The Conservative's Insecurity

Conservatives don’t think about “winning” battles with the Left, just “getting through” them. On the rare occasions they do think about winning, it is by showing themselves more adherent to leftist ideals than the Left.

This apologetic strategy has brought conservatives defeat in all cultural battles (and most economic battles) for a century now, but still they cling to it, constantly sure that despite its record of total failure, it will get them through the next battle, or the next one, or definitely the one after that…

Underlying this defeatist approach are two factors: the inherent passivity of the conservative psyche, and the supplanting long ago of traditionalism by progressivism. Ever since, the conservative has recognised that the Left really believe in progressivism while he merely “accepts” it. His lack of fealty to the orthodoxy is felt by the conservative (who yearns to conform) as his secret sin, which he constantly has to hide and deny. He feels always on the brink of being unmasked as a pretender.

All of this results in him believing that the Left have the moral high ground. Even if they are naive, clumsy or over-zealous, they are righteous - and that means conservatives must be wretched. The Left have a purity of intent, a simplicity of vision and a total absence of self-doubt that the conservative claims to find amusing but actually finds intimidating.

As a result, he approaches battles with the Left convinced both that he will be defeated, and that he probably should be. All he can do is delude himself about his situation and the nature of the Left, and in the meantime try to limit the damage they inflict upon him.

The battered wife desperately assures her husband, turning to her with clenched fists, that she ironed his suit this morning. She would like the bathroom refitted, the lounge painted a different colour… she would like all kinds of things, but from day to day she can think only of placating her husband’s wrath. As a result, she will never get anything she wants.

But at least the battered wife knows that the situation is wrong. The conservative isn’t sure. His natural want is to be at one with his society, in tune with its orthodoxy. But progressivism repels him so he cannot be at one with it, only cowed by it. For this subterfuge, he sees himself as a fraud. Meantime, he knows that the Left actually are at one with the orthodoxy. So what right does he have, really, to oppose them?

But much worse than the conservative, in his eyes, are the right-wingers who go further than him, who actually openly defy progressivism. At least he has the decency to pretend! These nutters explicitly reject the orthodoxy of their own society! They threaten to upset everything! And worse still, the Left associate him with these people!

This is why, time after time after time, the conservative rushes to disavow right-wing radicals. It is to protect normalcy (a normalcy that he hates) and to prevent people realising that he hates it, because then he would be revealed for what he is: a traitor to his own society.

Having disavowed the radicals, cut ties with them, barred them from his organisations and warned colleagues never to help them, the conservative feels a glimmer of security and hope. The work he has done for the Left, castrating his own side, surely proves that he is “reasonable” and “moderate”. They will surely appreciate this and reward him with respectability and “a seat at the table”. He will enjoy some influence on how society develops, and be able to help the Left identify and disavow their own radicals.

This never happens. The Left never give him any power whatsoever. They rarely even give him the treat of calling him “respectable”. He remains, perpetually, under suspicion and having to prove himself to them, his enemy, day after day.

But he keeps hoping, and he keeps disavowing people on his own side, and hoping, and disavowing, hoping, disavowing... That is his lot, dictated by his nature.

The conservative is the perfect manager of decline, because he is comfortable with decline. He sort of “believes” in it as the lesser of two evils. Action - rejecting the orthodoxy, snubbing the Left, taking his own side, supplanting progressivism and actually saving his society - would be, in his eyes, the behaviour of a mad radical.

---

The conservative’s two fundamental problems are:

• he is naturally passive and sleepy

• he doesn’t like the idea of changing society

As a result, he always defers to the Left when they want to change society. Averse to doctrine and hysteria, he defaults to being “the adult in the room”, the “reasonable” person who can “bring some much-needed common sense” to the lefties and “make sure they don’t go too far”. To that end, he seeks their trust and admiration. To that end, he sells out his own radicals. This strategy results in him neutering his own side and facilitating the Left in achieving exactly what they want to achieve. He isn’t strong enough to thwart the radical Left, but he has thwarted the radical Right who are strong enough to do so - or rather, would have been.

After a century of this process, we are living in Woke World, Globohomo World, Rainbow World, the Yookay. It is a nightmare and we are heading for permanent extinction. While it would be unfair to blame this on the Left as such - most of them are just useful idiots - this is the world they approve of. Even if it isn’t perfect for them, they will defend it to the death.

In this dire context, it is time for the conservative to wise up, man up, and either grow a spine or get out of the way. He must either make peace with right-wing radicals or give way to them entirely. The very future of the European race is at stake now. Milquetoast conservatism - in policies and attitudes - didn’t prevent this and will never fix it.