The evolution of Netanyahu's governance and how it impacted Israel's character

Netanyahu is, in my opinion, an avatar of the development of the conservative movement worldwide, so I want to compare his development in terms of style of government and how it affected Israel.

Netanyahu began his career as something between a Nixonian and a classic Reaganite/Bush Jr conservative. A combination of pragmatism and manipulation of fears and negative sentiments in Israeli society through dog whistles and opposition to the establishment and a sense of persecution, and an optimistic capitalist, geopolitical power, basic cultural conservatism and a lot of emphasis on media image and charisma. He was a friend of Rupert Murdoch and many Republicans who flourished in Reagan's and later Gingrich's Washington, was connected to the traditional evangelicals of expensive suits and megachurches, etc. In Israel, he gathered around him traditional right-wing intellectuals who opposed Oslo and dreamed of a Reagan-style revolution/Nixon's counter-revolution.

In his first term in 1996, he was very aggressive against government institutions and the media, felt that the old elites were after him, attacked the media and legal establishment for trying to prosecute him, and tried to fire anyone he didn't like. At the same time, he tried to privatize everything he could and lead a cultural revolution of free markets and nationalism.

Netanyahu was ultimately defeated in the election because of his style, dragged into the interrogation room on live television where he again blamed the constitutional establishment, but narrowly escaped and went into political exile. Netanyahu concluded that the old establishment and the 'elites' were too powerful and was afraid of them.

When Netanyahu was elected again, from 2009 to 2015, Netanyahu was afraid of the state institutions and the old establishment and tried as much as he could not to undermine them except by interfering in the media. He tried to lead a slow peace process, was neutered by Shimon Peres on the one hand and did not have the power that he would have later, so he was restrained and managed out of nowhere a cold war in the state institutions or a ceasefire after the trauma of the investigations in 1999.

The turning point comes in the 2015 elections: Netanyahu was closed in on every side, the left was preparing for an easy victory after feeling that the public was fed up with Netanyahu, but Bibi started one of the most aggressive campaigns ever in Israel with Trump-style incitement (ironically, this was before Trump entered the political system), presented himself as persecuted by the elites who work against the right and want to sell the country, destroyed everyone on the right and left, won against all odds. The result was known in advance:

Since 2015, Netanyahu has realized that he can do whatever he wants without regard for anyone and that he is actually 'above' the old elites, will always receive backing from his supporters, and can finally do everything he has always wanted. From the strategy of 'silence will be answered with silence' against the elites, he emerged with full force, with attacks on every institution that was identified with the left and every institution that he perceived as disloyal, as well as attempts to take over television and establish alternative right-wing media, attempts to take over the public service and fire people he perceives as disloyal and "deep state", business economic reforms, but ones that will allow Netanyahu's loyalists and right-wing businessmen in the business community to create a monopoly, cultivation of right-wing influencers who emerged from new media, and a more conservative-traditional discourse.

The important stage came in 2019 - when the investigations against Netanyahu began, the attack escalated all the way to the Supreme Court, and Netanyahu's rhetoric cuased the right to change, moderate figures are seen as subservient to the 'elites', which paved the way for a new generation of young right-wingers (including Netanyahu's son), who feel that the old right has failed - and the new right needs to take over the state's institutions and 'truly govern.'

From there we have reached today's point, when this rhetoric and the new generation of right-wingers who want to rule have paved the way for more extreme figures like Ben Gvir, who basically represents the extension of "Bibism", and more extreme than Netanyahu himself.

The final point in the revolution is after October 7: Netanyahu, and the right, did not moderate but rather became extreme in every arena: the feeling of betrayal by the security establishment, the accusation of the protesters against the legal reform and their perception as traitors, the empowerment of the Deep State theory, and the vision of the 'Super Sparta'. Netanyahu's propaganda channel, Channel 14, has turned politics into a daily struggle, a situation in which people consume his propaganda every day and establish an identity based on it and are sometimes criticizing Netanyahu when he is not extreme enough, and the rise of conspirators and Post-Liberal intellectuals. Netanyahu and his people have become consumed with a desire for revenge, demanding complete control over the existing establishment to the point where they are backing street thugs against opponents of the regime.

