You have no answers. Just an appetite to oppose a 'them'. You are the same as 'the left'. wrong, self-centered & tragically confident in hollow misleading aphorisms. You have NO power base, central Ethos, money, know-how, perspective, spirituality, or future Good luck, fools enjoy the un-ironic, ironic definitions-based 'life'. OR-
I've been saying this for years !! Video essays MADE the dissident right, livestreams are just a grift. video essays take dedication and ideas and most right wing pundits have neither
I think another major rule to consider would be Humility. Understanding that we're all in this together, and that we're not as great, powerful, aristocratic, or based as we pretend online. There's no shame in being simple. Order needs peasants and smallfolk just as much as it needs kings and lords. Chest puffing about one's righteousness is pointless, especially if it's done in the name of forcing out potential allies.
@@SuperCulverinI'd say it is possible. Difficult but possible. If you can be humble and also unapologetic in driving home an argument, its extremely effective because people will see you're right, but they won't be threatened by it, and you avoid the chimp brain reaction that perceives a debate about truth to be a proxy for a fight. With this people are more likely to actually change their mind instead of doubling down on their position out of defensiveness. I think Lila Rose on abortion is a great example of pulling this off well
Reminds me of George Washington. He gave up being a king and stepped away from the power. We need to know our role and not think of ourselves as freater than we are.
@@EspressoMonkey16Lila rose's debate with destiny wasnt really successful however. She is fine on talk shows with dr phil and regular people but not against intelligent debaters
Thank you for the blessed absence of music or the deliberate use of any sound but your own voice. This shows a confidence that what you say is worth listening to. And it is.
Great and much needed video. Way too much negativity in RW social media. Seems like a lot of RWers are only out to find like-minded people and treat them like garbage.
It is camaraderie, male friendship is seasoned through banter, but it wouldn't hurt to be kind to frens and encourage them to just bee themselves instead of performative displays.
I could say the same about Hasan, dude slandered nickmercs and the C.E.O of O.U.R, not the best look for the left with allready massive amounts of pedophilia claimed against them
Great video but here is a comment regarding rule 17 @ "Grow or die". You don't always want to grow your numbers, sometimes you want to "grow" your cohesion first and foremost because you can also grow too fast. I don't know how to incorporate that.
It's true, strength is not in numbers alone but the cohesiveness and loyalty of the numbers you have. Better to have 5 good men than 100 half-hearted, because then they can fold and turn on you or just generally drag everyone else down.
@@j.r.mocksly5996 Very much so, this "grow eternally" is not preferable. We need to stop and make ourselves cohesive(and that costs something) once and awhile as well
The part about avoiding infighting is spot on; still, when you are dealing with a coalition that includes traditionalist Christians and Nietzschean twitter vitalists, it is a bit too loose to function. I've heard people in our spheres arguing that the 3 core pillars of DR are Morgoth, AA and BAP. That's a bit messed up, considering none of them are part of a serious religious tradition, have been nihilistic at some point in their lives and occasionally fall back into that.
Certain factions are just plain misguided and have no viable solution to the current issues, often without realizing why. They’re attracted to the surface level “edginess” of certain ideas, without considering the ultimate ramifications. What some see as “infighting” is really more a case of people who can’t see the root of the problem and just want to win Internet cool points for appearing more radical.
You've figured it out at last. What is "the Right"? Common sense, normal, even a bit boring. It takes tremendous effort for extreme villains to persuade anyone that we are extreme and they are normal. This task just keeps getting harder as reality gets harder to conceal.
I just want to say how much I always enjoyed your videos. They were always well-reasoned without getting into hysterics or moral signaling. You always wanted to deal with the issues as they are without the kind of ideological baggage others get dragged into.
Not all right wingers are going to be your friend. Some will have different interests than you, simply because they are not your group, despite being right wing.
Each of the DR factions need to be working toward their own factional goals, with the understanding that the common enemy of leftism and the establishment are far greater threats than any DR faction. Where there is common interest, cooperate. Otherwise, just stay out of each other's way.
Yet pragmatism, order, and nobility are inherently Rightist. Even if Rightist factions want different goals, they can negotiate working together for a world in which each faction has its own home where it is free from unwanted outside corruption.
Lost Wisdom #2436: One can forgive and still punish. To forgive and not give punishment is called a Pardon. One can forgive a heinous criminal yet still behead him.
