The Radical-Fanatic Axis
Today I read a good piece by Charlemagne, titled Left-Right Parity, which touched upon how the Alt-Right prospered the more crazy it got, and how, learning from this experience, the right cannot be both productive and crazy. Quoting from his piece,
“The right practiced this behavior more than you might think. During the heyday of the “Alt-Right,” the “movement” was largely driven by the most “spergy” commentators to be found on the Internet. This is not to say that the “creators” or “leaders” of the alt-right were this way, but, being heavily dependent on superchats (one of the most damaging things ever created; I hate superchats), the “chat” more or less had their leaders by the balls, financially. If you “cucked” on this or that issue, it could really harm your bottom line; and that bottom line is supremely important for those putting everything on the line in order to engage in genuine right-wing politics…
With the miraculous ability to reach wider, more sensible audiences despite all the censorship, avenues for monetization from less radical elements have opened up. We love the radical right — we really do — but look, we just can’t go around throwing up romans left and right and get anything done. The answer to the original question which I have posed is less my opinion on the matter than it is simply an observation of what has actually happened as this process has developed.”
As someone who listened to each episode of The Radical Agenda as it came out, I can attest to the fact that the more wild, more outrageous, Cantwell got, the more I was enticed, and the heavier I drank Bang, and smoked cigarettes in my truck as I sped down the highway. The more wild stuff is more entertaining, and a good chunk of the right, and conservatism as such, is an entertainment model. It sells! Possibly the worst thing that could happen to Tucker Carlson would be for Trump to become dictator, and eliminate the left. If there are no leftists to ridicule, no leftist dictatorship to fear, or no communists to be thrown out of helicopters…the right-wing media machine would go bankrupt. I would put many Traditional Catholics in this category, who make an income solely on the basis that their show is the guiding light in the age of great apostasy. Taylor Marshall, and Matthew Diamond’s, worst fear is a traditional pope, a pope that no one would pay to hear criticized.
Yet, at the same time, people are convinced of ideas if they are interested in them, for if there was no interest, no energy would be expended in research. Assuming a portion of the right wants to change minds (most importantly the minds of the powerful), then it does need to be something to peek interest. This brings me to the radical-fanatic access.
Radical can mean hardline, but what it really means root, as in a radical number. Someone is a radical if they go to the roots of their belief-system, and fully embrace them. A person is fanatic, on the other hand, not because they have radical, or far-out ideas, but if they have no room for disagreement. A radical leftist would believe in the redistribution of wealth, would be happy to tell you why he thinks that, but is willing to accept that you may disagree. It is possible to be on friendly terms with such a person. In college I was on good terms with a handful, even with them knowing my beliefs. A fanatical leftist, however, believes everything a radical leftist does, but must either convert you to his cause, or break off his company with you. Equivalents can be seen on the right.
What sells is radicalism, not fanaticism. There is a lot of superficiality in the world as is, and in mainstream conservatism there are a lot of half-measures, or blatant contradictions. If you believe abortion to be murder, for example, and if you made it illegal in your state, then why do you not advocate for raiding all existing Planned Parenthood locations? Feasibility aside, if you think this company is killing babies, why would you not send in the police? Further, if you would use the full force of the law against a school that taught students that black people are moral scum, then why would you not do the same to a school that teaches that white people are moral scum? Feasibility is not issue, but the line being towed. Those listening to conservative, and right-wing, pundits like this sort of thing, because they see America’s decline, and they want to be validated. This would sell, and move the needle. If, however, you push towards fanaticism, and start arguing that anyone who does not hold your views is the enemy, a leftist plant, fed, a JEW, or FREE MASON, and then demanding their TOTAL EXPULSION, is when you become a fanatic, and anyone who does not already agree with you will be turned off.
Be radical, go to the roots of your belief-system, and hold fast. Be consistent, persuasive, and fun. Never dip into the fanatical end of the pool, always allow reasoned disagreement.