To some extent, Netanyahu's evolution represents the evolution of the Republican Party. From a conservative, Hawkish Neo-Con, to a paranoid 'persecuted by the establishment', to a fundamental takeover of the existing order and a reshaping of the image of the state.

reddit.com
u/Amazing-Buy-1181 — 4 hours ago

Serious question: What are Stephen Miller's views (if any) beyond immigration?

Serious question: What are Stephen Miller's views (if any) beyond immigration? Like, he is described as a true believer and a shadow President who really dictates the agenda, but I didn't manage to understand what his views are aside from his tough stance on immigration, which isn't so unique among Conservatives. What makes him stand out in his agenda, aside from being tough on immigration? Does he even have any views?

reddit.com
u/Amazing-Buy-1181 — 2 days ago

How do you define MAGA true believers, and how do you define grifters?

Who in MAGA are grifters, and who are "true believers"? Usually, the right is treated as an incoherent mess, but it does have ideas, and while based on Trump's cult of personality, some people in it do have ideology and true beliefs.

IMO:

The likes of Rubio, Ted Cruz, etc and other former Never Trumpers/establishment Republicans do believe in Neo-Conservatism and the old school Reagan era Christianity, but care more about their career, so they are dishonest Trump loyalists.

Vance is a grifter, but he does have some core beliefs, like the redneck grievance and hatred of immigrants.

Musk and the tech-bros are grifters who care only about profit.

Alex Jones is a mystery. It does look like he plays a character, but he has been doing it for so long that maybe he truly believes it.

The Murdoch family are grifters without beliefs

Roger Stone is a grifter

Tucker Carlson is now not MAGA, but he is definitely a grifter.

The likes of Michael Anton are an interesting case. He started as a Bush Republican Neocon, but since 2016 became so radicalized and adopted Trumpism and went into the Curtis Yarvin area of fascism that he definitely seems to embrace Ultra nationalists beliefs.

Steve Bannon was described by many as an honest Right-Wing Populist-Nationalist who had a vision of dismantling the establishment for years, but his ties with Epstein may suggest that he is just a grifter.

The Heritage/NatCon guys, in my opinion, are honest Christian Nationalists/Illiberal Nationalists who are using Trump to advance an anti-Liberal authoritarian vision.

Stephen Miller is definitely a true believer.

Feel free to add this is what came to my mind

reddit.com
u/Amazing-Buy-1181 — 6 days ago

Michael Anton as a case study for Republican radicalizing

I read a bit about this guy, and apparently, he was originally a typical Neo-Con from the Bush era, not something special, but he was one of the first old republicans to get un the Trump train, but he didn't just supported him as a Republican but became super radicalized, from laying the foundations for the post liberal right to getting into Curtis Yarvin-level of fascism. Its only from some articles I saw on the internet, I don't know much aside from that

reddit.com
u/Amazing-Buy-1181 — 6 days ago

Dynamics within right-wing movements, and MAGA especially - And how a growing movement that started with Trumpism gets its independent fascist-populist character

Since 2016, but especially after Trump's loss in 2021, Trump and his movement have removed all the old establishment that did not align behind Trump on January 6, including intellectuals or old donors. Trump also developed the "right-wing media", a right-wing media and ecosystem that would fight the media and the media that he decided brought him down, which also gave a voice to the young base, among others (young Catholics who started out as trolls on the Internet, such as J.D. Vance's associates), and with the vacuum created after Trump removed the right-wing intellectuals who did not align behind him, radical intellectuals who are interested in a fundamental right-wing revolution or young and aggressive influencers began to emerge (Charlie Kirk was moderate compared to this guys but was representative of this, TPUSA, Proud Boys). For example, look at Jack Posobiec. Someone who started as an alt-right internet troll and provocateur, rose to fame due to his loyalty to Trump, but is actually more radical than him, and due to the vacuum created in the GOP, became an influential voice.

