What is the New Right?
Now that the election has passed, it is time to start creating the future we desire. The Republican party is weak and there is an opportunity to bypass the old gatekeepers and reach the people directly. We have a chance to answer the question: “What is the New Right?”
People with resources and a desire to make change are paying attention to what we do and say. This is a rare opportunity to influence the world around you.
Now is the time.
Ali Alexander explained how the New Right came to be.
The New Yorker described how the New Right distinguished itself from the Alt-right.
And Jeff Giesea first outlined three core ideas of the New Right at the Deploraball. They were:
- Sovereignty
- Economic Nationalism
- America First
But now I want to take these ideas further, expand on them, add to the list. Let’s work together to define what we represent.
What follows is a brainstorm of positions which when taken together begin to represent my idea of what the New Right could be. Consider these a draft of a draft of something to be posted on the front door of the GOPe headquarters.
You’ll see a mix of economic, immigration, education, and cultural positions, including changes to policies on identity, race, and gender.
Reminder, this list is incomplete and just the beginning of the conversation.
Without further ado, I submit to you my ideas on “What is the New Right?”
The New Right
In order to create a more perfect union, we must:
- Defend our borders and put the interests of American citizens first. This includes reinforcing physical borders.
- Create long-term assimilation campaign (ex. 10 years) whose goal is to enhance intergroup trust within our increasingly tribal society. Examples: ”We are America,” “America First,” or “Today’s America.”
- Orient federal policies towards assuring an equality of opportunity rather than an equality of outcomes.
- Acknowledge the inherent differences among American citizens and work towards emphasizing strengths over weakness.
- Honor personal preferences as natural expressions.
- Minimize foreign adventurism and nation building. Military, diplomatic, and economic policies must be focused on enhancing the lives and security of American citizens.
- Foster a national conversation on race, asking ourselves where do we see America in ten years and how do we achieve that vision.
- Provide unequivocal support for freedom and personal liberty for all citizens of America.
- Create a low tax, low regulation environment which enhances the market’s ability to efficiently organize labor, capital, and technology within the borders of the United States.
- Maintain an unwavering commitment to free speech including protecting the speech of those we disagree with.
- Foster a national conversation on feminism, asking ourselves: have the valuable goals of feminism been met and what does the future hold for the movement?
- Foster a national conversation on the state of men in general, asking whether or not boys of all races are succeeding as well they can be.
- Reject a broad amnesty for illegal immigrants to discourage future illegal entries and overstays. Proceed with the compassionate yet compulsory deportation of all illegal immigrants.
- Eliminate sanctuary cities ensuring equal application of existing federal laws across all states and jurisdictions.
- Wherever possible, restore lawmaking and cultural engineering to the most localized jurisdiction possible.
- Eliminate federal criminalization of marijuana, referring the matter to state and local governments.
- Embark on a comprehensive review and reform of university and college expenses, student loan markets, and federal influence over academic policy-making.
- Return to science and evidenced-based decision making, rejecting post-modern assumptions which deny the existence of an objective reality.
- Orient monetary, fiscal, and economic decision making away from GDP growth at all costs and look specifically towards enhancing the standard of living for all Americans.
- Ensure equal access to the internet and eliminate discriminatory policies of electronic utility providers such as domain registrars, web hosting, social media platforms, and search.
- Reduce federal influence on local education. Foster school choice through charter schools. Permit local jurisdictions to determine curricula and testing methods.
- Quickly move to a limited merit-based immigration plan, which requires employer sponsorship. Those employers must then pay a substantial (ex. $20,000) tax into a fund to be used for American citizen job training programs.
- Not discriminate on the basis of any protected class and explicitly reject the hateful politics of supremacy in any form.
Tell me, in your words, What is the New Right?
This list is incomplete, and I am open to feedback. What did I miss? What seems like a good idea? What sounds ridiculous or impossible? What do you think? Tell me, in your words, What is the New Right?
Post a comment below and let me know.
Retweet and share this list to give more people a chance to contribute. Let’s start a real conversation.
This is a rare opportunity to shape the future. Believe me, when I tell you, serious people are paying attention to what we do and say. This is our chance.
