What's Wrong with the Right?
The crisis in Church and State
This is a post for my paying subscribers, many of whom have asked me to say more about the political economy I am writing for our postliberal future.
In it, I try to define what is right from wrong, how we know this, why we have forgotten this distinction, and how this informs what we should call the Right in politics.
Do tell me in the comments if you think this was worth your time, as I have more to say on this matter but do not wish to bore you.
This will take you 15 minutes to read.
CONTENTS
What is wrong with the world
What is right, and what does the “Right” have to do with this?
The crisis in Church and State
The technique of regime change: war and social revolution
One technique, two forms of permission to destroy
The Great Subtraction: the political technique of the 20th Century
Both State Religions of the West are dying
The political economy of the Common Good
WHAT IS WRONG WITH THE WORLD TODAY?
Israel’s latest regime change war is producing another round of regime change at home in the West.
Before the shortages hit home, as they likely will in the next two weeks, the most obvious rift is over who is right about the war.
This division now includes a new friend/enemy distinction between the White House and the Vatican. The crisis is compounded by the fact that neither of these institutions serve their stated roles. The US government no longer serves the American people, their interests, and is no longer the leader of the free world.
The Vatican no longer teaches the religion whose political economy could restore our civilisation. This is an introduction to the depth of the crisis which has consumed our Church and State, suggesting how understanding these aspects of reality can help you distinguish between Right and wrong thinking.
What is right, and what does the Right have to do with it?
Firstly, Trump is neither right nor Right. His war is wrong, and so is he in abandoning the cause of the Right for that of Israel.
Secondly, the Vatican is not wrong about the war, but that does not make it right about everything else, and as we shall see, this is because the Vatican is not Right either.
What is right and wrong, and what is left of the Right when we understand this?
This essay is an attempt to explain what the “Right” is in the political sense, what this means in essence, and thereby what it is to be right about things.
I will argue that the prosperity Zionism of Trump is neither Right nor right, and that though the Vatican is right about opposing the war, its motives and meanings more generally are not right (nor Right) either.
This is because what is Right is essentially the defence of civilisation, and what is wrong with the White House and the Vatican is they are a contest between two wrongs presented as righteous.
In brief, the Vatican agrees with the world outside the Zionist lobby that the war is an act of reckless devastation whose effects could be apocalyptic.
Where this right ends and wrong begins is that the Vatican does not defend the civilisation developed over the past thousand years or so.
In fact, it promotes the Liberal State Religion, a rainbow cult of net zero and open borders1. This is ultimately neither political nor religious at all because the aim of this elite agenda is to replace all civilisation with itself, by means of the manufacture of mass belief in itself.
The crisis in our state mirrors that in the Church. There is a division between the stated mission of these institutions and the State Religion they actually promote.
The US promotes the State Religion of Prosperity Zionism. Elsewhere, as in the Vatican, Western elites promote the State Religion of “Global Liberalism”.
The Vatican, the WEF, the governments of the Anglosphere and Europe are in agreement on open borders, rainbow flags and the climate cult. For now.
So much for what is wrong. What then is right about the Right? The Right is obviously refracted through its partisan factions, each mobilised in outrage at some aspect of the general crisis.
Some on the right think market worship is the Right. Some think it is State Worship, others identify the Right with Zionism, its cutout project of National Conservatism, its astroturf populism of counter-jihad.
Few on the right realise that demonisation towards the permissioning of the destruction of muslims is a technique which can and will be used on the next target, which will include you if you are not a friend to Zionism and its aims.
This last point is hard to see, as there are obvious problems with fostering a large muslim population in Europe, which includes the rape of Britain and is complicated by the prohibition of basic facts about reality.
One such fact is that tribes and their customs, which you might call “cultures”, are different in significant ways. This does not mean we must kill each other. It is in fact a strong invitation to seek a separate peace in place of unifying permanent war.
Another fact, often missed, is the regime change wars supplied the mass migration crisis which is now used by the Israel lobby to justify further regime change towards its own strategic goals.
A very few on the right have noticed the remarkable similarity in the technique of regime change abroad and at home.
States targeted for assassination are labelled murderous, killers of their own people, terrorist. These states are then bombed into anarchy. The logic is “the leaders of these states are killers of their own people, so we must kill more of their people to save them”.
This is the technique of the military-political wing of regime change which “changes” regimes abroad - replacing order with chaos.
This is the right (and Right) way to understand regime change: war abroad, social revolution at home towards the destruction of our civilisation for power and profit.
At home, groups and individuals targeted for neutralisation are labelled antisemitic, racist, transphobic, extremist - even terrorist.
Actual terrorists who carry out actual terror attacks are always known to the authorities as terrorists beforehand. The Manchester Arena bomber was trained and radicalised in Libya, during the US/UK backed campaign to kill its leader and collapse the Libyan State. For example.
Labelling people at home in this way gives permission to kill them. You can kill their liberty by imprisoning them. You kill their speech by banning it. You kill their argument by criminalising it. Calling people these names dehumanises and demonises them, just as calling other states these names does the same.
Both aspects of the regime change technique permission destruction at home and abroad. Neither is Right, both are wrong.
Anyone who partakes in this technique is not right, and is not Right either.
What is right in the sense of being true, correct and just is to defend the closest correspondence to reality in description and judgment.
What unites the Right from Franco to Peter Hitchens is the defence of civilisation from its enemies.
If you would like to read my work and cannot pay me to write it, send me an email with a brief explanation and I will gift you a free subscription.
If you do pay me to do my work, thank you. I could not do this without your support.
