This is what really rubs me the wrong way about modern so-called "conservatives"- they make a big verbal stink about something, barely put up a fight, then when the left gets their way, they try to claim it was actually "conservative" all along.
This is a good example on the culture war front, but you see this in other areas, like how mainstream conservatives are trying to co-opt MLK and the Civil Rights movement, despite the fact that both were/are fundamentally left leaning, and how they stopped defending Confederate monuments so they can say that "Democrats were Confederates, thus they were the real racists".
Someone posted here yesterday or today about how CPAC is actively saying transgenderism is a "conservative issue", that is a good example as well. And how most of the GOP is now presenting themselves as "moderate" pro LGBT when 15 years ago neither party would touch the issue.
They need to stop trying to out-virtue-signal the Left- it accomplishes nothing except allowing leftists to continue shifting the Overton Window. If you allow leftists to set the paradigm, you will lose to Leftists since they will keep changing the paradigm against you.
"Conservatives" are a ratcheting mechanism: they'll put up token resistance to any socio-political change then strongly resist any reactionary movement which seeks to revert any socio-political change which has already occurred because those proposing it are "far right".
Be careful how you talk about that, people tend to be sensitive to that sort of thing here.
I made a post arguing this point a day or two ago, giving a number of points arguing that the GOP, and Trump specifically, were controlled op. It was extremely controversial, most of my in-thread replies were downvoted without a substantive response, and of the four replies I actually got to the in-thread comments, two implied that I was a Jew shill for not being totally pro Trump.... completely illogical given that Trump is quite pro Israel and half his family is literally Jewish.
I love this site usually, and even when there is disagreement people are usually respectful, but some of the more neocon-ish types can be touchy when you question their worldview, even with evidence.
Be careful how you talk about that, people tend to be sensitive to that sort of thing here.
Nah, I'm gonna step all over people's feelings with zero remorse. I'm done with that. I hold no forlorn love for the Republican party. I was a disillusioned Leftist who came to set up camp in the Far Right because they're the only people talking sense, so no I'm not gonna pull any punches when it comes to badmouthing Conservatism.
The Conservative movement is one of the many things standing between us and a healthy society. Destroy it.
I've come to kind of entertain that suspicion myself. A way to reigning in populism while at the same time also speeding up the process of making the Uniparty officially real, a fusion of NeoCon/NeoLibs as a party.
Wouldn't call him "the" Jewish shill, there are several that can be found in both parties. He is "a" Jewish shill.
And imo while the JQ has some validity to it, they are not the only elite faction trying to control things. We should not ignore or downplay the zionist faction, but I feel that many tend to develop tunnel vision that causes them to miss other elite factions where they exist.
The only thing "conservatives" actually oppose is traditionalists. They fight tooth and nail to make sure everyone knows THOSE views aren't acceptable or supportive.
Someone posted here yesterday or today about how CPAC is actively saying transgenderism is a "conservative issue"
What the tweet said was that conservatives conducted themselves professionally when interacting with a transsexual. As is appropriate if they are neither taking liberties nor known to have done so in the past.
While they make some fair points about Tubman and that's totally fine, first and foremost, it's a win for them and I don't want that. Mainly because I've seen what they do with these slippery slopes and as soon as we open the floodgates before you know it what's left of the paper money will be covered with the faces of trannies and "In God We Trust" will be replaced with "Stunning and Brave." Maybe if they had taken their wins quietly and happily in the past and not used every single win as an opportunity to push for more tenfold, I've have a different opinion.
I sort of like the tradition of mostly Presidents on the money too. Not attached to Andrew Jackson in the slightest. How about they update the back of the bill? That's been a lot more common to vary over the years. Surely there has to be something badass that some black people did in service of the country they could put back there.
Not necessarily suggesting ceding ground, but more was thinking if they had come up with something that made me think "yeah that's a badass American moment" without having to add "...for a black person" on the end then I'm all for it. The thing is I really can't think of such a moment. I definitely don't want ugly old Harriet Tubman on my money regardless of what I think of her.
No doubt she was far more 'right wing' by today's standards than any modern 'conservative'. So was my great-great grandfather - can we put him on the dime? FDR's got to go.