I think most, if not all, of these ideas are ones that I support. I’d argue that the focus should be a little different. The issue arises in the [idea] –> [congress] –> [law] pathway. We almost always forget that the president does not make the laws. We have seen with Trump that even someone as forceful as he is can get tripped up by the workings of government and the judiciary.
Further, I fear that even electing more politicians that support the New Right ideas is no guarantee because a transmogrification seems to occur as soon as they get elected. There are structural issues in the federal government that preclude the adoption of any law or regulation that is detrimental to the interests of any entity with enough money to lobby against it.
Maybe the question to ask is: how can we make a Congressman’s life so easy that they have no reason to listen to lobbyist X vs. the actual interests of their constituents?
I look at this a bit like entrepreneurialism. It’s not the idea that’s important, it’s the execution. And that’s where we will get tripped up. We have to be far more clever than ever to advance these ideas and to get them passed as laws.
If I had to pick my top 3 that people would really rally around, I’d pick:
16. Eliminate federal criminalization of marijuana, referring the matter to state and local governments.
17. Embark on a comprehensive review and reform of university and college expenses, student loan markets, and federal influence over academic policy-making.
13. Reject a broad amnesty for illegal immigrants to discourage future illegal entries and overstays. Proceed with the compassionate yet compulsory deportation of all illegal immigrants.
Thanks for the comment.
Yes, of course the President doesn’t make law. To me these ideas are meant to be the basis of a platform, not a demand of Presidential action. This means congress should rally behind them and work together to move them forward, or least some derivative of the idea. Also, this is just a first first draft and just meant to be a conversation starter.
The monied interests are always going to be a problem. It is something which needs to be addressed. I considered including something around pernicious money influences, but I couldn’t articulate it the right way. I’m open to suggestions on it. What do you think?
Finally, I agree with you those three points you highlighted are likely to be popular. They’d make great running points in upcoming elections.
elimination of marijuana is popular on the left and center but not on the right, which (rightfully, IMO) views drug use as a serious social ill. Especially with the opioid epidemic currently spreading. I don’t think it’s a hill worth dying on.
If it is framed as a state’s right issue, then states and local jurisdictions can appease their local voters however they see fit. If Trump wants to build a larger coalition after he wins the Republican nomination, offering pot decriminalization is a great way to do it.
the problem with making it a states rights issue is that it’s nearly impossible to control drug flow from states that legalize it. Not to mention that the feds have constitutional control of interstate commerce, making it a federal issue.
If it’s not a hill worth dying on then is common sense?
Conflating the opioid epidemic with cannabis use is one of the tools used historically, and to this day, to keep a consenting adults and medical patients from using cannabis products for recreation or medication.
Cannabis is a federally classified as a schedule 1 drug. Right there with Heroin. Anyone with common sense knows how ridiculously stupid that is.
Further, the “New Right” has the best chance of understanding how and why Cannabis was prohibited in the first place. Much of it having to do with the prohibition of growing Hemp as a national resource.
Powerful people involved in large industries like timber, petroleum, etc used their ownership of the media to spread disinformation to conflate Cannabis with Hemp and demonize Cannabis users using racism and hysteria.
Think about it. Henry Ford was creating automobiles built with hemp composite panels fueling them on fuel made from hemp ethanol.
That was squashed.
Almost everything created from petroleum can be made from hemp. Plastics, fuel, paint, etc. I am no way saying that this it is possible now to replace petroleum. Just that it’s a reality and there was once an opportunity.
Big timber hated hemp because you can make paper products from it. And so on.
Point is that mega corporations and financial interests using disinformation through a controlled media should be something the New Right is well aware of and they should fight for truth and common sense equally across the board.
Imagine the benefits of introducing Hemp, once again, into our national agriculture. It is one of the most useful and versatile crops that has an incalculable number of uses from paper, plastics, fabric, fuel, building materials.
To me that opportunity seems like the definition of America First.
Well said, thank you.
And on top that, my data shows a big majority of Democrat to Deplorable voters favor federal decriminalization. So do a bunch of people on the left. Part of politics is doing the ‘right thing’ but you can’t do that unless you win. Pot decrim is a winning position for a wide coalition.
