Should radical Republicans in the US acknowledge they're not Conservatives anymore?

@Kwek00 I didn't say I agreed with him, but he's upfront and intellectually honest enough to talk with.

Compare that to that to Trump, MTG, Hannity, or Carlson, or Ingraham, and you can see why I like the idea of having him around.

@MistyCee I never said you agreed with him. But after his piece, I still think he qualifies as someone that wants to conserve a worldview from the past, even though he "feels" that it's no longer there. He kinda forgets that a lot of people in the US live in a way that agrees with what he wants, his issue is that other people don't. And that's why he wants his little revolution to protect his liberty to not be confronted with people that don't live his lifestyle. And this other lifestyle, is apperently so morally reprehensible that he wants to use the governement as a blunt instrument to bring the rest of the people back in line. Or make them dissapear I guess.

@Kwek00 I think it's pretty reprehensible what the guy is pushing for, but, at the same time, he's honest and capable enough to articulate it, which is really kind of refreshing, compared to the Fox News bobbleheads who don't even try to articulate anything past us vs them.

@MistyCee That's because Fox News Bobbleheads play a diffrent roll. I don't think they would survive on FOX if they went all revolutanary. But what some of their pundits are pushing... if you follow it to their logical conclussion, it will end up with the same sentiments that the author of the opinion piece is pushing.

And Trump isn't an ideologue imo, he's an opportunist. He uses the tools he can find in society to amass power and gain wealth. AT the end of the day, he doesn't really care how he does it and who he uses, as long as it works.

@Kwek00 Fox isn't really as interested, imo, in fomenting the end of Western Civilization, or changing it, as it is in profiting from its audience, which leans that way.

In that sense, I think Trump and Murdoch are pretty much on the same page, although theyre both looking out for their own interests

That's where I'm actually a little pleased with this Federalist piece, though, because I can see where there's an actual ideology of sorts and an analysis that would never sell on Fox. O'Reilly, honestly, I felt like tried to go there, but he got killed off, largely because he was pushing an ideology and a level of intellectual analysis that was dangerous to Fox, all the sexual harassment and other stuff to the side

(although, I'd submit that it's actually part and parcel of the whole issue on a bigger scale. Fox plays with maleovolence and abuse of other human beings when it suits it's profit margin, but it's not really committed to might makes right).

At the end of the day, though, I'm pretty happy to see an articulate and relatively thoughtful analysis coming through somewhere, even if it's from the Federalist.

Increasingly, between Trump and the Fox News commercialization of the Republican party (and the left/establishment/liberal reaction to it, I've seen very little chance of addressing issues in a way that can result in compromises.

Take for example, government. This guy at least acknowledges government has a role, instead of just whining about how it can stifle individual freedom.

I really think, like, if more people read and understood this stuff, as opposed to just watching Fox and buying they're the bad guys, we'd be better off.

@MistyCee I'm not sure who is the boss or final editor at Fox, but I still think that they try not to cross the line of preaching revolution. Their guest might, but the pundits themselves won't do it imo. It's more about keeping people pissed off and glued to the screen.

I'm not sure about Murdoch and Trump, these people seem to just use eachother. One wants attention the other wants the money. As long as it doesn't reflect badly on Murdoch it seems to be all nice from where I'm standing. But Murdoch also seems to turn away when it becomes to extreme.

If you want to read right wing ideas, they are pretty far spread Misty. I can't acess it right now, but I believe the Patriot Front website has an entire piece on why they excist and what they want to do. And if you want a European variant like: "Against Democracy and Equality" from Tomislav Sunic. You can read stuff from Alain de Benoit. You even have a publisher, a popular example is "Arktos". And you can read political scientists that look at these organisations. Cas Mudde is intresting one if you want to go broad. And "The Flag and the Cross" by Gorski ad Perry is really fascinating if you want the US specifically. You also have a book called "How the south won the civil war" by Heather C. Richardson, she also has some nice stuff on youtube. I mean, you can really let yourself go if you are intrested behind what these people believe and sell to their wannabe electorate.

I thought during the Trum era, it was pretty clear that the governement has an important roll too. These people were talking about teaching the children a "pro-American curriculum that celebrates the truth" and are going to crack down on women that were going to have an abortion. I also can't believe that kicking transsexuals out of the army would be the end of that discussion. Like, these authoritarians aren't really for "small governement".

What if more people read this kind of stuff, and just agree? I mean, what these people are selling has an attraction. And of course, it's never going to be "that bad", these people wouldn't really go that far. But these true believers, that think that the ends justify the means, and talk about turning a governement into a blunt instrument to do what they want. Well... I rather don't have it around me.