I am not a right-wing voter and don’t consider myself a centrist, but discarding all right-wing views as faulty isn’t gonna help to bring about a healthy democratic conversation. I would argue it is in the benefit of everyone to make a distinction between extreme/far-right views and ‘regular’ right-wing views.
Knowledge is a cure for a lot of things, no argument there.
Right wing politics is ultimately about concentrating power in the hands of the aristocracy of the day or distracting the public whilst the former goal is furthered.
These goals are to the detriment of modern society and should be wholly resisted. The goals of modern society are to create the rising tide to lift all ships.
There is zero value in the right wing school of thought beyond the warning to not pursue it we all got ~80 years ago.
It’s about enriching the self. It’s about stonewalling or reversing social power.
theyrethesamepicture.jpg
The difference is how much one is able to “enrich” their self, is determined by how much they’re willing to crush others to elevate themselves. The ultimate conclusion is concentrated power.
Like, even if you ignore everything except a left/right economic scale, their wealth inequality was insane. Most people had the same: nothing. And a few people had almost everything of value in the country.
That’s not communism, that’s an oligarchy. The only further right on an economic scale would be a single person owning everything.
Knowledge is the cure to conservatism.
You cannot simultaneously hold right-wing views and know enough about the world to have any valid opinions about how it should be run.
I am not a right-wing voter and don’t consider myself a centrist, but discarding all right-wing views as faulty isn’t gonna help to bring about a healthy democratic conversation. I would argue it is in the benefit of everyone to make a distinction between extreme/far-right views and ‘regular’ right-wing views.
Knowledge is a cure for a lot of things, no argument there.
Name three that aren’t.
Right wing politics is ultimately about concentrating power in the hands of the aristocracy of the day or distracting the public whilst the former goal is furthered.
These goals are to the detriment of modern society and should be wholly resisted. The goals of modern society are to create the rising tide to lift all ships.
There is zero value in the right wing school of thought beyond the warning to not pursue it we all got ~80 years ago.
Disagree. It’s about enriching the self. It’s about stonewalling or reversing social power.
It results in aristocracy but poor right wingers are not driven by that goal.
theyrethesamepicture.jpg
The difference is how much one is able to “enrich” their self, is determined by how much they’re willing to crush others to elevate themselves. The ultimate conclusion is concentrated power.
We agree there. I’m highlighting that creating an aristocracy is a side effect, not a goal.
No.
Aristocracy is absolutely the goal. Rugged individualism is simply the most popular lie used to attain that goal.
Disagree.
The rugged individualism is what makes it popular, not the desire to be a serf.
That’s like saying everything left is bad because look at how the Sovjets ended up
The soviets were authoritarians…
Ones with a terrible human rights record.
Like, even if you ignore everything except a left/right economic scale, their wealth inequality was insane. Most people had the same: nothing. And a few people had almost everything of value in the country.
That’s not communism, that’s an oligarchy. The only further right on an economic scale would be a single person owning everything.
No, it’s just simply understanding the end goals of an ideology.