joke they'd never be able to get away with in normal RL company (not their fault usually, this was always how the Internet worked to a degree but the number of spaces where you can freely express right-of-center views has been dropping like flies), so they then think they can behave the same way as a public figure seeking office - invariably with disastrous results.

For one example, you can take a look at what happened to the UKIP after they let Sargon of Akkad in: instead of getting to discuss any serious issues they ended up wasting a ridiculous amount of time defending his casual jokes about raping Labour MP Jess Philips (which he quadrupled down on), which whatever you think about Philips personally or Labour & women generally, is not exactly the kind of thing that normie voters will laugh about or vote for. The result, of course, is that Nigel Farage quit to found a new party where such idiocy wouldn't fly and the UKIP was destroyed in short order. Or, indeed, the trainwreck that was YE24. Normies do not, in fact, enjoy it when you spout /pol/ talking points IRL, and they enjoy it even less when you associate yourself with absolute degenerates like Milo and Fuentes (people with huge Kiwifarms threads or an entire subforum in the latter's case, so it's not like those of a more rightward bent don't find them insufferable either) while still supposedly claiming to represent tradition, faith and fatherland. How exactly is one supposed to persuasively argue in favor of any of those things while having a white-nationalist catboy enthusiast who's been caught on camera throwing temper tantrums in restaurants as a lieutenant?

Not coincidentally, the left had to play by the same rules to get as far as they have. As a counter-example to the above, the gay rights crowd had to firmly and in no uncertain terms dissociate from NAMBLA and its ilk in the 90s in order to deny the right the ability to easily and accurately accuse them of being pedophiles or, at 'best', pedo-adjacent (which would have been absolutely true had they not done so). It's also absolutely not a coincidence that the idea of civil unions, gay marriage, etc. started gaining mainstream acceptability only after that point. Does anyone really think the push for gay marriage could have happened if the albatross of literal overt pedophiles had been something those guys embraced, rather than ran away screaming from?

To be fair, while I hate Carl Benjamin(god damn in the past when you typped in his online personality his ugly mug showed up) making rape jokes worked for Trump and Bolsanaro. So worrying too much about "propriety" is how you end up with the establishment right.

 

[shangrila]

As long as the left dominates media, they will be able to push their story first. Normies with poor attention span will absorb the first story and ignore corrections even if made. This incentivizes the kind of instantaneous punch to the right characteristic of the Establishment Right. The Establishment Right will always disown another on the right the moment some leftist makes up nonsense. This is what we saw with the Covington Kids, and what the Left counted on with Kavanaugh.

Here's the thing though, no considered disavowal will ever achieve the desired goal of normie outreach as long as the Left controls the media. It will take too long to do research and discussion and the media hitpieces will already be out. Only instinctive betrayal might, and one must wonder if a culture of instinctive betrayal could possibly be better than giving up on normies until and unless the media situation changes.

Purging your own ranks of the incompetent, the degenerate, and the drama queen is of course necessary. Performative disavowals on the other hand, not so much.

 

[Circle of Willis]

To be fair, while I hate Carl Benjamin(god damn in the past when you typped in his online personality his ugly mug showed up) making rape jokes worked for Trump and Bolsanaro. So worrying too much about "propriety" is how you end up with the establishment right.

My understanding is that Trump's Access Hollywood tape was from more than a decade before his presidential run, and he wasn't even actually joking about rape (his wording IIRC was 'when you're a star, they let you do it'). Bolsonaro also didn't make his 'not worth raping' comment during his campaign for the presidency (wasn't it during a heated debate where the other woman was actually accusing him of being a rapist first?) and in general, both men knew better than to triple down on the controversy.

Sargon/Carl Benjamin didn't. Hell he might even have gotten away with the first remark (it was something along the lines of 'I wouldn't even rape [Jess Philips]' if he had just tried to brush it off, play it down and in general not attract attention to it. But nope, he just had to embrace the controversy wholesale and crack another joke that went further (the second time he actually did joke he might do it if given enough booze), then claim he had rape survivors lining up to support him making such jokes because they were 'empowering'. I don't think you have to be some Machiavellian genius to see why all this must have sounded much better in his head than it did when he spoke it out loud, and why the UKIP leader at the time was arguably an even bigger moron for backing him up at all costs.

I do not believe there exists a strict dichotomy where one can only ever 'optics cuck' or else have to tolerate RL /b/tards running around completely unfiltered with zero gatekeeping or wrangling whatsoever, of course there's a sensible middle ground that can be reached here. In general I'd agree there's no need to rabidly persecute people on your own side for off-color comments like some 'white knight' and to always wait to verify whether they said what they said & in what context, rather than just take the MSM's word for it. But it's also important to be able to maintain discipline (which is not the same as overzealously policing your party members!), to punish people who did go too far (like, even setting all emotion aside to look at things purely pragmatically, how does joking about raping your enemies benefit one's party politically? Is there anyone of voting age that isn't already a convicted rapist who would be persuaded to vote for you based on that?) and to also protect your ranks from grifters, trolls and edgy morons with no filter in general.

 

[ShieldWife]

Conservatives attacking to their right has almost always been a bad thing. The entire Republican and “conservative” establishment in the USA is largely based on making sure the right in the USA isn’t too far to the right and they routinely attack their own base on criteria set by the far left. The government is currently locking up dissidents (the Jan 6th protesters) without trial and without due process of law and our scumbag GOP senators are attacking the people trying to reveal the truth. For decades the GOP has held their own base in contempt and fought against their interest, using the same leftist insults to silence their base.

Punching right is destroying our country. I would happily ignore guys like Richard Spencer (who should be ignored because he has effectively no influence in the USA) if it meant we could kick out the RINOs and neo-cons who are actually more harmful to conservatism than Democrats are.