Trump encouraged the violence of his supporters, and groups arose who believed in conspiracies that came from the right-wing media and Trumpist ideology, mainly thugs from the lower class, and this is how groups like the Proud Boys were created. With processes that include a combination of modern religious traditionalism and media, a new group has emerged on the right, consisting of thugs, criminals, and young activists who were originally part of the leader's personality cult, but due to their devotion to the personality cult and the fight against the "Deep State", they began to develop an independent ideology that emerged from the personality cult and the propaganda machine, but is also more extreme.

What’s really interesting is how this has evolved beyond just a Trump fan club. It’s developed its own internal logic and its own set of goals. We’re even seeing tension now where some of the more radical activists criticize Trump for not being "America First" enough. It’s becoming a post-Trump project.

The Trump phenomenon acted as a catalyst for a distinct social and political sub-movement, essentially fostering a new class of operators. This emerging cohort is a mix of aggressive thugs like the J6 thugs, a specifically vocal segment of traditionalist Catholics, and a new breed of opportunists-like various crypto-entrepreneurs and grifters-who see the state as a vehicle for their own enrichment. As the movement drifts toward this new configuration, these figures have begun to coalesce around J.D. Vance, representing a shift where the energy of the original Trump personality cult is being captured and rebranded by a younger, more radicalized, and often ethically flexible political clique.

And so thugs like Enrique Tarrio become entrenched in right-wing politics and dictate its political dynamics, alongside fascist intellectuals and traditional nationalist media influencers.

reddit.com
u/Amazing-Buy-1181 — 6 days ago

Do you think people actually misread the right in the sense of its motives?

Since 2016, but especially after Trump's loss in 2021, Trump and his movement have removed all the old establishment that did not align behind Trump on January 6, including intellectuals or old donors. Trump also developed the "right-wing media", a right-wing media and ecosystem that would fight the media and the media that he decided brought him down, which also gave a voice to the young base, among others (young Catholics who started out as trolls on the Internet, such as J.D. Vance's associates), and with the vacuum created after Trump removed the right-wing intellectuals who did not align behind him, radical intellectuals who are interested in a fundamental right-wing revolution or young and aggressive influencers began to emerge (Charlie Kirk was moderate compared to this guys but was representative of this, TPUSA, Proud Boys). For example, look at Jack Posobiec. Someone who started as an alt-right internet troll and provocateur rose to fame due to his loyalty to Trump, but is actually more radical than him, and due to the vacuum created in the GOP, became an influential voice. For those who are versed in the internal GOP dynamics, do you think a growing faction on the right can be defined as becoming classically fascist, independent of Trump/will be in the future, or will the whole thing die with Trump?

reddit.com
u/Amazing-Buy-1181 — 6 days ago

How do you define MAGA true believers, and how do you define grifters?

Who in MAGA are grifters, and who are "true believers"? Usually, the right is treated as an incoherent mess, but it does have ideas, and while based on Trump's cult of personality, some people in it do have ideology and true beliefs.

IMO:

The likes of Rubio, Ted Cruz, etc and other former Never Trumpers/establishment Republicans do believe in Neo-Conservatism and the old school Reagan era Christianity, but care more about their career, so they are dishonest Trump loyalists.

Vance is a grifter, but he does have some core beliefs, like the redneck grievance and hatred of immigrants.

Musk and the tech-bros are grifters who care only about profit.

Alex Jones is a mystery. It does look like he plays a character, but he has been doing it for so long that maybe he truly believes it.

The Murdoch family are grifters without beliefs

Roger Stone is a grifter

Tucker Carlson is now not MAGA, but he is definitely a grifter.

The likes of Michael Anton are an interesting case. He started as a Bush Republican Neocon, but since 2016 became so radicalized and adopted Trumpism and went into the Curtis Yarvin area of fascism that he definitely seems to embrace Ultra nationalists beliefs.

