How the Left Wins

As someone, probably George Washington, once said, there are two kinds of people in this world: The kind who divide people into two kinds, and the others.  But seriously, the recent outbreak of infighting among the bigger names in Our Thing has got me thinking about the fundamental differences between Us and Them.

Though I’ve been studying Them — the Left, Liberals, SJWs, whatever — for decades now, and even though I live and work deep cover among them, even the most basic aspects of their psychology continue to baffle me.  Consider one of their greatest tools for success: Their preternatural tolerance for routine, bureaucracy, meetingsoh God, the meetings.  It’s incredible.

Even the worst my-way-or-the-highway Leftist dictators, even at the apex of their power, when their word was law, had a capacity for sheer leather-assed paperwork that ground down all lesser men.  One can hardly imagine Lenin, say, or Stalin, sitting around a conference table, patiently hashing out the third subclause of the fourth paragraph of the second section of the amendments to the revisions of the bylaws of the code of conduct… but they did.  Stalin’s work ethic was legendary; his archive of just memos annotated in his hand is superhumanly huge.  The man spent fifteen hours or more at his desk, every single day.  The vozhd could’ve had every single flunky in the Kremlin sent to Siberia with a wave of his hand, and yet most of the time he got his way not by threatening to shoot his underlings and their families, but by dialecticing them to death around a conference table.

Folks in Our Thing, obviously, are different.  Plenty of Alt-Righters have serious work ethics, but only lone wolf-style.  We don’t do meetings.  Even those of us who don’t take disagreements personally tend to turn every discussion into a dick-measuring contest; those who do take disagreements absurdly, epically personally go overboard enough to make a Sicilian blood feud look like a fender-bender.  Leftists will continue sitting around a conference table until they reach consensus, no matter how incompatible their positions (being utterly unconstrained by Reality really helps here, I imagine).  Alt-Righters will trade a few verbal jabs, then take it out into the parking lot (if only metaphorically).

And this is why the Left wins.  As anyone who has ever suffered through a meeting knows, the one willing to talk the longest gets whatever she wants (and it’s almost always she these days, have you noticed?); eventually the rest of us give in through sheer exhaustion.  Want to know how the Left came to control all media, academia, culture?  Simple: They showed up, and they wouldn’t leave the conference room until they got their way.

If Our Thing is ever going to go anywhere, we — and by “we” I mean “people whose blogs have readers in the double digits, unlike me” — have to impose a bit of discipline on the ranks.  We don’t need to go the whole Party-song-and-armband route — a bit too on the nose — but we absolutely have to hold fire to our right.

Loading Likes...

9 thoughts on “How the Left Wins

    1. Severian

      Since they all carry 45 oz super-sugary Starbucks drinks in those eco-friendly portable containers, I just assume the containers are…. multi-purpose.

  1. Anonymous White Male

    Yeah! More dialectic! You inferred another difference when you stated that “we have to impose a bit of discipline in the ranks”. What are the ranks and who occupies them. Those of a “rightish” nature are more compatible with a military hierarchy. Left, female. Right, male. Female, nursery. Male, armed forces. Its not that the Right can’t agree with each other, its just that they want the social structure defined. And once defined, everyone is to abide by their rank. You place conservative men in a combat situation they will adapt. But, you have to pre-define what the command structure is. Nobody likes a Colonel Kurtz or a General Patton, but they are respected because of the results they provide. I think that’s what we’re seeing in Our Thing now. The players are jockeying for position. Because the Right is individualistic, each little Napoleon thinks he is best “leader”. And because they are individuals, they will fragment into different camps. Until a large enough people with an established hierarchy exist. Once that happens, you know what the game is and the rules to follow. The rules are inviolable so you don’t have to waste time each day trying to redefine them into something else. This is something else the Left loves to do. Constantly change the rules and redefine words so the horde is constantly jumping from one foot to the other. Contracts are the rules that allow groups to make decisions based on the rules. Like a Constitution. The Constitution defines the roles of government and the citizenry. Once you destroy the agreed upon roles and change them into something else, you have begun the slippery slope decline that always results. We are so far down the slippery slope now we are in Bizarro World.

    1. Severian Post author

      That’s the thing, though — most of the wannabe-Napoleons in Our Thing also argue (correctly!) that we’re in a “4th Generation War” situation. Leaving aside the pretentious nerdery of that, it’s true that we’re a lot like guerrillas roaming the countryside, taking potshots at vulnerable outposts and just generally sowing chaos….

      Has there ever been a successful right-wing guerrilla movement?

      That’s not rhetorical. I seriously want to know, because that’s what we — whoever “we” are — will have to build. There have been nationalist guerrilla movements, of course, for as long as there have been nations, but we’re well past the point where shouting “Gaul for the Gauls!” will get us anywhere. Unless “we” explicitly, openly embrace tribalism, I don’t see how “we” get anywhere….

      … but embracing tribalism is self-defeating, as it pretty obviously — and I mean so obviously that even the grossly enstupidated products of American public schools can see it — entails ethnic cleansing. “Make America white again!” is not a winning slogan in the current environment.

      The Left is so good at organizing guerrilla movements because they embrace ideology. It’s stupid, self-contradictory ideology — witness all the commie movements with “Democracy” in their names that explicitly embrace dictatorship — but since Most People Are Idiots, this works quite well. “Conservatism,” I’m told, is the negation of ideology. If that’s true, we’re screwed.

      1. Trimegistus

        I can think of one very successful right-wing guerrilla movement. The one that was organized in the early 1770s in Virginia and New England. They fought expansion of state power and defeated the might of Britain — not something which happened often before 1950.

        They laid their groundwork carefully. Before the first shots were fired they had a communication network, propagandists, lawyers, rabble-rousers, financiers, pranksters (what was the Boston Tea Party but an elaborate practical joke?), serious political theorists . . . and military veterans organized into companies.

        American independence wasn’t won in 1783, or even 1776. It was won in 1772 before the British even knew what was happening.

  2. Cerulean

    Your idea is credible; it seems like it could be quite significant. I don’t know fly-on-the-wall history well enough to be able speak to its actual validity.

    Seems to me people on the left are able to stick together better that people on the right. They seem to have better focus. Again, that’s just a perception … could be off the mark. They do seem to have effective political leaders who give them structure and momentum.

    Our lack of political leaders is a big problem … and that could be partly a result of our low attention span and tendency to splinter. The people a lot of us voted for for years did not actually have our interests at heart. Now that the masquerade / delusion is ending, the lack of a congenial political organization is increasingly apparent.

    (BTW, I’m another visitor from Zman’s blog.)

    1. Severian Post author

      Thanks, and welcome!

      That’s the problem with fighting a Borg Collective. We have hobbies, jobs, friends, interests, pastimes… you know, lives. They have politics. I will never feel any but the weakest solidarity with another “conservative,” because who knows, maybe he’s an African conservative and he wants to conserve lip discs and whatnot, and you know, I’m cool with that. To each his own, brother; that’s what “conservative” means, but I won’t be partaking.

      The Left, on the other hand, derive their entire identity — such as it is — from being part of the collective. (One of the reasons they’re so hot and bothered to change personal pronouns, I think, is that they all not-so-secretly long to be referred to in the plural). If I had a dollar for every time I heard some academic feminist start out with “As a feminist, I think that….” I’d be in Soros’s league. After point-and-shriek, “argument from authority” is all they’ve got; our attitude towards authority is more like Tombstone: “Law don’t go around here, law dog.”

      We’ll never get to their level of organization, but we need to figure out some kind of structure PDQ.

Comments are closed.