Those opposed are generally willfully ignorant and promoting some other competing interest. There is money in prohibition for some groups.
Copying and pasting to Jack Murphy..
I agree with Johnny. Our country has been fighting a failed “war on drugs”
since the 80’s. My own 82yr old mother has become an opioid addict due
to a never ending supply provided by doctors for years. The doctors are only interested in the money earned from creating more addicts. I think you would be better served to have a platform outlining anti-addiction instead of pro-marijuana.
I agree with Johnny. Our country has been fighting a failed war on drugs since the 80’s. My own 82yr old mother has become an opioid addict due to a never ending supply provided by doctors for years. I think you would be better served to have a platform outlining anti-addiction instead of pro-marijuana.
7 is not doable right now, environment for open discussion is getting worse. if open discussion occurred I’d expect rifts to get worse, not better. other points related to this are gonna be hard to enforce because nobody in power is interested in them (including most republicans)
9 sounds like libertarian BS, both the left and the right is increasingly uninterested in more freedom for corporations. this point alone will keep me out of the “new” right entirely. IMO, laisezz-faire is pretty much dead and it’s not coming back (it wasn’t even a good idea when it was first invented).
16 is likely to have disastrous repercussions. it’ll take away gang income, but the violent psychopaths that make up the gangs won’t suddenly disappear. We could have a huge crisis on our hands if they start, say, engaging in home invasions to make up for lost income. Especially with jobs disappearing and our ability to create new make-believe jobs severely stunted by the fact that we already have too many of those.
The biggest problem with the new right, like with the alt right, is that you all pussied out over charlottesville. Trump stood up to the narrative and laid out a path for victory. Cuckservatives and neocons fled the battlefield. You, Vox Day, Cernovich, etc. fled the battlefield. You all thought it was a good opportunity to eliminate the nazis (an irrelevant faction which nevertheless cannot be eliminated) and traded up your own basic liberties (in Vox Day’s case I suspect it was because he thinks, erroneously, that he or others on his side can just replace all the vital media infrastructure that progressives control, and that he will personally benefit from the right’s banishment from sites like twitter and facebook). Trump was pretty much left with MPC (where everyone thinks he can do no wrong) and a handful of old school conservative talking heads (Coulter, Steyn, Carlson) to take on the entire leftist machine.
I don’t think publishing a manifesto will solve the inherent problem on the right, which is that it consists of a bunch of (relative) losers with no social or political power engaging in constant bitchslapping competitions. You, Spencer, Vox Day, Cernovich etc. all gather about the same respect from me on this front (and it’s not much) after that weekend. And I doubt I’m the only one that noticed. And I want to offer some advice so I’m not criticizing just for the sake of criticizing but I suspect the requirement (a complete shift in attitude about the whole issue) is too much to ask. Lots of big egos at stake.
Not sure how we could abandon Spencer and his nazi’s after Charlottesville when I’ve been anti Spencer and his nazi’s since the jump. I’m glad he is fucking up all over the place. He has always been a liability and will continue to be so. I’m not sure you see the pieces on the field accurately.
Regarding #9, When I wrote that, I thought in my head, well, except in certain cases when public interests can be advanced by manipulating the market place. My libertarian dreams died years ago when reality proved them to be retarded, but in general a low tax low regulation environment is a good idea. But in the case of the major tech monopolies right now, something may need to be done..
The point of these ideas here isn’t to judge them against whether or not GOPe figures are willing to take them on, but rather to force them into having the discussion.
Even though I disagree with your takes, appreciate the feedback.
I’m talking about abandoning Trump, not Spencer. Trump tried to steer the discussion towards left wing violence (which unlike nazis is a serious issue for all of us) and the rest of you joined up with the media and the rest of the GOP to take out your frustration on nazis. the result was the normalization of banishing right wingers for thought crimes (starting with the daily stormer) Spencer is and always has been an idiot and attention whore but lately I’m starting to think the latter now applies not just to Spencer but also to 95% of right wing figures, major and minor. IE: there’s no good strategic reason for vox day to plaster his name on alt tech projects like infogalactic and gab, he’s a liability for them but he does it anyway.
I rarely agree with your take but I appreciate the engagement.