Steve Bannon was described by many as an honest Right-Wing Populist-Nationalist who had a vision of dismantling the establishment for years, but his ties with Epstein may suggest that he is just a grifter.

The Heritage/NatCon guys, in my opinion, are honest Christian Nationalists/Illiberal Nationalists who are using Trump to advance an anti-Liberal authoritarian vision.

Stephen Miller is definitely a true believer.

Feel free to add this is what came to my mind

reddit.com
u/Amazing-Buy-1181 — 7 days ago

Who in MAGA are grifters, and who are "true believers"?

Who in MAGA are grifters, and who are "true believers"? Usually, the right is treated as an incoherent mess, but it does have ideas, and while based on Trump's cult of personality, some people in it do have ideology and true beliefs.

IMO:

The likes of Rubio, Ted Cruz, etc and other former Never Trumpers/establishment Republicans do believe in Neo-Conservatism and the old school Reagan era Christianity, but care more about their career, so they are dishonest Trump loyalists.

Vance is a grifter, but he does have some core beliefs, like the redneck grievance and hatred of immigrants.

Musk and the tech-bros are grifters who care only about profit.

Alex Jones is a mystery. It does look like he plays a character, but he has been doing it for so long that maybe he truly believes it.

The Murdoch family are grifters without beliefs

Roger Stone is a grifter

Tucker Carlson is now not MAGA, but he is definitely a grifter.

The likes of Michael Anton are an interesting case. He started as a Bush Republican Neocon, but since 2016 became so radicalized and adopted Trumpism and went into the Curtis Yarvin area of fascism that he definitely seems to embrace Ultra nationalists beliefs.

Steve Bannon was described by many as an honest Right-Wing Populist-Nationalist who had a vision of dismantling the establishment for years, but his ties with Epstein may suggest that he is just a grifter.

The Heritage/NatCon guys, in my opinion, are honest Christian Nationalists/Illiberal Nationalists who are using Trump to advance an anti-Liberal authoritarian vision.

Stephen Miller is definitely a true believer.

Feel free to add this is what came to my mind

reddit.com
u/Amazing-Buy-1181 — 7 days ago
▲ 41 r/RealTime+1 crossposts

It seems that Nixon replaced Reagan as MAGA's role model and hero.

The new-old hero of the Trump movement is a figure who has always fascinated me and to some extent laid the foundations for a lot of what we see today: United States President Richard Nixon, who serves as a role model for both Trump and Vance and replaced Reagan as the historical model for the Trump movement.

When Trump entered American politics, he originally used MAGA as a reference to Reagan's campaign. Like Reagan, Trump spoke in the language of a war of good versus evil, surrounded himself with evangelical Christians like Pence and Pompeo, and was very useful to evangelicals in the sense that he flirted with their messages of biblical prophecy and promoted issues that were important to them. Trump’s people branded him as Reagan’s successor, whether it was capitalism, religious rhetoric, relations with the Jewish community, anti-terrorism, etc.

Trump in the previous term was surrounded by Reaganists. They refused to swear allegiance to him after January 6, and as a result, he and his supporters overthrew the old GOP establishment and shaped the party in Trump’s image. Trump’s image includes people like Roger Stone, who worked under Nixon and admired him and learned all of his methods. Stone continued to implement these strategies with Trump.

And so, on a topic that has been trending since J.D. Vance said Nixon was impeached - we see that the hero of the MAGA movement is nowNixon.

Nixon and his people, including Roger Stone and Roger Ailes (who would later found Fox News), used Southern Strategy, hey decided that they would go to racist whites from the lower-middle class, conservatives, Christians and peripheral populations who felt that the elites were taking their place and destroying the country's identity, and realized that they could ride on this and turn on this public for Nixon's needs.

Nixon had always been an outsider and felt persecuted by the media and the old establishment, and built much of his image on presenting himself as representing the "silent majority" (a dog whistle for the silent majority being silenced by the elites), speaking in a "law and order" dog whistle against blacks in front of the elites, the media and the establishment.

