Is the extreme right a conservative version of Marxism?
James Lindsay made experiment where he sent the American Reformer a search-and-replaced version of Marx’s “The Communist Manifesto,” replacing “the proletariat class” with “the New Christian Right,” and “bourgeoisie” with “classical liberalism,” and so on. The result got published (8:51).
The screenshotted passage in the video, “The weapons with which liberalism [bourgeoisie] felled tradition [feudalism] to the ground are now turned against liberalism [the bourgeoisie] itself!” was actually just some poetic rhetoric, which when boiled down is rather bland. It didn’t make a substantive policy equation between Marxism and the New Christian Right. It only suggests that, being self-inconsistent, classical liberalism [the bourgeoisie] could not sustain power.
So I wonder, how close is the comparison is between Marxism and the NCR? Are they similar at all? I doubt it. But I also doubt myself enough that perhaps I need to do a comparison of the ideas for myself. Without having researched deeply though, all this shows to me is that the editors considered classical liberalism to be the enemy.
Is classical liberalism an absolute good, needing improvement, or a failed concept?
The condemnation of classical liberalism is an interesting thing. Classical liberalism can be criticized for having been too tolerant. After all, it politely allowed the far left to undermine the ideas of objective truth, of equal protection under the law, of the sacrosanctity of an impartial judiciary, and of the need for a separation of powers. The result was a color war on biblical values, unmitigated reverse racism, the near defeat of 1A and 2A, a barely-disguised politicization of the court system, and the rise of an unelected Deep State that took over the government.
So classical liberals lacked the teeth to stand their ground.
What enabled this, IMHO, was the government’s favoring of a few (and therefore easily controlled) large corporations dominating national discourse. Fair and square competition, and at times antitrust principles, need to triumph over unrestricted capitalism. The alternative is simply another name for socialism - where property and resources under monopoly control are in reality controlled by the state.
socialism: a theory or system of social organization that advocates the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, capital, land, etc., by the community as a whole, usually through a centralized government.
SOCIALISM Definition & Meaning | Dictionary.com (emphasis mine)
Does the woke right even believe in 1A?
Lindsay asserts that the far right now clamors for a dismantling of constitutional ideals, similar to the woke left, but from the opposite side. At 33:30, he claims that the idea “This is a Christian nation, and the Christians of this nation demand that we have Christian leaders dominate this country” is becoming a common sentiment, and that this means going against the First Amendment.
I actually believe that wanting Christian leaders is not a per se violation of the First Amendment. What was such a violation?
- The denial of equal funding for elective religious education. (Never forget John Adams: “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”)
- The legal compulsion to surrender children to indoctrination and even surgical mutilation, in accordance with new fads of sexual identity, permissiveness, and wokeness.
- To permit businesses and universities to espouse affirmative action. That is, to discriminate in hiring and admissions on the basis of immutable characteristics, and whether the applicant submitted to woke beliefs.
I believe that someone who is traditionally faithful, whether Protestant, Catholic, or Jewish, would have a healthier view than any Democrat, of protecting faith in general. Biblical faith in particular. The institutional discrimination we conservatives have been experiencing must end. The OBBBA’s school choice provision is a major step towards that.
That said, we must not forget how the Protestants persecuted the Catholics in England, and how the Mayflower pilgrims (being outside the English Christian establishment) were fleeing to America from religious persecution in the Old World. The Quakers, the Shakers, the Deists, Theists in general, the Catholics and yes, the Jews whom George Washington addressed, were all afraid of America becoming a nation with one national religion. In his words:
All possess alike liberty of conscience and immunities of citizenship… for, happily, the Government of the United States, which gives to bigotry no sanction, to persecution no assistance, requires only that they who live under its protection should demean themselves as good citizens in giving it on all occasions their effectual support.
~ George Washington, 1790, Letter to the Hebrew Congregation of Newport
“Alternative ways of knowing” in the woke right
Lindsay also suggests that the “woke right” is falling off the plateau of truth. Because “[they]'ve been lied to about a lot”, the woke right have begun to say that “what They don’t want us to know, whatever They don’t want us to talk about, is more likely to be true.” (51:02)
I’d say it’s a good thing in general that we have the Streisand Effect. But it can lead us astray. While it can point us in fruitful directions to investigate, and often such conspiracy “theories” prove to be more than mere theories; sometimes they are just crackpot ideas. The way to tell is by seeing if there is reliable corroborating evidence. We cannot relinquish our personal responsibility to make that evaluation for ourselves.
