It’s been a while, so time to alienate a few readers. You know, things used to seem so simple, back when the lines were drawn between conservatives and liberals. Maybe it was the naivety of my youth.

Now we’ve got nationalists and “globalists,” alt-righters, Bernie Bros, and crony capitalists. “Right” and “Left” aren’t as clear as they once were.

There are plenty of bombthrowers and shitlords on the Left. That’s nothing new. Point out the fact that Muslim terrorists keep blowing people up and you’re an Islamophobe. Venture that a wall along our border is actually a good idea and you’re anti-immigrant or racist. Observe that punching a police officer and trying take his gun and subsequently being shot does not qualify one for martyrdom and you’re displaying white privilege.


Of course dumbass celebrities can talk of “cleansing” the opposition with little repercussion. This is what happens when the fourth estate becomes corrupted and heavily biased.capture2

I’ve been told that the growth of the alt-right and nationalist movements and those who sympathize with them is largely a reaction to this virtue-signalling, finger-wagging, PC wankery from the Left. Along with the growth of social media, I can buy that.

What’s a shame, however, is the conflagration of issues on what was formerly “our” side, and the adoption of Leftist tactics and thought.

I haven’t had many exchanges on Twitter with liberals, quite honestly. I just don’t run in the same circles. But I’ve had my share of exchanges with nationalist alt-righters, and they’re the only ones who have hinted to me that perhaps I deserve to be shot for treason. Not that they would ever do such a thing, mind you. But they certainly won’t forget who their enemies are, they say.

I’ve noticed this from some quarters of the faction, in particular when it comes to “globalism.”


First, what does “globalism” even mean to them? It’s a collection of issues, but immigration, trade, and religion seem to be the primary considerations.

What I find ironic is that many of these people would decry being shoved into boxes or stamped with static political labels. Not a Republican, maybe a libertarian. Nationalist, perhaps. And yet, if you support walled borders, deportations, and enforcing our immigration laws and yet take a nuanced view of legal immigration and amnesty (though so does the god-king), you may be a globalist cuck.

If you support free trade, you may hate America. Nevermind the economic arguments, though – if you don’t support the subsidization of American companies to produce sometimes inferior products, you’re on the wrong side. Beware.

If you believe that immigrants from Muslim countries need to be thoroughly screened or else not allowed, but you feel that legal immigration is a good thing, especially when poaching talent from other countries, well you’re putting Americans out of jobs and you also might be a race-traitor.

Odd feeling, that conservatives aren’t as far to the Right anymore as we used to be. And that’s fine. What gets me, as I said, is the tactics. This is because it was decided that in order to fight SJWs, one must use their own tactics against them (and now against any who stand in your way).

Frog memes are fine, when they’re not depicting Jews being shoved into ovens. They’re usually just silly, and what do I care? We all know how effective Twitter memes are.


But when you’re trying to be obnoxious and offensive and hinting at violence, well. That’s your right. Freedom of speech. Don’t know what you think you’re accomplishing, though. Maybe you amuse some people. There are only so many keyboard trolls to join your cause, though. And as far as attracting average folk; they won’t understand the fascination with green-skinned Donald Trump. You can make your nationalist populist arguments, and that will resonate with some. But keep calling well-intentioned people with differing ideas (often former allies) traitors who deserve traitor’s deaths, and you’re no better than the Left. Brownshirt thuggery and veiled threats were supposed to be their thing.

“He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And when you gaze long into an abyss the abyss also gazes into you.”

At any rate, I guess those of us without purely nationalist or globalist inclinations had better watch out; we could be purged by either side!





10 thoughts on “Wrongthink

  1. Given Thomas Jefferson’s writings on Islam and foreign policy, opposing Islam and international terrorism is American as apple pie and rattle snakes!

    The use of globalism as a catchall is dangerous, because there are so many degrees of “opposing globalism”. Personally, I’m a fan of global mercantilism and international trade. I am, however, for secure borders and against demographic shifting mass migration. Those goals can be achieved without going full Gondolin.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. I don’t personally see anything offensive about opposing the Saracens. The Crusades are often thrown in our faces by the Enlightened, ignoring the fact that they were defensive wars. So too are we told today that we’re bigots if we don’t welcome potential enemies into our camp. I’m on the same page with you there. Not all Muslims are terrorists, but the numbers show many are terrorist sympathizers, which is greatly troubling. Why should we suffer to admit those who hate us?

      So far as globalism, I haven’t heard or read any arguments thus far to convince me that protectionist trade policies are beneficial. Usually it comes down to levying taxes upon foreign sellers, the costs of which are passed onto American consumers. Thus we may preserve a few American jobs (usually manufacturing) by asking their countrymen to pay higher prices. I see it as a roundabout form of equitable distribution. Another form of socialism.

      So far as legal immigration, I see it as beneficial so long as we’re gaining people who (a) want to be *Americans* and (b) don’t have a welfare state to coddle them should they fail or decide not to pull their own weight. Labor is a resource, and skilled laborers of some sorts will become often become employers, creating more jobs and wealth. When immigrants detract from our economy more than they contribute, then they become undesirable.

      These are all fine points to disagree on. My issue comes with adopting Leftist tactics and declaring opposing views to be Anti-American or traitorous and deserving of censorship or punishment.


      1. Essentially, if you’re a social democratic welfare state (which the US has sadly become), you cannot handle any influx of migrants. That they often do not speak the language or share in any of the cultural ideal (or actively oppose them) just makes matters worse.