As president, Nixon recited to his people: the media is the enemy, the academy is the enemy. Stone learned this very well. As president, Nixon tried to cause a revolution against what he felt were the elites who controlled the country. Besides Watergate, he was a paranoid who felt persecuted, tried to use his powers to threaten the media, had a list of enemies that he tried to use his powers against and believed that because he was president he was above the law. Christopher Rufo, one of the ideologues of the Post-Liberal right, hailed Nixon's abuse of power.:

https://www.city-journal.org/article/bring-on-the-counterrevolution

In economics, Nixon was not a classic capitalist either, but exercised state powers and tried to act against his enemies. He imposed tariffs, froze prices and wages, put pressure on the central bank, very un-Reaganist steps that are now being taken in the Trump administration to establish a model in which there is a certain capitalism but also a very clear monopoly of government insiders and state intervention when necessary.

In foreign policy, many MAGAs today are using Nixon as a justification for their policies.

When Nixon fell in the Watergate affair, many of his associates, Roger Stone, Roger Ailes, felt that he fell because he was persecuted and set up by the establishment that did not want him. This is a narrative that was on the fringes of American politics for years and never really matured because the Republican Party was dominated by the old establishment.

When Trump's people took control of the party, this narrative, spread by Roger Stone, among others, seeped in and turned Nixon into a 'tragic hero' in the parallel universe of the resurgent right: Reagan, in their opinion, did damage to the right, who loved globalization who caused the homeless crisis and abandoned the white working class, while Nixon was a true right-winger, a pessimist, who served the peripheral white working class, not a globalist, who tried to take over the state systems that Trump is now taking over and used his powers against the 'enemy within,' a paranoid against the establishment, persecuted for no reason but for his own sake, an ultra-realist in foreign policy who did not enter wars.

u/Amazing-Buy-1181 — 8 days ago

Dynamics within right-wing movements, and MAGA especially

Since 2016, but especially after Trump's loss in 2021, Trump and his movement have removed all the old establishment that did not align behind Trump on January 6, including intellectuals or old donors. Trump also developed the "right-wing media", a right-wing media and ecosystem that would fight the media and the media that he decided brought him down, which also gave a voice to the young base, among others (young Catholics who started out as trolls on the Internet, such as J.D. Vance's associates), and with the vacuum created after Trump removed the right-wing intellectuals who did not align behind him, radical intellectuals who are interested in a fundamental right-wing revolution or young and aggressive influencers began to emerge (Charlie Kirk was moderate compared to this guys but was representative of this, TPUSA, Proud Boys). For example, look at Jack Posobiec. Someone who started as an alt-right internet troll and provocateur, rose to fame due to his loyalty to Trump, but is actually more radical than him, and due to the vacuum created in the GOP, became an influential voice.

Trump encouraged the violence of his supporters, and groups arose who believed in conspiracies that came from the right-wing media and Trumpist ideology, mainly thugs from the lower class, and this is how groups like the Proud Boys were created. With processes that include a combination of modern religious traditionalism and media, a new group has emerged on the right, consisting of thugs, criminals, and young activists who were originally part of the leader's personality cult, but due to their devotion to the personality cult and the fight against the "Deep State", they began to develop an independent ideology that emerged from the personality cult and the propaganda machine, but is also more extreme.

What’s really interesting is how this has evolved beyond just a Trump fan club. It’s developed its own internal logic and its own set of goals. We’re even seeing tension now where some of the more radical activists criticize Trump for not being "America First" enough. It’s becoming a post-Trump project.

The Trump phenomenon acted as a catalyst for a distinct social and political sub-movement, essentially fostering a new class of operators. This emerging cohort is a mix of aggressive thugs like the J6 thugs, a specifically vocal segment of traditionalist Catholics, and a new breed of opportunists-like various crypto-entrepreneurs and grifters-who see the state as a vehicle for their own enrichment. As the movement drifts toward this new configuration, these figures have begun to coalesce around J.D. Vance, representing a shift where the energy of the original Trump personality cult is being captured and rebranded by a younger, more radicalized, and often ethically flexible political clique.

