Before commenting or voting read this: https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2015/08/24/rise-of-the-cultural-libertarians/
The reason the left had infuence for years was because the right was dominated by both tradcons and the corrupt dipshits who catered to them, effectively disenfranchising libertarian right leaning individuals, and unless those with culturally libertarian values can reassert themselves over these people including the tradcon leaning paleocons, legitimate opposition to the regressive left will die out.
While I agree we should ban and restrict media that's legitimately questionable, we need to take measures to preserve artistic and media freedom to stop the regressive left from poaching ideological allies and persuading them to join a terrorist ideology just so they can consume media that's merely offensive and not legitimately questionable, which fyi is a known lie regressive leftists are likely using to luer people.
Yes, I support soically conservative policies like restricting abortion and extramarital relations, but I just want apolitical media to be fully protected while persecuting regressive leftist bullshit.
As long as we give people a low barrier and wide access to weapons, preserve free speech, and not restrict media because it's offensive rather than legitimately questionable, we can do whatever the fuck we want to our enemies.
I am just trying to get my point across in an accurate manner that we can all agree upon.
To the extent that you can have a unifying principle that can unify all the various factions of the right, I think it has to be "freedom of association (and exclusion)": the idea that you can move someplace and have (and enforce) the social norms you want without someone who lives someplace else telling you you can't. And exclude people who don't want to abide by those norms. Beyond that the right isn't trying to be universal, and I think any attempt to have universal values or standards is doomed to failure.
To some extent the non-universal nature of right wing populism/nationalism is observable even today. One thing even shitlibs have noted is the international nature of the right-wing nationalist populist movement. At a cursory glance it seems odd that American, Canadian, French, English, German, etc... nationalists could all get together and find common ground to advance their respective causes given past national histories. But an American nationalist isn't trying to impose an American way of life on the French, nor is the French nationalist trying to impose a French way of life on the American. We'll all fuck off to our respective countries and do our own thing.
Taken further I think we have to acknowledge that there are going to be cultural and religious differences within a nation as big as America, and that we'll all be able to fuck off to our respective areas and do our own thing. Maybe a Mormon wants to live somewhere where alcohol and caffeine are banned. Maybe a Catholic wants to live somewhere were their public schools can instill Catholic values. Maybe an atheist wants to live somewhere that places less of an emphasis on religious faith in day to day life.
This IMO is something we should fight for, and "cultural libertarianism" as defined in that article will not allow it.
I agree people should be allowed to keep to themselves as long as their beliefs do not interfere with each other.
We still have this problem though...
That is "cultural libertarianism", which will not allow (eg.) a public school in a Catholic town to teach Catholocism because what if there's a Muslim family who is made uncomfortable by it.
"Free association" says "this is a Catholic town, and we teach Catholicism in our schools: no Muslims. Muslim town is over there"