In Western society of the “current year” – 2017 – politics is firmly and sharply divided between two extremes. This divide manifests in the political apparatus of each country differently, but in two broad strokes an observer can characterise vast swathes of politics. This is the first article in a series that will examine this state of affairs and the knock-on effects.
Despite its flaws, the age-old left/right dichotomy continues its stranglehold on the interpretation of democratic and parliamentary systems. One could argue that this nomenclature has, despite massive changes to parties on both sides of the divide, become even more entrenched in the way we look at politics. Alongside the entrenchment of this simple one-dimensional axis of political alignment we have seen increasing hostility from each side. For the most part, in 2017 we are no longer able to reach out to the “other side” and hold a rational discourse, an exchange of ideas, or a logical debate. Instead both sides have descended into bitter “cold civil war” which threatens to shake apart the very foundations of our societies.
Any political statement made in this context can no longer be judged on its own merit. Most of the time the first judgement a responder makes to a given political statement is to figure out which “side” the statement is coming from; the political “team” of the person making the statement. This is regardless of the fact that the person may have their own idiosyncratic, unique views or, while superficially appearing to be on one “side”, they share deep irreconcilable differences with certain mainstream elements in that “side”. This is perhaps a product of the internet era and the anonymity that it brings (or the pseudo-anonymity in the case of social media). While very few ordinary people would ever have brought up politics in polite company before (at least not baring their heartfelt, sincerest of views), the internet opens up a chasm of opportunities for a normal person to give their opinion on just about any topic, and naturally leads to “echo chambers”.
This results in a scenario where, after being labelled as being left or right, the person feels they may as well join the mainstream left or right side with all the side’s foibles. There are a number of reasons for this phenomenon; chief among them being that safety in numbers is a core human instinct and that constantly distancing yourself from would-be allies, being a martyr for your own unique politics is not a particularly pleasant option. As such we get a self-polarising social system, which builds upon and builds towards the unfortunate two-party dichotomy. In Europe this seems to have manifested itself in a particularly strange manner. In the UK, France, Germany, Sweden and other places we see that the political parties of the old order feel the need to rally together to stand directly in the way of the new so-called “populist” parties such as the UKIP, Front Nationale, Alternativ fur Deutschland and Sverigedemokraterna – while the media slanders them all as “far right”, “Nazi” and so on.
Being herded into groups alongside people you’d rather not normally be associated with, in order to achieve a “greater good” isn’t that uncommon in politics. After all, it’s fairly rare to find a political party and/or candidate that precisely matches your own views; but the entrenched polarisation exacerbates it tenfold. As such, huge numbers of people with fairly “normal” mainline views end up supporting causes they never thought they would. Let’s take a broad look at the kinds of ideas, ideologies and movements that the left and right seem to be host to, and then compare them to their opposite-side faction or idea, if it exists:
|Equality of outcome||Equality of opportunity|
|Social Justice||Bootstrap mentality|
|Mass immigration||Vetted immigration only / No immigration|
|Western cultural suicide / white guilt||Cultural preservation / Defending western values|
|Political Islam||Political Christianity|
|Whitewashing / Misrepresenting Islam||Destruction of church-state divide|
|Democratic Socialism||Economic Conservatism|
|LGBT Activism||De-politicised LGBT|
|Anti-white Racism||White Nationalism|
|Green activism||Environmental deregulation|
* So long as the science or lack thereof reinforces their other views
Note that political issues that don’t have a clear opposing view – such as mass surveillance – don’t really get any airtime in the discourse of the cold civil war.
Next up in this series we will be looking at how the Left shot itself in the foot by politically motivating hundreds of millions of people into voting against their scientific rationality because the alternative was their cultural suicide and ethnic replacement. In a future issue we’ll cover how and why the mass media seems slanted to one particular side.