This is why Republicans have no power. Oh, to be sure, those Republicans who comply with the Globalist-Leftist cabal have (individual) power … so long as they are compliant. But Republicans have no power to advance an actual right-wing agenda. The problem is they are so lost in ideas and words that they lose track of what is really important, and get turned around backwards.
Many conservatives draw the line between left and right mainly with the concept of individualism versus collectivism. In this ideological frame, anything seen as “collectivist” in nature is left-wing. This draws from the very plausible difference between the USSR, seen as collectivist, and the U.S. of that time, seen as individualist. So the USSR of that time would be left, and the US of that time would be right.
I can understand why someone would think that way, but it also incorporates a shit-ton of shortcuts that miss substance, mislabel things, and so forth.
The problem lies in that it is the very individualism that these “republicans” worship that lies at the heart of the progressive agenda. And this defangs them and makes them powerless in the face of their enemies. These beliefs amount to unilateral disarmament.
1. The “individualism” common to both progressivism AND “republicans” is, at its heart, a rebellion against unchosen obligations. However, it is these very unchosen obligations, enforced by social expectation, that create resilient families, civic investment, and communities that people want to live in. It is the life of obligations that gave us a world where divorce was rare, and kids could play outside unsupervised.
It was none other than Republican idol Ronald Reagan who campaigned vigorously for no-fault divorce. And not once has a republican-majority Congress combined with a republican President ever tried to get rid of it. EVEN THOUGH it has wreaked havoc on the body politic.
This is because the “freedom” of republicans is no different than the “freedom” of progressives — it is like a petulant 3 year old screaming “you’re not the boss of me!”
They have not grown up enough to grasp that freedom is not a consequence of removal of unchosen obligations, but is rather a consequence of keeping those obligations. Because it is the keeping of these obligations that creates an environment where freedom can thrive.
It is furthermore this individualism that creates the cult of safety because, having removed the NATURAL guardrails that mutual obligations create, those guardrails end up replaced with political correctness, speech restrictions, laws and regulations.
In essence, individualism removes the power of the community, and because power at any given point in time is finite, that power then flows to the state. Thus government grows under republicans too.
It is no coincidence that “republican” states host a great many “gender clinics” that maim and mangle pre-pubescent children, just as the “progressive” states do.
2. “Collectivism” in their conception misses important differences. There is a difference between people being forced against their will into factory to all get paid the same while under constant surveillance, and a community that evolves over time through inter-relatedness, common interests, common history, and a shared future. One is forced, the other is organic.
A state, properly constituted, seeks to create conditions amenable to community. When it is at war with that community, considering its own subjects to be an enemy, then it uses artificial collectives to break natural communities. Any destruction of community institutions, be they nuclear families, extended families or civic organizations, results in greater power accumulated by the state.
Families, extended families, people with shared heritage and history are ORGANIC and natural *communities*. This is the exact opposite of a forced collective.
Progressives seek to break these because they stand in the way of the total state. Republicans seek to break these because they stand in the way of individuals being completely subservient to corporations.
But NEITHER has effectively done anything to stop destruction of organic community. Rather, both seek its destruction. One for power, the other for profit.
3. The lone individual is powerless and at the mercy of forces beyond his control. A person tied to community through bonds of mutual obligation is dramatically more resilient. Granted, these obligation may sometimes be unwelcome, but they nevertheless pay back in other freedoms many times their cost.
So when a “conservative” uses the tired talking point of calling anyone who wants to rebuild organic communities (destroyed both by republicans and progressives) a “democrat,” he is actually advancing the leftist cause of the total state, but he doesn’t realize it because he has not truly examined what is underlying the issues. He has not looked at the horrible results of republicans and democrats, and how much they share, and dared to question his premises. If he did, he’d realize we’re right.