The liberals of your acquaintance, maybe ones in your extended family, loathe Trump and they loathe you because you voted for him. At first, they thought you were misguided and could be swayed to see things their way, but soon they came to see your irrevocable opposition to Leftism as proof of your evil. At this point, you know well enough to avoid any talk of politics with them, should circumstances dictate that you see each other, because your previous efforts at “hey, let’s go through this together and see where we agree, and why we disagree elsewhere” resulted in their twisted faces either hissing in your direction when they outnumber you, or coldly staring at you like executioners.
Their minds are made up, about everything. You write off any possibility of future contact but then one day you learn that a mutual friend was passing through their neck of the woods and he got together with the liberals you had written out of your life. This mutual friend is most certainly a Trump supporter and highly intelligent, though not nearly as jaded about the prospects of a nice evening with old friends who happen to be liberal as I am, so they get together.
Ambush. This mutual friend initially deflected taunts about Melania and Tucker that they sniped at him with. He said “Hey, I know that our views are a bit different and yes, I support MAGA. But let’s not talk about politics.” To no avail. They were dialing it up, from “you’re so smart, how can you not be a liberal” to, in so many words, “you are a retarded piece of shit.”
The evening was a disaster. He was disgusted. He was also, like me a year earlier, disappointed at how two people he’s fondly known for decades had changed into Cheka interrogators.
He and I talked afterwards and I still wondered, in a detached frame of mind: what do they want? A hypothetical intellectual exercise fascinates me, this idea that a lib and I can sit down and first, I explain in a sentence or two what I want in terms of politics that shape the future of our descendants. Then, they will tell me, clearly and rationally, what it is that they envision as a good future for them and theirs. Culturally we are same, we’re not from rival religious, ethnic or racial groups. We have similar socioeconomic backgrounds.
Does a liberal have a rational case for hating the things we vest our hopes in and loving the things we despise?
Yeah, he does.
I finally figured out what liberals want. It’s a eureka moment for me, not necessarily for anyone else who reads Anonymous Conservative and knows his r/K political theory. The question about liberals’ irrationality used to dog me, especially after heated arguments with them. I used to say, “I can state clearly in three or fewer sentences, why I want Trump to win and am not a liberal. Can you, for my better understanding of where you’re coming from, do the same for your side?”
If that were a Serb vs Croat argument of yesteryear, there would have been a straightforward case on each side. That case may or may not have been acceptable to the other side. But at least there would have been a rational basis for the partisanship of both parties. Not so with MAGA supporters vs the apparently normally-functioning White, middle class Hillary-voters.
Our rational case, in simple words:
- High-minded language — “Down with globalism, rebirth of nations.”
- Cards on the table — “It’s okay to be White, build the wall, send them back”
- The id speaks — “GTKRWN”
And one would think, being White and more or less just like us, libs would, if they were honest with themselves, want all of that too. But they don’t, yet they can’t tell us what they want.
In fact, they do have a coherent and rational positive vision: they want the r-selection paradise. Our dream of a vigorous West is their nightmare because it’s an aspirational world. They long for a world that entails a race to the bottom. It’s where they can be themselves.
A K-selected Right Winger wants to better understand their rational case for Leftism. He interviews his Hillary-voting subjects. His first question: “What about the ugliness of multiculturalism?”
- The Left’s reply: “Diversity is vibrant. White is boring.”
- What they mean is: “In a shithole, I can relax and be ugly too.”
Right winger: “Diversity plus proximity equals war! don’t you care about your family?”
- The Left’s reply: “You are so fear-driven.”
- What they mean is: “The bad stuff happens to other people.”
Right winger: “Our country is invaded, our ancestors dishonored, our descendants dispossessed. Are you okay with that?”
- They blink dumbly.
- What they mean is: “We are rabbits. No loyalty, no honor.”
Right winger: “And what about the sexual degeneracy? your side won the gay thing, the transgender thing, and now they are normalizing p-d-phiIlia!”
- They get pissy: “Yeah, like Catholic priests are some paragon of wholesomeness.”
- What they mean is: “No big deal; besides, I’ll also get to be degenerate and no one will judge me.”
If you think I’m making up a self-serving scenario with that last one, think about a hypothetical liberal’s attitude toward an actual priest. Should he know of one who committed some vile act, the liberal will condemn him, sure. A point for his side. He won’t, however, feel much of anything personally about such a priest. He might even see him as tragic, perhaps as victim of homophobia. The priest he loathes, one for whom the liberal saves his hottest hate, is the incorruptible man of God.
Yes, liberals have a rational case. No, they cannot be reasoned with. Yes, they have to be kept away from access to power and at least at an arm’s-length in your private life.