Alt Right Playbook

[KenyanPlato]

• Tweet

interesting. Layouts how the alt right works. Conservatism is cancer

[Arcadian_Dreamer]

Conservatism is cancer

It is not, true Conservatism is the voice of caution and propriety. You need a countervailing force in society to check heedless progressivism/liberalism. In America however, it has come to mean white nationalism/bigotry. It need not be. My theory is true conservatism can only thrive in homogeneous mono-racial societies, for colonial settler states like America, conservatism will attract unsavory characters who hide behind it.

[KenyanPlato]

Where are these mono cultures? There is no country in the world with a monoculture

Show me anywhere that conservatism has been a voice of proprietary and caution. Most conservatives are bigots. They want to impose their will on others. Anyway we have seen where this ends. Even in religion you see conservatives promote one thing but do the other ..Europeans are evil people and they have come up with silly theories overtime to explain away their behavior. You see all these nonsense emerge from crazy sociology theories that overtime are proven to be wrong.

[Kim Jong-Un's Pajama Pants]

My own personal view of conservatism is *I have got mine, why should I care about anyone else?*  We all have it in varying degrees.  The converse happens with liberalism.  Conservatism is just a PC way of saying I am a selfish schmuck.  People can be conservative in one context and liberal in another.

The motivations for it are different.  Some are racist, tribal, greed etc.  But its essence is limiting the availability of a perceived advantage or value from whoever one considers the other.  Preventing the *other* from becoming part of the in group.  It becomes extreme when that self interest starts to threaten the whole like what's happening in the US now. 

[Arcadian_Dreamer]

My own personal view of conservatism is *I have got mine, why should I care about anyone else?*  We all have it in varying degrees. The converse happens with liberalism.  Conservatism is just a PC way of saying I am a selfish schmuck.  People can be conservative in one context and liberal in another.

The motivations for it are different.  Some are racist, tribal, greed etc.  But its essence is limiting the availability of a perceived advantage or value from whoever one considers the other.  Preventing the *other* from becoming part of the in group.  It becomes extreme when that self interest starts to threaten the whole like what's happening in the US now.

That is the convenient boiler plate definition of conservatism. It doesn't do it justice. Bitmask here is David Brooks of the New York times defining it properly:

Modern conservatism begins with Edmund Burke. What Burke articulated was not an ideology or a creed, but a disposition, a reverence for tradition, a suspicion of radical change.

When conservatism came to America, it became creedal. Free market conservatives built a creed around freedom and capitalism. Religious conservatives built a creed around their conception of a transcendent order. Neoconservatives and others built a creed around the words of Lincoln and the founders.

Over the years, the voice of Burke has been submerged beneath the clamoring creeds. In fact, over the past few decades the conservative ideologies have been magnified, while the temperamental conservatism of Burke has been abandoned.

https://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/05/opinion/05brooks.html

Read the whole thing.

 

[Arcadian_Dreamer]

How did Burke get it right about the ultimate course of events in France — and, by extension, so many subsequent revolutions that aimed to establish morally enlightened societies and wound up producing despotism and terror? The question is worth pondering in light of two main ideological currents of today: the tear-it-all-down populism that has swept so much of the right in the past five years and the tear-it-all-down progressivism that threatens to sweep the left.

At the core of Burke’s view of the revolution is a profound understanding of how easily things can be shattered in the name of moral betterment, national purification and radical political transformation. States, societies and personal consciences are not Lego-block constructions to be disassembled and reassembled with ease. They are more like tapestries, passed from one generation to the next, to be carefully mended at one edge, gracefully enlarged on the other and otherwise handled with caution lest a single pulled thread unravel the entire pattern. “The nature of man is intricate; the objects of society are of the greatest possible complexity,” Burke wrote. “And therefore no simple disposition or direction of power can be suitable either to man’s nature, or to the quality of his affairs.”


Burke’s objection to the French revolutionaries is that they paid so little attention to this complexity: They were men of theory, not experience. Men of experience tend to be cautious about gambling what they have painstakingly gained. Men of theory tend to be reckless with what they’ve inherited but never earned. “They have wrought underground a mine that will blow up, at one grand explosion, all examples of antiquity, all precedents, charters, and acts of parliament. They have ‘the rights of men.’ Against these there can be no prescriptions.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/05/opinion/sunday/edmund-burke.html

[KenyanPlato]

Ad
It boils down to mzungu need to theorize evil and his peculiarity. You never see theories like this coming from africans. It is because it is madness conjured in one thinkers mind and used to play mind games with people. One thing about  conservatives is the hate of change. Any change makes them uncomfortable. This is not a group of people that are of any use to society. The problem with a lot of people they think that you can meet a conservative halfway you cant. Among kikuyus we have conservatives but they have lost every battle they been in because the liberals never gave them a chance to  negotiate..if kikuyu land was like usa the conservatives would still be dragging kikuyu society on needlesss non-negotiable debates like female circumcision..once in while you see these idiots like mungiki try to rise but they get crushed..that the only say to deal with these sickos

[Kim Jong-Un's Pajama Pants]

My own personal view of conservatism is *I have got mine, why should I care about anyone else?*  We all have it in varying degrees. The converse happens with liberalism.  Conservatism is just a PC way of saying I am a selfish schmuck.  People can be conservative in one context and liberal in another.

The motivations for it are different.  Some are racist, tribal, greed etc.  But its essence is limiting the availability of a perceived advantage or value from whoever one considers the other.  Preventing the *other* from becoming part of the in group.  It becomes extreme when that self interest starts to threaten the whole like what's happening in the US now.

