Indeed. An ideology around a single individual rises and falls with said individual, and very few can triump for long.
If the new right is going go have a future, it needs a stronger set of principles than just "trump", and it needs a way to articulate said principles beyond a single compromised mouthpiece.
Yet despite our attempts to bring them up to speed on how to fight the new digital culture war, they still have not taken the lessons to heart. Things like the distrusting of corporations, the three rules of sjws and fighting against alinskyism, the recognition of academia, social media companies and mass media as the enemy, how to mobilize under their noses, and they still refuse to accept the social landscape change of the last 15-30 years.
The trick going forward will be using these compromised positions as gateways to the truth. Not to treat them as truth or trustworthy in and of themselves, but to piggyback off them to get the normies to dig deeper themselves. Give the normies enough cognitive dissonance to make them go looking for a way to reconcile it. Or use their social media presence as a way to bring people deeper into the net.
"Muh cult of personality" is a collectivist smear against any movement that opposes them. You don't hear anyone denouncing the insane mass worship of Obama, which greatly exceeded any similar support for Trump. Why not? Because he was a personality pushing for global communism, and his cultists were the "good kind" of fanatics.
You cannot have a strong nation or a strong individualist populist movement without equally strong and charismatic leaders who inspire and direct the people. Globalists will always denounce such leaders as demagogues and their supporters as cultists. The very idea of a nation is anethema to their goals. They will always push for weak leaders and unenthusiastic nationalism because they want your nation to vanish.
Sure you can. Ideology js more than the people who follow them. If your principles are sound, you don't need the strong leader, as another one can take its place as long as they align closely enough with its values.
Thats how the left infects new people with their ideologies. Only difference is once they lose power the ideas have to compete until a new orthodoxy emerges. Hence why social justice is so radically against many of the old communist talking points.
On the flip side, the founding principles of conservatism more or less can remain the same so long as its system remains. Sure, populism can help, but no person is without sin and populism is not required to win. Besides, people have whims, ideas do not, meaning even with imperfect people, as long as their ideas are sound, you can point to accomplishments.
Consistently cutting bait and abandoning people is precisely why conservatives always lose. The establishment republicans are pushing "their constituents" to ditch the most popular republican in modern history. He still has over 90% approval among conservative voters. Why should he be the one ejected from the party? Seems to me like every other republican leader and talking head should be the ones kicked to the curb. Judging by Fox News's ratings, most conservatives appear to agree with me.
Ejected? No. Made the sole pillar of the counter revolution? Absolutely not. A movement around a person rises and falls with said person. A movement around an idea endures long after said person is gone. Its why we still have to deal with marxism 150 years after the death of Marx, and very few marxists even really like the guy himself.
Very few marxists even read Marx or know much about him. Marxism is an oral tradition passed down through academia that evolves rapidly due to the nature of the game telephone.
Marx just wrapped 5 dollar words around "I'm a failure and sad about it, it has to be someone elses fault. And that is my excuse to justify acting shitty."
I don’t see the lie. You gotta admit that Trump lost in some way, either the election or the secret war against the vampires or whatever. Tuckers take is cucked but bailing on Trump isn’t heresy
I wouldn't say Tucker doesn't understand Trump. He understands exactly why the people voted for the man. He's had multiple monologues exactly nailing the circumstances among the working class in this country that led to Trump's election
Well his mask is off now.
Tucker merely played the role of Populist Inc and now he doesn't bother to even do that to a convincing degree.
Still what can we expect from someone who works at a mainstream news outlet?
They just stole a presidential election in broad daylight. We're not voting ourselves out of this.
Indeed. An ideology around a single individual rises and falls with said individual, and very few can triump for long.
If the new right is going go have a future, it needs a stronger set of principles than just "trump", and it needs a way to articulate said principles beyond a single compromised mouthpiece.
Yet despite our attempts to bring them up to speed on how to fight the new digital culture war, they still have not taken the lessons to heart. Things like the distrusting of corporations, the three rules of sjws and fighting against alinskyism, the recognition of academia, social media companies and mass media as the enemy, how to mobilize under their noses, and they still refuse to accept the social landscape change of the last 15-30 years.
The trick going forward will be using these compromised positions as gateways to the truth. Not to treat them as truth or trustworthy in and of themselves, but to piggyback off them to get the normies to dig deeper themselves. Give the normies enough cognitive dissonance to make them go looking for a way to reconcile it. Or use their social media presence as a way to bring people deeper into the net.
"Muh cult of personality" is a collectivist smear against any movement that opposes them. You don't hear anyone denouncing the insane mass worship of Obama, which greatly exceeded any similar support for Trump. Why not? Because he was a personality pushing for global communism, and his cultists were the "good kind" of fanatics.
You cannot have a strong nation or a strong individualist populist movement without equally strong and charismatic leaders who inspire and direct the people. Globalists will always denounce such leaders as demagogues and their supporters as cultists. The very idea of a nation is anethema to their goals. They will always push for weak leaders and unenthusiastic nationalism because they want your nation to vanish.
Scientology doesn't poll well either, but that hasn't hurt David Miscavige. Obama's cultists are in positions of power.
Sure you can. Ideology js more than the people who follow them. If your principles are sound, you don't need the strong leader, as another one can take its place as long as they align closely enough with its values.
Thats how the left infects new people with their ideologies. Only difference is once they lose power the ideas have to compete until a new orthodoxy emerges. Hence why social justice is so radically against many of the old communist talking points.
On the flip side, the founding principles of conservatism more or less can remain the same so long as its system remains. Sure, populism can help, but no person is without sin and populism is not required to win. Besides, people have whims, ideas do not, meaning even with imperfect people, as long as their ideas are sound, you can point to accomplishments.
Consistently cutting bait and abandoning people is precisely why conservatives always lose. The establishment republicans are pushing "their constituents" to ditch the most popular republican in modern history. He still has over 90% approval among conservative voters. Why should he be the one ejected from the party? Seems to me like every other republican leader and talking head should be the ones kicked to the curb. Judging by Fox News's ratings, most conservatives appear to agree with me.
Ejected? No. Made the sole pillar of the counter revolution? Absolutely not. A movement around a person rises and falls with said person. A movement around an idea endures long after said person is gone. Its why we still have to deal with marxism 150 years after the death of Marx, and very few marxists even really like the guy himself.
Very few marxists even read Marx or know much about him. Marxism is an oral tradition passed down through academia that evolves rapidly due to the nature of the game telephone.
marxism has been around long before marx, he just got some dumbass to pay him to sit around and write about it
https://www.jordanbpeterson.com/transcripts/biblical-series-v/
Marx just wrapped 5 dollar words around "I'm a failure and sad about it, it has to be someone elses fault. And that is my excuse to justify acting shitty."
I don’t see the lie. You gotta admit that Trump lost in some way, either the election or the secret war against the vampires or whatever. Tuckers take is cucked but bailing on Trump isn’t heresy
He will still be the president of the US until he gets clintoned and Kamala takes over.
I wouldn't say Tucker doesn't understand Trump. He understands exactly why the people voted for the man. He's had multiple monologues exactly nailing the circumstances among the working class in this country that led to Trump's election