‹ Back

I recently took a short break from the online world of politics whilst I went on holiday. It often slips from my mind how effective it can be to withdraw and give the machine a rest; in doing so, I was able to clarify a few concerns that had been the topic of runaway thought trains for some time. Here I will outline each, and explain where I currently stand on them:

 

1.     The left/right distinction is dead, but there is nothing satisfactory to replace it

The original points of opposition that gave rise to the left/right spectrum were from the French Revolution - the liberals and the nationalists on the left against the imperial traditionalists, the right-wing defenders of the Ancién Regime. In modern Britain, the only place you will find nationalism and liberalism on the same side is amongst what currently constitutes the populist right, a primarily civic identity that conceptualises the ideal government as a benevolent lord that grants personal freedom and national security in exchange for a (fair) share of the gains of labour. To this sector of political ideology anyone is folk, entitled to freedom and security as long as they contribute gains. Naturally, this sector is diverse, because it places few ‘fixed’ limits on who can join them. This is the home of most right-wing commentators feverishly condemned as hateful fascist Nazis by a certain other political sector, of course.

 

Compare this to the anti-liberal nationalists - or more specifically those who base their national identity on an ethnic rather than civic premise - and the entire worldview changes. The only thing this group have in common with the former is a positive view of nationalism as an idea; even a shared appreciation for the monarchy and the church is not a given in these times. There are very few political issues that they and the lib-nat right agree on, tapering to practically none if taken to their full conclusion. Lib-nat right wing is a playpen for baby’s first controversial opinion, and most will either develop into more committed liberals at the expense of nationalist tendencies or eventually become anti-liberal staunch nationalists. So while it’s demonstrable that these two groups share a historical root, they are now differentiated to the point where bracketing them together only makes sense to someone completely ignorant to politics - which is exactly the point. It’s designed to demonise ALL right-wing views to the general public by making the centre indistinguishable from the fringe.

 

The left is suffering a similar schismatic identity crisis, but as they are not currently the persecuted wing it is not really a problem for them. Eventually, however, it will become very urgent for the left to work out who they are and what they really stand for, just as it has for us.

 

2.    In the current culture, the values of the right are suffering from bad optics

In a society that values individualism, narcissism, consumption, and hedonism, everything the anti-liberal right stands for represents a negative. It asks the individual to exchange the short-term for the long-term, pleasure for sacrifice, and the thrill of ‘new’ for the comfort of ‘old’. As the human brain is primed to respond to everything modern culture advocates, people naturally perceive that they are enjoying themselves and don’t want to give that up for something they simply won’t enjoy. The fact that their ‘enjoyment’ is coming packaged with increased incidence of mental illness and suicide, family breakdowns, skyrocketing abortion and STD rates, substance abuse, poverty, crime, and literally every single bad metric you could possibly measure a group of people (aka a society) by is neatly diverted by blaming hate.

 

The actual problem, according to The Narrative, is that humans are also primed to judge each other and this causes negative self-image which in turn sets people up for these bad outcomes. In this world where the very natural act of judging is heavily demonised, it is impossible to even suggest any sort of collective standard without triggering a mental image of a bitchy, nasty, controlling individual who is wholly unpleasant to be around. Judgemental people are not welcome in the current culture - and there’s enough popular animus against them to effectively freeze them out of polite society if they try to stake their flag. In this climate, the anti-liberal right are very obviously on the back foot.

 

This is just one (very pertinent) example of how the right is suffering from bad optics. I could easily go into a number of others, but I don’t want to end up sounding demoralising. The point is that mass appeal is extremely important to making legitimate change - especially because the ideological minutiae of a movement will never trickle down to the common lexicon, remaining important only to the Real and True Politickers. Holding our views needs, quite simply, to not suck the life out of life.

 

3.    Online group chats are arguably the worst introduction to political involvement ever

It achieves nothing except creating a repository of stupid arguments for our opponents and enemies to cherry pick. Impotent, aggravating, self-imposed containment pens!

 

What’s motivated me to write this is that I so deeply believe in the vision of the future I see, yet with a heavy heart I acknowledge it will not happen unless we can vitalise - engage heartily with life, thrive in defiance of the weight of what is pitted against us, not submit to substitute activities. Once upon a time our ethnic ancestors landed on the shores of a foreign land, found people who showed them no loyalty or benevolence, and struggled through the harshest of conditions because their dream lent their every thought and deed a purpose bathed in glory. This attitude is not reserved for colonialists of a new world, it can be yours if only you will grasp it!

 

By Lauren Brookes, 

 

Membership Officer

 

 

A republication of an original essay first published on Telegram https://t.me/AngelcynnDivision