Carville recently said, in response to the victories of the “Democratic Socialists” : “They say we’re a big tent, but there’s just some shit I can’t be in the tent with.” He went on to say GO! Form your own party. Don’t hang on as a drag on the Democrats.
I’ve been complaining for some time that I can’t see why we the Rightly-Guided allow the Left to saddle us with people like Fuentes, Carlson, and Owens. These people are NOT “Right-wing”, extremists. They’re just extremists. They don’t support Trump, and I don’t know anybody among my fellow Trump voters who agrees with anything they say.
We do not have to own them. But we never seem to have the sense to say what Carville did. We just sit there and take it. “Both sides-ism”.
In fact, bozos like them should team up with the Dem Socs. The main tenet of both factions is anti-Semitism, so they’re halfway to rapport.
But, having written that, I got scared.
Would such a party actually encounter the “common sense” resistance I’m assuming would dismiss them?
Remember the old saying about big fleas having smaller fleas?
Activist Democrats have taken over many cities and states, despite being only a small minority of the populations. Now activist socialists are taking over the Democrat Party, despite activist socialists being only a small minority of those who claim to be Democrats.
History says that Bolshevik Communists were only a minority of Czarist-era Russian Leftists, who themselves were only a minority of the Russian population. Nevertheless, those Bolsheviks were able to take power and hold it for 70 years – almost 3 generations.
Bottom line – the Universal Suffrage “democracy” model is broken. It yields rule by the nosiest and most committed small group. But there is no way the small group in power – winners under the Universal Suffrage model - are going to release their grip on power. I’m glad I’m old!
I don’t think we should model the Dems. I am definitely a traditional conservative of some variety (contrarian class frequently). Personally, I am simply not into the cancel culture mentality. I truly do not care if someone likes or doesn’t like any other particular policy/religion/person, especially if it is something about which they have no essential or first hand experience/true knowledge. Everyone is free to have individual opinions. Generally, beyond curiosity, their opinion matters not a twit to me, and I do not give them any governing authority over my own ideas, opinions, perspectives (well, OK, there are are a few people I always give serious consideration to whatever they say/write – John Walker, DrLorentz, CivilWestman, PHCheese (you know the super-smart folks); plus a few super thoughtful people (She, WesternChauvinist, Grayzone Dudes) and there a handful of people in IRL that I actually know beyond their constructed public persona to which I listen closely.
I think Carville is a super frustrated, disappointed traditional democrat but he is also a realist. He is not confused; he knows no one died and put him in charge of other people and/or what they are ‘permitted’ to think/say. He is not ejecting others from being in the tent, so much as he is himself walking away. There is a difference. BIG difference.
I don’t think Carville is a facist; he is engaging in wishing thinking about others while governing his own behavior.
Confession: @Hypatia, I have heard all the people you mentioned say things I agree with, and I have heard all of them say things I do not agree with – I still listen, color me egalitarian.
What I’m saying is that these people are NOT “to the right”. And what the Dems do is more accurately described as “no enemies to the Left until we decide that they dont belong on the Left”. Thats what Carville said: the flag-desecrating chick is OUTSIDE the tent. Thats what they did to Biden.
Thats what I’m suggesting we do.
But OTOH, I do agree that with someone INSIDE the tent, nay, it’s very tentpole— Trump— we should imitate the Dems in never admitting any possible fault. You didn’t catch the Dems ever saying of ol’Jo[k]e:“Sure, he’s not perfect, but..” Nah! He was sharp s a tack, "the best Biden EVER! " riiiight up to the moment they shived him.
Perhaps tangentially, I’ll mention how inapplicable is the common terminology - left-leaning and right-leaning. (The latter is rarely used; instead anyone one the right is a “far right extremist” or “alt-right”. I can’t help but visualize these on a Cartesian axis. On that axis, ight leaning is signified by an acute angle. If the MSM were forced to draw what they mean by right “leaning”, they would draw an acute angle of about 10 degrees to the X axis, almost flat, leaning far to the right. Left-leaning, by contrast, would show an OBTUSE angle (no accident in terminology there!) to the X axis, with an angle of maybe 95 degrees, almost vertical (sorry, I’m not able to create graphics due to my own obtuse computer skills. I hope you get the picture. It neatly summarizes inherent MSM lying).
Yes, THAT’S my point. It IS bad. We the Rightly -guided do not have to own these people of the Fuentes ilk.
We should emulate Reagan, remember: David Duke, a vocal anti-Semite, announced that he was voting for Reagan. When asked about it, Regan said, “He may support me, but I don’t support him”.
And that was IT. Nobody tried after that to hang Duke around Reagan’s neck.
“Love is a growing or full constant light/And his first minute, after noon, is night.”
(I think that’s Donne, anyway, it’s apt.) Think of B. Hussein (finally!) denouncing the Reverend Wright. As long as, on balance, there might be some benefit to tolerating race-hatred, he equivocated, but with an eye on the scale, and then in the nick of time, he publicly excoriated wright .(And we fell for it, even though we knew he had been sitting in a pew for years lapping up Wright’s hateful “liberation theology”!). It’s either love or hate with them, there’s no in-between. They’re either all in or ll out.
The point being that the Left does this as a matter of course, contra Carville. Whether it is good or bad depends on your criteria. If the principal criterion is political success, which appears to be Carville’s (“drag on Democrats”), the big tent seems to be working out for them. On the other hand, sticking strictly to principles is why several Republican legislatures refused to redistrict because it might not be fair to Democrats and violate norms. Same goes for the filibuster and the SAVE Act. As if the Left observes any norms.
This touches on what I find most frustrating in NormieCons. Normies love muh principles and lose with dignity intact. I am interested in winning, for if the Left completes its takeover, the only principle will be power. Highfalutin principles are for after we win. Before you repair to the fainting couch, understand that doesn’t mean to abandon all probity. It does mean to make appropriate tradeoffs.
It’s just not her time to be expelled, yet. . Maybe it never will be, if they dont think she’s a liability. I mean who knows, maybe it’ll be Carville’s turn first.
And welp, i dk…maybe some people here don’t think the Fuentes Carlson Owens crowd are a liability to our side. I don’t want to be saddled with or identified with anything they say, but perhaps some of you don’t mind. I’m’na take my cue from Reagan whenever anybody calls any of them “Right-wing”, but that’s just me, personally. If you like your maniacs, you can keep your maniacs.
Hypatia, remember the NYT style rules – there is no such thing as “Right-wing” – only “Far Right Extremist”. Just as there is no such thing as “Left-wing” – only “mainstream”.