        Liked by 1 person

      2. Indeed. I think we need a welfare overhaul before we can get our immigration policy back to where it should be. But we’re not going to accomplish that by electing big government politicians (from either party). Thus I continue to despair.


    1. True, but not all tribes fight equally dirty. I was taking with Hooc on Twitter a little about this. The main behavior that disturbs me is trying to shut down opposing arguments or views with either threats or labels like “bigot” or “traitor.”


      1. The race and gender baiting stuff turns me off too, whether it be the “white privilege” or “patriarchy” bullshit or the anti-Semitic stuff.

        Note when I talk about this I don’t count debunking the “Islam is a religion of peace” dreck or wanting to curtail immigration.


  2. From twitter

    Me: “The question is: If you thought tweeting a pepe/nazi/oven meme would stop a war with Russia would you tweet it?”

    Bushi: “I’d like to know more about the presuppositions behind such a hypothetical, assuming there is indeed any logic.”

    I promised a response though I think most of it was covered in following tweets.

    specific to the tweet the presuppositions

    -I think alt-right shitlords do see Obama and by extension Hillary as saber rattling with Russia for no good reason and that it could lead to war. There is a whole lot more the alt-right see wrong with Hillary and therefore needs to be stopped but that is beyond what I said in my tweet.

    -Altright shitlords when they see the word anti-Semitism being thrown around they think the reasoned debate is over and now is the time for rhetoric. This is no different then what was seen during gamergate when the word sexism was thrown around. Milo calling feminism cancer and then everyone repeating it stopped the SJWs dead in thier tracks.

    -I don’t think the alt-right is anti-Semitic. They are Americans and America has never had mass popular or violent anti-Semitic movement. In fact it sent soldiers who died and killed to fight one. Journalists and politicians calling Americans, Trump supporting nationalists or otherwise, anti-Semitic is absurd on its face. nazi-pepe exposes that absurdity.

    -The alt-right thinks it works. One has to admit that Hillary looked like a fool talking about nazi-pepe or the alt-right or the Trump-Putin secret alliance. Also it stops Journalists as well. A journalist cries anti-Semitism and gets notifications filled with the grossest anti-Semitic propaganda imaginable and then gets in a huge sperg debate with an army of anons over everything from Irish slavery to Israel’s Wall with Palestine. The journalist is then flustered. He may not have lost the debate but he definitely didn’t win. You can see this with Ben Shapiro. That guy was more then a little flustered.

    You mentioned Alinsky rules for radicals and how the alt-right are using those tactics. Yeah I agree. I do think during gamergate they sort of reinvented them out of trial and error but yes they are the same.

    I think with the alt-right, and perhaps not with you, is they see it as do or die. Hillary will be a disaster and not just for the conservatives or the alt-right. without getting into many specifics in how much or how little I agree with the alt-right I think Hillary spells the end to the Rule of Law in America. So I am not bothered by Nazi pepe so long as it appears to be working.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Thanks for the thoughtful response, Hooc. Actually does increase my understanding of what’s going on a bit, as it seems some basic perceptions of what’s going on differ.

      A few of my own thoughts:

      – The point about Russia is surprising to me. I’ve always seen “I’ll have more flexibility after the election” Obama and “Reset button” Hillary as soft and appeasing of Russia (much like they’ve been with Iran). Hell, Russia basically invaded a neighbor and we didn’t do squat. Putin has been testing the waters to see what he can get away with. Now I’m not saying we should go to war with Russia, but it’s a worrying time and the idea that Obama and Hillary have been antagonistic doesn’t add up to me personally.

      – The anti-Semitism thing seems to be a strange chicken and egg situation, from what you say. My perception of the alt-right being anti-Semitic comes as a result of seeing the shitlords, as you call them, throwing around slurs and oven/nazi memes. You say they toss around slurs and memes because they are called anti-Semitic. Seems self-fueling to me. There also appears to be some strong anti-Israel sentiment among some alt-righters/nationalists, but I can’t tell how widespread that is (and I think politically it’s a reasonable topic to disagree and debate over), but it does seem to feed into some of this.

      – Your thoughts on Hillary are perfectly reasonable, and my beefs with the alt-right don’t really intersect with my concerns about Trump aside from the race-baiting shtick. I don’t find Pepe in and of himself offensive or bothering; just silly. Could be Nazi Mickey Mouse for all I care, and I think the effect would be the same. We could debate the effectiveness of this stuff; personally I think Hillary’s tanking has less to do with Pepe and more to do with all the lies/email controversy/her failing health and the fact that she’s probably the worst major party nominee ever, but as you point out, the important point here is that the alt-right believes their tactics are working.

      – My prevailing point is that I see nasty, fascist tendencies in these movements similar to those on the Left, and that bothers me more than anything else. Factions and tribes will always exist, despite some of these divisive politics being ultimately self-destructive. As I’ve said a couple of times, I just see no good at all coming from telling people they have no right to an opinion because they’re white, or that they’re a traitorous cuck if they don’t support protectionist economic policies. You’re right that the alt-right and nationalists haven’t gotten violent yet compared to the likes of BLM, but there’s a lot of violent rhetoric. I don’t believe in trying to frighten your opponents into submission. And speaking of submission, Islamic terrorism is a huge threat, and we’re too busy fighting ourselves.

      Anyway, thanks again for your thoughts, Hooc!


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s