@@qboxer I think it's twisted and been confused. Not necessarily lost. It's also in legal language. Pardon is to forgive and not punish. Forgive is to accept the guilty plea but still punish. Also, you cannot force forgiveness. It must be initiated first by the guilty. Forgiveness is asked for. I cannot forgive any person unless they ask it of me first. That's also buried. The initiation of forgiveness by the guilty. Many think forgiveness must mean no punishment. When that's incorrect. Probably because they are guilty of crimes themselves and don't want to "face the music". So they prefer this version of forgiveness. Because they themselves want that kind of forgiveness. In a way it's a subconscious confession on their part.
The right is divided mainly due to the many different ideological differences based on country since the right hinges on religio-cultural foundations. I'm sure somebody on the "right" in China will be butting heads with somebody on the "right" from Japan and so on
One of the things which unites "the right" is their respect for one another's differences. The acceptance of *actual* diversity, rather than the imposition of homogeneous mediocrity.
This is what the Traditionalists attempted to do-to bridge the cultural gaps and find common spiritual ground. I believe they succeeded but unfortunately most people still don’t understand the message. It’s an uphill battle for sure.
@@SuperCulverin I agree wholeheartedly but there must be certain conditions to be met. I only see this ever happening if there’s a powerful leader with a messiah complex to settle disputes of religio-cultural issues between each factional differences of the “right”. The only person to achieved this so far is Putin. He did a good job of pandering to the ortho-muscovite & the muslims in Russia against a perceived threat of Western wokeism. Not to mention how multicultural Russia is. Then again, the threat of extinction on their own Russo-Eurasian civilisation against encroaching Western Homoglobo-Imperialism does also help in a way. Distract the public with internal disputes with external threats.
There needs to be someone who can mediate between different groups. Take stock of the assets that the right actually has and start working on how to organize it. Such a mediator needs a certain amount of clout or resources so that they can offer to make it worthwhile for people to engage with them. They also need to be thick skinned, not attention seeking and avoid getting involved in any drama themselves. Unfortunately there does not seem to be anyone who is generally respected who can fill this role.
Something like this would be traditional, but the current situation does not allow for it. As it is, anyone fitting such a role will inevitably prove to glow. Instead, we shall avail ourselves of the distributed emergent system that has manifested. Nothing can stop it.
One excellent argument for de-emphasizing racial/ethnic components of rightwing discourse is the nature of decline and ethnicities. Ethnicities rarely survive declines intact. They migrate or get conquered and mix, diluting away. However, their languages and mythologies persist long after they're gone. Rome's cultural, religious (both pagan and Christian), and linguistic legacy far outlasted its genetic one.
@@pauls464 As stated, they mix and dilute as migrations occur and conquerors loot the civilizational heartland. Modern Italians have a lot of Germanic ancestry now because of that. Many genetic lines are also lost simply due to population collapse - Rome's urban centers ended up leaving surprisingly little genetic impact on the continent. Most modern Euro ethnicities are the result of mixture and divergence after the fall of Rome. European genetics as a whole resulted from the mixing of Proto Indo Europeans with Early European Farmers and Western Hunter Gatherers - peoples who were profoundly different at the time of mixing. It's likely that we're in the beginning stages of a similar period of admixture and genetic drift.
Well I think it’s a travesty that European genetics would be diluted, considering european’s unique combination of genes is probably more or less what created the modern world as we know it.
On the principled level, I can appreciate and support all of these rules. But... In any competition, assuming all else is equal, the competitor who is willing to break the rules will win. This is, fundamentally, the Left's advantage. Their goal is destruction, and so they're willingness to break every rule is built in. It is not now, nor has it ever been, possible to build faster than destroy. We (humanity) will not solve this peacefully. It's a fight, and since our enemy desires our complete destruction, there's going to be a point where we must commit equally or cease to exist.
@@SuperCulverin intelligence, artificial or not, cannot beat an intrinsically irrational opponent who is willing to do violence if you don't agree with him. Intelligence will not decide this. It WILL be decided by violence, eventually. If "we" don't, it won't matter. "They" already are.
@@TheDistributist feels over realz? If you really don't think I'm right, read a history book- any history book. It doesn't even matter how accurate it is, as every side uses violence in every part of history. Terms like revolutionary and freedom fighters are used on one side. Law enforcement and patriot are used on the other. Both sides doing violence to the other. Grow up, and face the world as it truly is.
Dave this Right that you describe seems a foreign land to me. I don't think it exists in my country (New Zealand), where what passes for the Right is for the most part highly individualistic and very secular. I recently heard the leader of the right-libertarian ACT party describe a catholic socialist as "the worst of all worlds - a moral conservative and a socialist". A very different situation from the US, where you have an actual Conservative movement.