Believe me, the leftists are still going to call conservatives Nazis no matter how much “conservatives” attack people to their right. In fact, all the left has to do is produce one glowy at one event with Swastika flag and that one paid saboteur will get wall to wall media coverage and the millions of conservatives who disapprove won’t. In fact, conservatives who make a big deal out of repudiating the supposed “far right” actually cause more damage to the image of conservatism because they lend credence to leftist accusations, they create the false impression that the “far right” actually exists enough to worry about. Far better just to ignore leftist accusations or laugh at them like the histrionics they are.

So as for myself, I never punch right. I might consider it when the left starts repudiating the extremists within their own ranks that (unlike Nazis in the GOP) actually have massive influence in the Democrat Party and in leftist political movements and ideology.

 

[ShieldWife]

I'd say dump them all left and right on an island prison colony and let them fight it out. If the survivors really feel Dues Vult that they rule over the USA, Then they can declare war and get an American-sized boot up their butts.

So you’re saying that anybody with “extreme” beliefs should be imprisoned and left to probably die?

That doesn’t seem extreme at all. Nope, not at all.

 

[KilroywasNOTHere]

So you’re saying that anybody with “extreme” beliefs should be imprisoned and left to probably die?

That doesn’t seem extreme at all. Nope, not at all.

*Sigh* you're right, still At this point, I just want to be left alone to live my life in peace.

Edit: you know what? no you're not right. I don't want people who have "Extreme beliefs" to get imprisoned and left to die. I want people who openly state to hate the US and those living in it, people who openly admit they want to death to those who like me simply want to be left alone to freaking leave or at the very least stay on their side.

I'm sick of being mocked, berated, threatened, and all sorts of other things because I'm too liberal too conservative too white too male whatever. I'm sick of people getting bullied, pushed around and even told to kill themselves all because they want to play a freaking video game.

I am sick of people who wouldn't last five minutes in the real world and I do literally mean five minutes calling the shots and controlling the narrative. I find it funny that the people mocking the "I just want to grill" people are more often than not the ones trying to instigate things in the first place and my tolerance for these kind of people regardless of what side of the isle they are on is really REALLY starting to wear thin.

 

[Curved_Sw0rd]

Yes, because the center is larger than either fringe, most of America society exists in the middle, and you don't win elections via subtraction, nor culture wars via becoming political hermits.

The Right is not large enough, or powerful enough, to dominate the Left without the center coming onboard, no matter what accelerationists or their friends think

And how is that working out? What does winning the culture war look like? Does the average normie really think abortion is infanticide? Can the average normie really ignore the current thing and not dance to the legacy media's tune?

Perhaps most importantly do you think Dreher makes friends with his actions or does he do the Lefts work for free?

 

[Bacle]

And how is that working out? What does winning the culture war look like? Does the average normie really think abortion is infanticide? Can the average normie really ignore the current thing and not dance to the legacy media's tune?

Perhaps most importantly do you think Dreher makes friends with his actions or does he do the Lefts work for free?

More important question; why should we care what Dreher, Miller, or Haywood think?

I'd never heard of any of the 3 before now, the link is to a place I'd never heard of, and the whole premise that all three are arguing about is something that only really matters to a rather hardcore fringe of the Right, because only the hardcore fringe of the Right actually has a problem with 'Punching Right'.

Though I will say that many people on the fringe of the Right, not just these 3, actually do a lot of the Left's job for them. Particularly when they act like it's more important to not Punch Right than it is to make damn sure people like Fuentes, Milo, and Richard Spencer have no home or welcome in the Right's political actions or platforms.

You do not win elections through subtraction, and you do not win the culture war by singing to a shrinking choir.

 

[Marduk]

You do not win elections through subtraction, and you do not win the culture war by singing to a shrinking choir.

You don't win the culture war by welcoming changes of political landscape to your disadvantage (that's just surrender and the end result is ending up as GOPe or Tories, with constanly disappointed voter base who thought you are right wing but you're not) either, winning the culture war is about influencing which choir shrinks and which grows.

As for controversial fringe - the only way to win is not to play. If you praise them, you get bunched in with them, if you obsess about them being too fringe, they get someone to call a cuck, a leftist or wet noodle with no spine. If you have a better alternative, do your own thing, instead of talking about them, controversy and attention is what such shit-stirrers thrive on, just roll your eyes at them and move on.

 

[Bacle]

You don't win the culture war by welcoming changes of political landscape to your disadvantage (that's just surrender and the end result is ending up as GOPe or Tories, with constanly disappointed voter base who thought you are right wing but you're not) either, winning the culture war is about influencing which choir shrinks and which grows.

As for controversial fringe - the only way to win is not to play. If you praise them, you get bunched in with them, if you obsess about them being too fringe, they get someone to call a cuck, a leftist or wet noodle with no spine. If you have a better alternative, do your own thing, instead of talking about them, controversy and attention is what such shit-stirrers thrive on, just roll your eyes at them and move on.

Unfortunately, with the way the US political and social climate operates these days, just ignoring the fringe is not possible, nor is it possible to shrink the Left's choir by just preaching to ours.

People shit all over 'centrists' here, but the fact is most of US society exists in the middle, and no amount of purity spiral bullshit on the Right will change that.

Deal with the demographic and cultural landscape we have, not the landscape we wish we had to work with.

The appealing to the center, and convincing the center that the Dems aims are are worse than the GOP aims, requires the GOP to not allow it's own radicals/fringe to dictate the conversation and terms of engagement with society.

The GOP base is not enough on it's own to win anything, no matter how much it wishes it was.