Nick Fuentes, The Anti-Conservative

1. M. Dowling makes an incredibly important point in her brilliant article above.

   She states:

   “Nick Fuentes is not a conservative and he is no friend of conservatives or the Trump administration. Fuentes campaigned against Donald Trump. He is also not a Republican. People say he is right-wing yet his tenets are not right-wing”

   It speaks to the essential, albeit widely misunderstood, concept of the “political spectrum” which is so much used an an identifier of ones political persuasions.

   It goes to the very nature of what it means to be Democrats and Republicans… of “Left” and “Right”… as taught and discussed and understood by the voting public, which tries to choose between them according to their supposed political ideology, is based on a lie.
    
   As generally understood, the very nature of the so-called “political spectrum” makes no sense; that is, if a spectrum is a representation of every gradation that exists between two extremes, then the current political spectrum represents no such thing.
    
   For example, a spectrum of light would start at one end at the point of absolute white (a total absence of color) and run across the spectrum to the point of absolute black (a totality of color.) On such a spectrum, one could not travel from white to black and end up white or vice versa. If one could, there would be no dichotomy of relative distance between them. Therefore, for the spectrum to fulfil its function, it must allow for travel along a line of either increasing or decreasing color so as to end up in either one extreme or the other; but one could never travel to one extremity and then end up in the opposite extremity. To believe this is possible would be considered as nonsensical to most people as turning right but finding you had turned left… and yet, most people accept exactly this when considering their politics as being located somewhere along a political line between “Right” and “Left.”
    
   The Political Anti-Spectrum
    
   Consider the political spectrum as currently understood: on the extreme Left is Communism, which is a brutal totalitarian police state where all human rights are crushed in the name of a Class concept whose definition is so arbitrary that it can be whatever those who rule the state say it is. On the extreme Right is Nazism, which is a brutal totalitarian police state where all human rights are crushed in the name of a Racial concept whose definition is so arbitrary that it can be whatever those who rule the state say it is.
    
   In fact, the definitions of what the state stands for are so arbitrary that even though both supposed ideological “extremes” claim to be each other’s mortal enemy, which each “solemnly pledges” to destroy, could become allies if it served their purposes (as happened in 1939 with the Nazi / Soviet Pact, which allowed both states to launch WW II within 17 days of each other starting with a vicious, aggressive war that they mutually waged against a helpless Poland.)
    
   According to this flawed “spectrum,” the “middle of the road” should be a midpoint between the two extremes containing equal elements of both. Slightly to the Left of the Middle would be Democrats and slightly to the Right of the Middle would be Republicans. Moving Left on the spectrum we would pass Liberals, Progressives and Socialists and finally arrive at Communism. Moving Right, we would pass Conservatives, Reactionaries, Fascists and arrive at Nazism.
    
   But if this spectrum is supposed to represent a dichotomy, how can we end up in the same political condition… viz. a brutal, collectivist, sadistic, totalitarian police-state that despises Liberty, Human Rights, Capitalism and democratic Republican government?
    
   This representation, though irrational to the point of being inane, is blindly accepted as reality not only by the masses of people but also by intellectuals, academics, politicians and the TV newsreaders who whore themselves out to large media outlets.
    
   The fact is that a rational political spectrum would not… and indeed, could not… be represented by two extremes that were identical in everything except symbology and rhetoric. The “differences” between these extremes are all cosmetic: where one is a party who’s “official color” is red and the other party’s official color is brown; where one party’s symbol is a swastika and the others is a hammer and sickle; where one beats prisoners in merciless GESTOPO secret police dungeons, the other party beats prisoners in merciless KGB secret police dungeons; one tortures and mass murders slaves in Concentration Camps while the other tortures and mass murders slaves in a Siberian GULAG. At both extremes, we find those who persecute their enemies by demonizing, imprisoning and exterminating them based on contorted ideological rationales that perversely obsess on Class or on Race.
    
   No, there is no difference and hence no sense in this concept of a spectrum of political opinion. 
    
   The only way a political spectrum could make sense is when it exists between two extremes of governance: a model based on a society under the control of total government on one end and a society based on a model with no government control at all on the other.
    
   All governmental gradations in between would be variations and mixtures of either extreme based on how close to each extreme their ideology would be. Since totalitarian collectivism – as practiced in the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics as well as in National Socialist Germany – represent total government, it would rightly be placed on the ultimate Left. Opposing it would be the total absence of government…that is, some form of Anarchy… and would be found on the ultimate Right.
    
   Under such a scenario, the Left would proceed from the Middle to end up in either the total government of Communism (International Socialism) or Nazism (National Socialism.) Conversely, as one moved Right from the Middle of the Road (that is, a perfect blending of Right and Left ideologies in one government) one would eventually end up in a society with no government… some form of Anarchy such as Anarcho-Capitalism, where ALL government functions, including police, courts and armed forces, have been privatized and no state is required.
    
   Because the understanding of the political spectrum is so misunderstood, we have enabled the political class to operate as corruptly and as dishonestly as the flawed spectrum itself allows…

   …and allowed poisonous charlatans like Fuentes vomit out their mortally dangerous lies.

Comments are closed.