It's a similar situation here in Sweden. More than 50 years ago our old conservative party left all conservative cultural values and morphed into a neo-liberal laissez-faire party that only cares about finance, deregulation and lower taxes. It's only in the last decade some conservatism was brought into our political discourse through the radical nationalist party Sweden Democrats, which grew enormously in the 2014 election cause Sweden's problems with mass immigration have become so serious.
Remember operating in public requires pragmatism else one risks tarnishing one's reputation and security. As such, the public representatives must adopt a watered down, moderate position just to have a public presence. The more watered down such a presence must be in order to avoid the mob, the more the "true believers" must operate in secret. I have a feeling there is a much bigger and more passionate base in your home country than you can imagine. Believe me the US has a ton of problems. Sometimes our token Right is the #1 obstacle to any genuine success.
My largest (and likely most unrecognizable, unfortunately) goal in life is to buy a shit ton of land in the middle of nowhere and build the most self-sustainable and well-fortified community out there. It will be the best gift I can give to future generations: the tools necessary to be independent from those who seek to corrupt and destroy them, the foundation for surviving the upcoming apocalypse. The points in this video are, more or less, what I'll be basing that community off of- I find it funny that I thought of these far before I found this video. The one thing I think I won't be able to do, however, is forgive enemies in the way that may be necessary. I don't think I'll ever be able to look past the destructive nature of leftist types due to the deep scarring I believe it leaves on their souls. There are certainly some that will be able to legitimately recognize the horribleness of leftism and that the destruction that it causes is bad, but I personally don't think that I'll be able to overcome my doubts for those people. There will always be a part of me that wants to cast them out into this big, burning world of ours just so that I can see them burn in the fires of their own ideology. I know that makes me evil in a way, because I feel hatred and resentment for people who are very clearly misguided and in desperate need of stability and caring community, but a very rational part of me justifies it by saying that inviting these people in, no matter how reformed they are, will open the floodgates to horrific things that will destroy everything I've worked so hard to build up and protect and leave nothing for the future. It's something that I will have to work on before I can become the leader a community like what I wish to create deserves. Thank you for the video. It's a wonderfully succinct way of explaining crucial behaviors and concepts for the right wing.
If it helps, remember how few us are raised based. One of the English dissidents said, a few years back, that we are a movement of redemption, and he was right. I don't know your personal history, but almost all of us were once fools, at best, and are now defecting, coming in out of the cold. When I look at a leftoid loony or a liberal parrot, I remember "that was me, once." Granted, on a practical level you have a point. Some of these creatures do not want to and never will change. We can deal with that. Our insistence on lived values will select out those that can't abide such things.
@@CopeAndSeeth This is the problem of not creating a strong (armed) community, or one that is easily disbanded locally and can rebuild itself from different points.
Rule #5 is crucial. Too many people provide moral judgements without tying it down to any concrete time, place, or people. Without this constraint, the morality cna be misunderstood or hijacked.
Being one of those "millenials who gave up", some of these rules seem hard to follow, but I'm glad I've found this video - I've been looking for proper guidance way too long. Also it's good to know there are likeminded frens out there. I'll definitely rewatch this video a couple of times to properly soak it all in.
I appreciate this video because I think its needed. In my opinion, the boomers on the right a lot of times ruin our name. My father in law, even though he shares a lot of the same politics as me, still makes wierd jokes about AOC. Not arguing her politics or policies. Just calling her donkey mouth and such. It makes me roll my eyes.
christians don't see race and all the problems i see they have with others are religious in nature which is a big problem for me, an ethnic jew can convert to christianity and you will be happy. race is real and important, aryans (were) great despite christianity not because of it, give subsaharan africans christianity or any other religion and they still won't be.
Unless race realism is explicitly woven into catholicism and justified through some theological organ (literally impossible currently lmao look at the Pope), the resultant slave morality will just lead the masses through the same exact heuristics which led us to blank slatism. The drum HAS to be spreading awareness about race and gender ideology. If we don’t address fundamental inbuilt inequality, the heuristics to defeat something as simple as Civil Rights Law become a monumental challenge.
Excellent video. It needs a follow up on how to interact with non-frens, which groups you should keep non-frens out of as well as how. You also should have a follow up video on how to identify non-frens who are pretending to be a fren, either intentionally or not and how to deal with them. It has been my observation that at least on the whole, the majority of right-wingers innately follow most of these rules, though which ones varies depending on the individual. The problem I have identified is that most leaders of "right-wing" groups explicitly do not gatekeep and this almost always leads to infiltration of the group, which manifests as either a coup or the group being shut down because internal chats are either leaked or fabricated that break TOS.
