And money is just a way to represent power. Now we have individuals and corporations that have more money than entire (historical) nation-states, enough money to take over space exploration. And wasn't terrestrial exploration government-sponsored at first? What happened when, suddenly, private interests got their noses into exploring beyond the "Pillars of Hercules"?
We can't win by just pointing out the problems and inconsistencies with the other side's ideas. We need to figure out how to present an alternative that not only supports our agenda but is appealing to normies.
"Shut up and work hard and you will get into heaven" is no longer adequate motivation for the general population. Conservatism desperately needs a marketing department.
Simultaneously we need to go after the individuals on the other side who are publicly espousing things like economic and social violence against us. (see what I did there?)
I haven't figured it out yet to be perfectly honest, but Conservatism only ever yields ground to its opponents, so I don't find it to be a suitable form of opposition to the current madness. We need something though.
I don't know either but I'm convinced there needs to be some kind of religious framework behind it. People need a certitude even if it is bullshit when you think about it, most people don't want to or actively refuse to think about it.
Co-opting an existing religion would put us hundreds of years ahead. The way I see it is there are two paths. One is use christianity and the other is use islam.
Christianity is the easier but probably weaker foundation since anyone can start a christian cult. Pushing something like eastern orthodox might be workable since they seem the least pozzed.
Islam, on the surface, looks pretty damn based. From what little I know to convert all you have to do is say you convert. Then do regular performative public rituals to demonstrate you are loyal. The downside is there doesn't appear to be a mechanism for islam to internally police itself so there isnt a good way to "steer the ship".
These really are questions for someone smarter than me.
Of the two I would certainly prefer Christianity. I think it would be easier to use within the Western world since it already has a long history within the culture. It would need to return to something of its roots when it was a religion of strength rather than the limp wristed defeatism it currently manifests as. There's an old morally strong foundation to build on but we need to unearth it first since they last several decades have done nothing but layer weakness and degeneracy over it.
On the other hand, those most in need of such a guiding light seem least likely to follow it. It has become hip and cool to abandon religion. Many are currently wandering aimlessly with little more direction than an aversion to the religion that came before(Christianity).
I'll definitely agree that these are conundrums for someone cleverer than us, though I worry we may be the only ones working the issue at all, so maybe that just means we need to step up our game.
It's all the same as sports. We root for our home team, and boo the out of towners. If our team fouls, we say it didn't happen. If we even think their team fouls, we scream at the ref to notice it, and possibly torch his car for not seeing it.
Then the sport is shown on TV. The news knows the home team is the big heroes, so they show the heroes scoring and doing amazing things. Even if the score is 12 to 108, they show those 12 like they were common. If you want to know a weird thing for sports broadcasting, its getting the end score from coaches from a loss. They will not tell you.
But then we treat politics like a sport, and the News gets to decide who is the home team. then they take it to levels of insanity, and never reveal the score of a losing game.
Mean while we are yelling at the ref, and not realizing what is happening.
And money is just a way to represent power. Now we have individuals and corporations that have more money than entire (historical) nation-states, enough money to take over space exploration. And wasn't terrestrial exploration government-sponsored at first? What happened when, suddenly, private interests got their noses into exploring beyond the "Pillars of Hercules"?
We can't win by just pointing out the problems and inconsistencies with the other side's ideas. We need to figure out how to present an alternative that not only supports our agenda but is appealing to normies.
"Shut up and work hard and you will get into heaven" is no longer adequate motivation for the general population. Conservatism desperately needs a marketing department.
Simultaneously we need to go after the individuals on the other side who are publicly espousing things like economic and social violence against us. (see what I did there?)
Conservatism doesn't need a marketing department, it needs to be abandoned in favor of something that will work.
whats that something?
I haven't figured it out yet to be perfectly honest, but Conservatism only ever yields ground to its opponents, so I don't find it to be a suitable form of opposition to the current madness. We need something though.
I don't know either but I'm convinced there needs to be some kind of religious framework behind it. People need a certitude even if it is bullshit when you think about it, most people don't want to or actively refuse to think about it.
Co-opting an existing religion would put us hundreds of years ahead. The way I see it is there are two paths. One is use christianity and the other is use islam.
Christianity is the easier but probably weaker foundation since anyone can start a christian cult. Pushing something like eastern orthodox might be workable since they seem the least pozzed.
Islam, on the surface, looks pretty damn based. From what little I know to convert all you have to do is say you convert. Then do regular performative public rituals to demonstrate you are loyal. The downside is there doesn't appear to be a mechanism for islam to internally police itself so there isnt a good way to "steer the ship".
These really are questions for someone smarter than me.
Of the two I would certainly prefer Christianity. I think it would be easier to use within the Western world since it already has a long history within the culture. It would need to return to something of its roots when it was a religion of strength rather than the limp wristed defeatism it currently manifests as. There's an old morally strong foundation to build on but we need to unearth it first since they last several decades have done nothing but layer weakness and degeneracy over it.
On the other hand, those most in need of such a guiding light seem least likely to follow it. It has become hip and cool to abandon religion. Many are currently wandering aimlessly with little more direction than an aversion to the religion that came before(Christianity).
I'll definitely agree that these are conundrums for someone cleverer than us, though I worry we may be the only ones working the issue at all, so maybe that just means we need to step up our game.
der freischütz plays in the background.
It's all the same as sports. We root for our home team, and boo the out of towners. If our team fouls, we say it didn't happen. If we even think their team fouls, we scream at the ref to notice it, and possibly torch his car for not seeing it.
Then the sport is shown on TV. The news knows the home team is the big heroes, so they show the heroes scoring and doing amazing things. Even if the score is 12 to 108, they show those 12 like they were common. If you want to know a weird thing for sports broadcasting, its getting the end score from coaches from a loss. They will not tell you.
But then we treat politics like a sport, and the News gets to decide who is the home team. then they take it to levels of insanity, and never reveal the score of a losing game.
Mean while we are yelling at the ref, and not realizing what is happening.
Good luck with that