Rolepgeek I would say those roles have reversed and are the product of necessity, not philosophy
Consider how progressive leftism now eschews free speech in favour of safe speech, curtails academic freedom in favour of academic uniformity and intellectual insulation, whilst traditional rightism has eschewed conservatism in lieu of provocation, moral values in favour of pretenderism, nationalism in lieu of globalism etc.
I imagine once new-rightism takes supremacy, the roles will switch round again
It's similar to how for example the left and right were opposed to mass surveillance, but under Obama the left supported Obama's decision to label Edward as traitor, and the right rushed to defend civil liberties from Obama. Didn't really make sense to make it a left-right issue cos it was Bush as continued by Obama, but there you go, it certainly was looked at it like one. Cycles, it all goes on in cycles
I think you might be right, but I also think it's about trying to maintain cultural dominance, and really what I think is that the Democrats are worse at it. It's not part of their blood. Plus, really, it's about inter- or intra-group conflict with America as the group. They're winning, and the winners try to cement their hold; their enemy is not outside America, it's "Those blasted Republicans". The terminology used for the opponent is not 'traitor' or 'alien' or focused on people being outsiders or not doing their part for the group. The terminology is 'bigot' and 'misogynist' and 'old white dudes'. They aren't seen as traitors who have turned their backs on the glorious Democratic people. They've always been the enemy. They have always been the foe. That's why Republicans are seen as the party of Evil and the Democrats are seen as the party of Stupid by their respective opponents. One is misguided at best, traitorous at worst. The other is ignorant at best, brutally oppressive at worst.
Within each group, as a separate entity, you're almost certainly right; the left has found a winning strategy, so they try to rally around it and enforce adherence. The right, meanwhile, is flailing for a countermeasure, and the thing it seems they've hit on is, in fact, nationalism. Literally the direct antithesis of what the left is using. Look at the Euro thread, or Trump. They are in a bit of a bad way trying to enforce it, however, as the intra-group dynamics of the right haven't settled out as to what their strategy is. You can see this sort of cycle in nature, too; Aphids will reproduce asexually, preserving their own genetic code as much as possible, when resources are plentiful, but will reproduce sexually in tough times, in a bid to develop survival traits as quickly as possible. Memetics, rather than genetics, is the biggest difference here, I think.
Also Obama is a centrist, in a lot of ways. At least as far as I can tell. I think it's why I like him so much on everything except national security, and I still mostly like him there.
Also, from what I can tell, at least in America, it's less actual restriction, at least at the large scale (though there's quite a few individuals and individual institutions that think they know what's best and what's best is shutting dissenters the fuck up), and more 'get educated'. With education being largely liberal dominated anyway. You have to be extremist about your opinions and not consider the other side. Otherwise they might win! If you concede any point, it gives them credit on every other point, but they're wrong on most of those, but other people might not know that! So you have to oppose even the stuff they might be right about, to make sure nobody else thinks they're right on the stuff they're wrong about.
It's still fucking stupid, mind you.
Author
Topic: Doc Helgoland's Asylum for the Politically American: T+0 (Read 1316695 times)