@@SuperCulverin A real fren will have his condition combine with his fellow frens, hence his cause is individual in the sense that he wills best for his frenkin.
I believe it to be completely impossible to create friendships based on politics, no matter how similar your political positions. At the end of the day, political discourse is infinitely shallow compared to actual care for your fellow man. Make friends through casual activities, cut off anyone who will not grant others any respect or listen to any reason. If they are respectful, and they do listen to reason, it is possible to have a relationship with them, even if your political opinions do not align.
Love you dude great video. In reading Burham's biography one of the reflections was that "there's always a Schlam" meaning, there will always be someone opposed to you within an organization, because competition is a facet of the zero-sum game that is hierarchical structure. Some amount of friction is inherent in organization---we might use this as an extension of "organization means oligarchy." If we recognize that competition is necessary then it falls upon us organizers to create structured space for that conflict---while creating space where it is necessarily absent: chaos is the yin to order's yang. Democracy does this through elections and corporations do this through "office politics." I wonder about how *informal* office politics are but how that is most things get done in the office. This is part of my broader response to the video---chaos has to be given its due. The chaotic (and unorganized) nature of the right-wing is necessary because we are in the "creative" stage of a longer term march through the halls of power. Of course, we are in the process of formalizing, but ensuring the health of organizations requires "hell" or an Ixion bound to the wheel of fire---there has to be room for man's will to make mistakes and successes and those can only be judged through competition.
Excellent video as always. I've been hovering around these circles online for years now. And, while I can't say I am truly right wing in *all* senses, nobody else seems to be grappling with real issues the way the right (dissident right?) is. I've been wondering for a while now if there isn't room for some sort of synthesis between the true right and the post-left. Of course, people like myself will have to come to terms with harsh realities. Even in my own minor intellectual disagreements with small elements of the right, I know of no better group to genuinely learn from. No other group provides such edification in my life. It may be too early for such a synthesis, but I will support and follow you guys until then.
@@SuperCulverin But TheDistributist himself is doing that with some areas! He even debated with a cocky very leftist professor with the hopes of using the dialectic method to reach a left-rightwing synthesis for the future.
Can’t say I can 100% agree with you, but efforts to talk things through & respecting promises is something many forget to do in general is something that needs to be throughly prioritized.
I do have a question regarding Rule #15 - what are we suppose to do with the Taylor Lorenzes of the world? I feel as though the only way to handle them is an eye for and eye, unpleasant as that may be.
You’re an info warrior not an info terrorist Lorenz is by definition a regime target, the rule only refers to non regime targets. Your average shitlib isn’t Lorenz and doesn’t deserve harassment or a dox
Basically find a community to fit into then try to build bridges with other communities. I've heard TFM talk about it for a long time glad to see you agree.
9:22 I hate it when that happens-put out something with a typo. Then pendants only seem fixated on typo rather than the substance of what has been said.
I agree with many of these basic points, but one raises concerns. "Don't dox non-institutional targets" feels like a point directed at K*wi Farms, but the Farms' loyalty is to archival, the aggregation of information, and good humor. These loyalties could be interpreted as a form of Truth and Beauty. In the case of the Farms, Rule 15 and Rule 1 are at odds with one another. Maybe you don't see the Farms as a right wing website, but at the very least it is a valuable ally to the right. After all, it fits neatly into many of your rules given the strength of its community and the courage of its leader.
19:28 I recommend Vox Day's "SJW always lie" and "SJW always double down". This process is explained in detail. Also review of these work will bring them to attention of those that the left attacks.
As a Christian Anarchist and therefore a Leftist, I appreciate this synthesis of the logic behind the Right. It's always endlessly fascinating to analyze a rigorous perspective!
It's not divison that's wanted. It's unity and community, it's just understood that we do better with people who are similar to us. When we congregate with our own people we have a greater incentive to help those around us because we can identify with them, and are more willing to come together and work to build better communities. There's no reason we can't have trade and travel with other groups, that can lead to building stronger economies and solidify peace so we don't have to throw away the strongest of our men in battle and waste the potential that could have been better served building up our people. But cohabitating in the same land is foolish, as there will always be the perceptions of minority groups as being the outsider that's unwanted. Which in turn seeds distrust, paranoia, and a mentality of victimhood. These seeds always grow from perceived threats to violent actions of "retribution and justice". It's just not worth it.
>There is no going back to the 1990s, there is no “return to Fresh Prince", or even the 1950s. If power wanted to go back to the 1950s, it could do so. The question is, Who is in the driver seat?