I think plenty of us have been focused on left wing violence. Cernovich went to the White House Briefing room and demanded the media cover it. I’ve written about Antifa more than once, as have many other people. No one let go of that to pile on the nazis.
Timing is everything. There should have been a solid shield wall when it counted. Now the precedent has been set, it’ll be much harder for anyone on the right other than Trump to hold a rally, his supporters will continue to be assaulted unmolested and tech companies feel comfortable enough that they’ve started purging even fairly mainstream conservative websites like jihadwatch.
I understand what Johnny is trying to relay. AltRt isn’t nazi, racist or supremacist. They are white nationalists and anti-Jew. That leaves them the only half sane “group” willing to openly support white people. I am willing to dare say most AltRt aren’t anti-Jew or a white nationalist. They feel like the AltRt is the only thing out there that can give them any hope of representation. My family marched south to fight and die to END slavery. The statues represent them as well. To remove the statues, is to remove my family sacrifice as well. If you’re a white male, it doesn’t matter how qualified you are in your craft, you will be offered a job after those who are considered to be some form of a minority. If you honestly are interested in “equality for all”, you too would be willing show open public support for white people. Not behind the scenes. But in front of the cameras. Until then, many white people will be reluctant to support you. Viewing you as just another bumper sticker slogan silently supporting the war on whites.
I don’t think I wrote equality for all anywhere. That’s what I want to avoid. What I want to have happen reorient our national thinking onto equality of opportunity not equality of outcomes.
You’re not getting what we’re saying.. Many whites are now paranoid. It would behoove you to spell it out some place. A belief in job hiring based on qualifications only holding no bias towards skin color or sex. Stand in front of a camera and show public support for white people. Back President Trump when he calls out the wrong doings on MANY sides at the moment he says it. It’s honestly that simple.
Racial tensions is one of the biggest problems at this time. We are on the verge of another civil war. You asked for input of what people would like to see. This is mine and Johnny’s input.
1) Things like “equality for all” make a great bumper sticker. In reality it’s “Equality for anyone who isn’t white. Especially that evil white man”. This is the reason why Alt Rt has taken hold. White people are not only being ignored, we’re being demonized. God help anyone who is a white man. In my opinion (what ever it’s worth), if you truly want people believe you, it needs to be stressed whites will be represented as well. It doesn’t need to be in the outlined in the platform. However, I do believe it would behoove the “cause” for this to be stressed some place in the lead in.
2) Transgender issues are a huge issue.
A)Young children who shouldn’t know what the opposite sex looks like naked are being forced to shower with each other. Not that long ago, an act like that would have been considered a sex crime.
B) Women in the military are being forced to shower with Trans before reassignment surgery. Showers and living quarters in the military are open bay. Some trans are heterosexual or bi. To not address these concerns would be a misstep.
3) Religious rights. Does or will the “group” believe businesses have the right to refuse services to that which is against their beliefs?
4) Constitution. Is/will the “group” be pro-constitution as it is in its current form or believe the constitution showed be altered? If altered, what & how?
I am going to do a video, perhaps a series to pick up on this thread. And I plan on quoting (and giving credit) for this. Essentially my feedback is I think I agree with all of that, but too many words. It is my opinion the but what many are calling the New Right / alt-light could stand for orthodox Christian values, classic Western civilization and individual Liberty.
Note the first one which will get a lot of complaints. I am not saying everyone has to be a orthodox Christian, but you have to be ok living in a society with orthodox Christian norms. Your gender situation is your business (individual Liberty) but the norms of society are based upon orthodox Christianity.
I also think this is some what close to the coalition that started America. Economic libertarians and absolute Christian fundamentalists made an agreement to cooperate. And American was born. White Nationalist / alt-right understand the truth that politics is downstream from culture. They err to suggest culture is downstream from race. To me culture is downstream from an “accepted moral norms.” And for many of us, that is orthodox Christianity.
I’d be interested to see what you come up with. Link back to the video here when you’re done. Thanks for reading.
It’s been less than a year but almost an eternity in politics. Looks like the right is on the ropes, Trump is looking increasingly isolated, dems set to swarm mid-terms, no ray of hope shining anywhere. Pretty demoralizing.