This is what really rubs me the wrong way about modern so-called "conservatives"- they make a big verbal stink about something, barely put up a fight, then when the left gets their way, they try to claim it was actually "conservative" all along.
This is a good example on the culture war front, but you see this in other areas, like how mainstream conservatives are trying to co-opt MLK and the Civil Rights movement, despite the fact that both were/are fundamentally left leaning, and how they stopped defending Confederate monuments so they can say that "Democrats were Confederates, thus they were the real racists".
Someone posted here yesterday or today about how CPAC is actively saying transgenderism is a "conservative issue", that is a good example as well. And how most of the GOP is now presenting themselves as "moderate" pro LGBT when 15 years ago neither party would touch the issue.
They need to stop trying to out-virtue-signal the Left- it accomplishes nothing except allowing leftists to continue shifting the Overton Window. If you allow leftists to set the paradigm, you will lose to Leftists since they will keep changing the paradigm against you.
"Conservatives" are a ratcheting mechanism: they'll put up token resistance to any socio-political change then strongly resist any reactionary movement which seeks to revert any socio-political change which has already occurred because those proposing it are "far right".
They're controlled opposition, designed to prevent a genuine right wing movement capable of reclaiming lost ground.
Be careful how you talk about that, people tend to be sensitive to that sort of thing here.
I made a post arguing this point a day or two ago, giving a number of points arguing that the GOP, and Trump specifically, were controlled op. It was extremely controversial, most of my in-thread replies were downvoted without a substantive response, and of the four replies I actually got to the in-thread comments, two implied that I was a Jew shill for not being totally pro Trump.... completely illogical given that Trump is quite pro Israel and half his family is literally Jewish.
I love this site usually, and even when there is disagreement people are usually respectful, but some of the more neocon-ish types can be touchy when you question their worldview, even with evidence.
Nah, I'm gonna step all over people's feelings with zero remorse. I'm done with that. I hold no forlorn love for the Republican party. I was a disillusioned Leftist who came to set up camp in the Far Right because they're the only people talking sense, so no I'm not gonna pull any punches when it comes to badmouthing Conservatism.
The Conservative movement is one of the many things standing between us and a healthy society. Destroy it.
I've come to kind of entertain that suspicion myself. A way to reigning in populism while at the same time also speeding up the process of making the Uniparty officially real, a fusion of NeoCon/NeoLibs as a party.
Wouldn't call him "the" Jewish shill, there are several that can be found in both parties. He is "a" Jewish shill.
And imo while the JQ has some validity to it, they are not the only elite faction trying to control things. We should not ignore or downplay the zionist faction, but I feel that many tend to develop tunnel vision that causes them to miss other elite factions where they exist.
The only thing "conservatives" actually oppose is traditionalists. They fight tooth and nail to make sure everyone knows THOSE views aren't acceptable or supportive.
What the tweet said was that conservatives conducted themselves professionally when interacting with a transsexual. As is appropriate if they are neither taking liberties nor known to have done so in the past.
Appearing in public proclaiming that lie is crime enough for banishment.
Monoparty
While they make some fair points about Tubman and that's totally fine, first and foremost, it's a win for them and I don't want that. Mainly because I've seen what they do with these slippery slopes and as soon as we open the floodgates before you know it what's left of the paper money will be covered with the faces of trannies and "In God We Trust" will be replaced with "Stunning and Brave." Maybe if they had taken their wins quietly and happily in the past and not used every single win as an opportunity to push for more tenfold, I've have a different opinion.
I sort of like the tradition of mostly Presidents on the money too. Not attached to Andrew Jackson in the slightest. How about they update the back of the bill? That's been a lot more common to vary over the years. Surely there has to be something badass that some black people did in service of the country they could put back there.
Why cede any ground at all?
Not necessarily suggesting ceding ground, but more was thinking if they had come up with something that made me think "yeah that's a badass American moment" without having to add "...for a black person" on the end then I'm all for it. The thing is I really can't think of such a moment. I definitely don't want ugly old Harriet Tubman on my money regardless of what I think of her.
No doubt she was far more 'right wing' by today's standards than any modern 'conservative'. So was my great-great grandfather - can we put him on the dime? FDR's got to go.