That is the convenient boiler plate definition of conservatism. It doesn't do it justice. Bitmask here is David Brooks of the New York times defining it properly:

Modern conservatism begins with Edmund Burke. What Burke articulated was not an ideology or a creed, but a disposition, a reverence for tradition, a suspicion of radical change.

When conservatism came to America, it became creedal. Free market conservatives built a creed around freedom and capitalism. Religious conservatives built a creed around their conception of a transcendent order. Neoconservatives and others built a creed around the words of Lincoln and the founders.

Over the years, the voice of Burke has been submerged beneath the clamoring creeds. In fact, over the past few decades the conservative ideologies have been magnified, while the temperamental conservatism of Burke has been abandoned.

https://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/05/opinion/05brooks.html

Read the whole thing.

 

Do you have any example of a "Burkean" conservative relevant in today's America?

[Kim Jong-Un's Pajama Pants]

Ad
It boils down to mzungu need to theorize evil and his peculiarity. You never see theories like this coming from africans. It is because it is madness conjured in one thinkers mind and used to play mind games with people. One thing about  conservatives is the hate of change. Any change makes them uncomfortable. This is not a group of people that are of any use to society. The problem with a lot of people they think that you can meet a conservative halfway you cant. Among kikuyus we have conservatives but they have lost every battle they been in because the liberals never gave them a chance to  negotiate..if kikuyu land was like usa the conservatives would still be dragging kikuyu society on needlesss non-negotiable debates like female circumcision..once in while you see these idiots like mungiki try to rise but they get crushed..that the only say to deal with these sickos

In the US, the conservatives have either undergone a radical change under Trump, or conservatism is just a convenient label for something darker.

[KenyanPlato]

It is a convenient label for something darker. Liberals fails to grasp this. That why you hear liberals talking of compromise but the compromise is for the liberal giving up what they believe in and some more. Clinton used to be played by gop so bad and in the end they impeached him and stole AL gore win. These bastards are just evil

[Kim Jong-Un's Pajama Pants]

It is a convenient label for something darker. Liberals fails to grasp this. That why you hear liberals talking of compromise but the compromise is for the liberal giving up what they believe in and some more. Clinton used to be played by gop so bad and in the end they impeached him and stole AL gore win. These bastards are just evil

You could say that.  Though I find them more resentful than evil.  They have a hierarchy that they like, and they will do everything to preserve it.  If they have nice arguments to support it, they will use them, until they have to contradict them.  I find them to have only one enduring principle.  Power.  Everything else, they will cast aside the moment it can no longer be credibly used as a cudgel against opponents.

[Arcadian_Dreamer]

Do you have any example of a "Burkean" conservative relevant in today's America?

Noam Chomsky. A bit surprising but he is a classical liberal aka Burkean conservative.

[Kim Jong-Un's Pajama Pants]

Do you have any example of a "Burkean" conservative relevant in today's America?

Noam Chomsky. A bit surprising but he is a classical liberal aka Burkean conservative.

Everything about Chomsky screams against the established state of affairs.  Why do you think he is a conservative of any shade?

[Arcadian_Dreamer]

Do you have any example of a "Burkean" conservative relevant in today's America?

Noam Chomsky. A bit surprising but he is a classical liberal aka Burkean conservative.

Everything about Chomsky screams against the established state of affairs.  Why do you think he is a conservative of any shade?

Exactly. Burkean Conservative is aghast at the current state of affairs. Chomsky has described himself as a true conservative.

There are few genuine conservatives within the U.S. political system, and it is a sign of the intellectual corruption of the age that the honorable term 'conservatism' can be appropriated to disguise the advocacy of a powerful, lawless, aggressive and violent state, a welfare state for the rich dedicated to a lunatic form of Keynesian economic intervention that enhances state and private power while mortgaging the country's future

The term conservative in the US has be co-opted by ethnic chauvinists and bigots of all shades; religious, racial, class etc. It is a caricature of the actual meaning.

[Kim Jong-Un's Pajama Pants]

Do you have any example of a "Burkean" conservative relevant in today's America?

Noam Chomsky. A bit surprising but he is a classical liberal aka Burkean conservative.

Everything about Chomsky screams against the established state of affairs.  Why do you think he is a conservative of any shade?

Exactly. Burkean Conservative is aghast at the current state of affairs. Chomsky has described himself as a true conservative.

There are few genuine conservatives within the U.S. political system, and it is a sign of the intellectual corruption of the age that the honorable term 'conservatism' can be appropriated to disguise the advocacy of a powerful, lawless, aggressive and violent state, a welfare state for the rich dedicated to a lunatic form of Keynesian economic intervention that enhances state and private power while mortgaging the country's future

The term conservative in the US has be co-opted by ethnic chauvinists and bigots of all shades; religious, racial, class etc. It is a caricature of the actual meaning.

I get the impression that your quibble is just about terms not substance.  That you'd rather just repurpose terms.  Why not just use the ordinary meaning of the terms?  It just leads to a clearer exchange. 

Even then, I doubt the Chomsky that I know would have been opposed to the French Revolution.

[Arcadian_Dreamer]

I get the impression that your quibble is just about terms not substance.  That you'd rather just repurpose terms.  Why not just use the ordinary meaning of the terms?  It just leads to a clearer exchange. 

Even then, I doubt the Chomsky that I know would have been opposed to the French Revolution.

It is not a minor quibble. To call the white ethno-fascists currently dominating the right wing American political landscape conservative is a sacrilege. Those thugs have nothing to do with its principles.