If Trump was never a real threat to The Establishment, why have they been unrelentingly working to destroy him for the past six years?
Why did the consul Opimus murder Gaius Gracchus and 2000 of his followers without a trial? Perhaps as a warning for anyone in the future. That is the pessimistic answer. The optimistic answer is that they thought he was a threat.
But they were always their worst enemy. Trump was not competent or effective enough to really get in their way. Their reaction to Trump is what woke a lot of people up to their true nature.
Even so, the endless anti-Trump hysteria tells me The Establishment is not comfortable with him around.
They definitely don't want him to be a factor. But that is not the same as him actually being in control or 'in power' when in office.
But generally on the conservative side at least the pundits and politicians still recognize the importance of the Constitution and rule of law. I've seen high ranking Democratic lawyers basically posting "lol cry more" to legal criticisms of the raid.
There is a difference in temperament, though I think the 'populist right' is closer to the left in terms of temperament than to proper Burkean conservatives of the world. I say this while 'populist right' probably best describes me. I always have to fight back against my instinct that "everything is rotten, so it is desirable that everything burn down".
There is also an escalatory cycle where if they do something to us, then we won't mind if ours do it to them. It's the road to perdition, but then again, just turning the 90000th cheek hasn't done the right any good either.
Just because someone's in the pit doesn't mean I trust them. A slimeball like Cuomo is only in the pit until he can find a way to get back into power.
No need to trust them. In fact, it's not advisable. But if he can inflict damage on the establishment, I will cheer that.
There is a difference in temperament, though I think the 'populist right' is closer to the left in terms of temperament than to proper Burkean conservatives of the world.
There's always the lowest common denominator types in any group, who know nothing other than "my team good, your team bad."
I think the populist right is more vulnerable to this because, as I've said before, MAGA is a slogan, not a philosophy, so there isn't really a firm set of principles as a foundation.
The left has an ideology, but it is based in grievance, resentment, and group identity, and it explicitly rejects reason, so mindless, intense tribalism is a feature, not a bug.
There is also an escalatory cycle where if they do something to us, then we won't mind if ours do it to them. It's the road to perdition, but then again, just turning the 90000th cheek hasn't done the right any good either.
I believe in keeping to a set of principles, but I don't think letting yourself get repeatedly buttfucked by your enemies makes you "the bigger man."
The Left only understands one thing — power. They can be fought without sinking to their level, but it requires actual leaders with actual backbone, who understand this and will properly use their power to kick the commies out of their positions of power (e.g. DeSantis completely legally having police remove the commie State Attorney from his job).
The feckless turds who comprise the majority of the Republican party won't do this, which is why the populist right now exists.
I always have to fight back against my instinct that "everything is rotten, so it is desirable that everything burn down".
Why did the consul Opimus murder Gaius Gracchus and 2000 of his followers without a trial? Perhaps as a warning for anyone in the future. That is the pessimistic answer. The optimistic answer is that they thought he was a threat.
But they were always their worst enemy. Trump was not competent or effective enough to really get in their way. Their reaction to Trump is what woke a lot of people up to their true nature.
They definitely don't want him to be a factor. But that is not the same as him actually being in control or 'in power' when in office.
There is a difference in temperament, though I think the 'populist right' is closer to the left in terms of temperament than to proper Burkean conservatives of the world. I say this while 'populist right' probably best describes me. I always have to fight back against my instinct that "everything is rotten, so it is desirable that everything burn down".
There is also an escalatory cycle where if they do something to us, then we won't mind if ours do it to them. It's the road to perdition, but then again, just turning the 90000th cheek hasn't done the right any good either.
No need to trust them. In fact, it's not advisable. But if he can inflict damage on the establishment, I will cheer that.
There's always the lowest common denominator types in any group, who know nothing other than "my team good, your team bad."
I think the populist right is more vulnerable to this because, as I've said before, MAGA is a slogan, not a philosophy, so there isn't really a firm set of principles as a foundation.
The left has an ideology, but it is based in grievance, resentment, and group identity, and it explicitly rejects reason, so mindless, intense tribalism is a feature, not a bug.
I believe in keeping to a set of principles, but I don't think letting yourself get repeatedly buttfucked by your enemies makes you "the bigger man."
The Left only understands one thing — power. They can be fought without sinking to their level, but it requires actual leaders with actual backbone, who understand this and will properly use their power to kick the commies out of their positions of power (e.g. DeSantis completely legally having police remove the commie State Attorney from his job).
The feckless turds who comprise the majority of the Republican party won't do this, which is why the populist right now exists.
I feel this.