"It turns out we don't want bigotry, sociopathy, or callousness just because it's based and on the right." THANK YOU for putting into eloquent terms what I've been thinking these last few months. I get the feeling that younger generations are being shown a glamorous view of evil with all of the narcissist grifters and those asinine edits with phonk or some other music.
I think you're ging to have a hard time with even just your first rule given that the alt-right grew out of the new atheist movement. Replacing "god" with another word where you mean the same thing isn't going to fly.
I feel I’ve been pushed into a position where I see my self as “ in the right “ I’d always felt as though I as left field both politically and in general outlook I have seen this change in the last 3 years ….feeling as though I’m being pushed further and and further to the right ….I’ve also seen this with friends and colleagues too Some of whom I am surprised as I had always seen them way more left wing than myself This proves to me that there is indeed a problem with the left and that it isn’t just me What happens next I’ve no idea But honest and open debate is a must …..this is the fundamental starting point
How do these rules square with the fact that while you don't 'punch right', you also tend to pretend other adjacent right wing movements or persons simply don't exist? Say there is a big cultural debate viewed by hundreds of thousands of people online, what is happening but gatekeeping when people on the right just pretend it didn't happen?
I feel like ideological alignment and understanding who is acceptably close on various questions is the most important thing to building coherent online spaces. In real life, the most important things are stuff like competence, trustworthiness, respectability, comportment, etc. Just think of all of our IRL relations that don't involve people from the internet. In order for IRL groups built around philosophical views to thrive, we need to close the gap with all of the other people we work or hang out with that have more naive ideas about the world. For all the talk on the right about virtue, competence, etc. as a group we're generally worse than the classical liberals and center-left types when it comes to this stuff.
Just found this channel. Really good video. Not all the way through yet, but very solid start. Can't wait to get secretely radicalised slowly as you slide in ideas like invading poland by the end of the video.
This is a good first attempt/first draft/independent video, but a terrible set of actual rules. There are too many rules, and most aren't direct enough. A good, direct rule here is number 11, but even then you've added too many words. It should just be "Don't punch right." Extrapolating on the rule is fine for this video (content) but every rule needs to be clear, direct, and cut of ALL excess for it to be an effective rule. As is, these rules are too idiosyncratic to yourself, and only your direct audience perhaps, but are bad at working for a broader fren group. I find it funny that as a religious man obviously familiar with the 10 commandments, you're not following their model here Dave. "Thou shalt [x/not x]" is the appropriate length of any firm rule, and going past 10 of them is just meandering and trying to control too much behavior to ever be effective or easily transmissible. Hell, I wouldn't even go past 5. I can easily (and often) think back to Conquest's 3 Laws for example, and that's because it's easy to remember as there are only 3 of them. People already have a hard time remembering culturally promoted rules in sets of 10 (ask a normie to get the order right on all 10 of the commandments, or ask a normie what ALL of 10 Amendments in the Bill of Rights are in person, and be ready to be disappointed), so presuming anyone is going to remember a list of 20 is just a bad idea. It's also fine for rules to be coded in ways only those who speak this language to be understood, but no others (this is in and of itself, a form or necessary gatekeeping). You could boil a few (probably at least 5) of these rules down to one simple one for example: Return the Shopping Cart. A normie won't know what that means, but it's a thick concept that encompasses many ideas within it, and its promotion simplifies the process of transmission while also forcing normies to have to try to understand us. Forcing others to understand you rather than catering to their lack of understanding is a good method for growth - the sense of entering into an exclusive club with their own secret passwords and language is a strong enticement for the intellectually curious, and that's the exact type I think that you want to see in this space, in particular.
There was a video you had in your essential clips playlist analyzing the one other video in it that was funny, and it appears to be gone from youtube now. Would you happen to know where I can find it?
If this list is too long to commit to memory, just do the exact opposite of what Rod Dreher did in the Classical Christian School controversy a year (or so) ago
@@TheDistributist Yeah sorry. Wasn't trying to be mean lol. I think alot of these rules could apply to the "left" as much as the "right" (if that's a paradigm you care about. Which you obviously do and I obviously don't.)
Another rule: Always be eloquent. Use words that correctly convey the precise meaning which you want to convey, and one can be eloquent without falling into the trap of kitsch, facetiousness, which so many ‘walking dictionaries’ have.
I agree with these rules on the surface. I dont think anybody (on the right ) genuinely follow some of these rules. I have not seen many if any on the right who seem truly trustworthy and understanding. That being said i am not you but i am also the enemy of your enemy. I am about as left as you're going to get that is against the cathedral. So if you need practice in making frens im happy to help in that way. I would be interested to see new perspectives on things. (Pls i have no frens and im lonely)
