One of the things I’ve been happiest about lately, yes, thankful for too, is the inability of the Left to make actual affirmative arguments for their positions.
Believe me, it’s a VERY good thing for Conservatives and Libertarians, who’ve ALWAYS had to make arguments for our positions because we’ve been swimming against the grain for so long.
Some of it is the natural laziness borne of inertia that comes with adhering to the status quo and America’s political-media class has been very Left-of-Center for a very, VERY long time.
So, for the most part, they can’t explain why they believe the Command (government-run) Economy delivers more equitable outcomes and can’t argue against the view that governments have proven to never have been able to run businesses effectively, any more than they’re able to argue against the importance of the nation state, our natural affinity, even love for our own unique heritages, cultures and traditions.
They’re also (for the most part) unable to argue against the existence of the nation-state, nor why our old traditions, customs, cultures and heritages should be put behind us to make way for a new humanity.
THIS is a very real and imminent crisis on the Left and Conservatives and Libertarians SHOULD NOT let this crisis go to waste.
By confronting the Left at every turn.
Many, including myself, have noticed that most Left-of-Center people ban, block or otherwise refuse to engage those they disagree with. Possibly because they mistakenly believe that theirs is the prevailing political view, despite America having more than twice as many people who identify as Conservative (low of 41% to a high of 47%) as Liberal (a low of 19% to a high of 24%) and feel that “ignoring that view will marginalize it.”
While that’s certainly not true for the Right, which continues to grow, we should always remember it’s NOT true for the Left either. You must always confront those who are ideologically opposed.
That’s a lesson Donald Trump learned early and was foolishly excoriated on BOTH sides over it. Donald Trump NEVER lets an opportunity to confront a foe (sometimes personally), which is mostly counterproductive, but at least he rarely fails to confront no matter how big or small the for might be.
While the ultimate goal has to be a hostile takeover of America’s media. The Trump’s are certainly one of the families that have the means to do that. So are the Koch Brothers, but after their man (Jeb Bush) was dispatched with, they showed their true globalist/Internationalist colors by putting their money behind Hillary Clinton. It will take a collection of free (anti-globalist) thinkers to effectively wrest control of America’s media, in the meantime, the New Media seems very Independent, which is why BOTH Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton blamed “social media” and “fake news,” by which they meant those outlets they disagreed with (Breitbart, Red State, Ace of Spades, Drudge, and many others).
So, individually, what can you do? Continue to confront, NOT with venom, but with facts, stay on topic, every time a person disengages that’s a WIN.
You BOTH know that, even if the party that disengages doesn’t initially reflect on that. When we disengage we effectively surrender. So, NEVER, EVER disengage so long as the other person disagrees.
Also try NOT to respond in anger, or frustration, as difficult as that is. When losing an argument on the facts, many resort to distractions, to trying to provoke the opponent into anger allowing them a graceful exit, claiming “the moral high ground.”
Stay with them and keep making the same points, using the same facts that back them up. They’ll either have to come up with their own (“fake”) facts, which are easily debunked, OR, more likely disengage. In either case, it’s a WIN.
This has proven to work on BIG targets and small. For eons, The New York Daily News allowed comments with their online articles. Like a number of other outlets they’ve stopped that because the bulk of the comments went “against (their) message.” In other venues (CNN, the Washington Post, etc.), Conservative commenters have overwhelmed certain articles to the extent that the outlet simply closed the comments.
Those are WINS. Those outlets were effectively driven to disengage.
A lot of this comes down to temperament. If you are the kind of person who “doesn’t suffer fools gladly,” or has a “quick fuse” and frustrates easily, it’s probably not the best strategy for you, but it’s an effective and increasingly necessary strategy, as it effectively cows those who disagree. That minor triumph is an inroad and lots of them together form a cascading ideological storm.
For those who love and honor our individual and disparate heritages and cultures, values our traditions and customs and cherish the individual countries of our birth...no fight is more vital.