And so thugs like Enrique Tarrio become entrenched in right-wing politics and dictate its political dynamics, alongside fascist intellectuals and traditional nationalist media influencers.

reddit.com
u/Amazing-Buy-1181 — 9 days ago

Dynamics within right-wing movements, and MAGA especially

Since 2016, but especially after Trump's loss in 2021, Trump and his movement have removed all the old establishment that did not align behind Trump on January 6, including intellectuals or old donors. Trump also developed the "right-wing media", a right-wing media and ecosystem that would fight the media and the media that he decided brought him down, which also gave a voice to the young base, among others (young Catholics who started out as trolls on the Internet, such as J.D. Vance's associates), and with the vacuum created after Trump removed the right-wing intellectuals who did not align behind him, radical intellectuals who are interested in a fundamental right-wing revolution or young and aggressive influencers began to emerge (Charlie Kirk was moderate compared to this guys but was representative of this, TPUSA, Proud Boys). For example, look at Jack Posobiec. Someone who started as an alt-right internet troll and provocateur, rose to fame due to his loyalty to Trump, but is actually more radical than him, and due to the vacuum created in the GOP, became an influential voice.

Trump encouraged the violence of his supporters, and groups arose who believed in conspiracies that came from the right-wing media and Trumpist ideology, mainly thugs from the lower class, and this is how groups like the Proud Boys were created. With processes that include a combination of modern religious traditionalism and media, a new group has emerged on the right, consisting of thugs, criminals, and young activists who were originally part of the leader's personality cult, but due to their devotion to the personality cult and the fight against the "Deep State", they began to develop an independent ideology that emerged from the personality cult and the propaganda machine, but is also more extreme.

What’s really interesting is how this has evolved beyond just a Trump fan club. It’s developed its own internal logic and its own set of goals. We’re even seeing tension now where some of the more radical activists criticize Trump for not being "America First" enough. It’s becoming a post-Trump project.

The Trump phenomenon acted as a catalyst for a distinct social and political sub-movement, essentially fostering a new class of operators. This emerging cohort is a mix of aggressive thugs like the J6 thugs, a specifically vocal segment of traditionalist Catholics, and a new breed of opportunists-like various crypto-entrepreneurs and grifters-who see the state as a vehicle for their own enrichment. As the movement drifts toward this new configuration, these figures have begun to coalesce around J.D. Vance, representing a shift where the energy of the original Trump personality cult is being captured and rebranded by a younger, more radicalized, and often ethically flexible political clique.

And so thugs like Enrique Tarrio become entrenched in right-wing politics and dictate its political dynamics, alongside fascist intellectuals and traditional nationalist media influencers.

reddit.com
u/Amazing-Buy-1181 — 9 days ago

Dynamics within right-wing movements, and MAGA especially

Since 2016, but especially after Trump's loss in 2021, Trump and his movement have removed all the old establishment that did not align behind Trump on January 6, including intellectuals or old donors. Trump also developed the "right-wing media", a right-wing media and ecosystem that would fight the media and the media that he decided brought him down, which also gave a voice to the young base, among others (young Catholics who started out as trolls on the Internet, such as J.D. Vance's associates), and with the vacuum created after Trump removed the right-wing intellectuals who did not align behind him, radical intellectuals who are interested in a fundamental right-wing revolution or young and aggressive influencers began to emerge (Charlie Kirk was moderate compared to this guys but was representative of this, TPUSA, Proud Boys). For example, look at Jack Posobiec. Someone who started as an alt-right internet troll and provocateur, rose to fame due to his loyalty to Trump, but is actually more radical than him, and due to the vacuum created in the GOP, became an influential voice.

Trump encouraged the violence of his supporters, and groups arose who believed in conspiracies that came from the right-wing media and Trumpist ideology, mainly thugs from the lower class, and this is how groups like the Proud Boys were created. With processes that include a combination of modern religious traditionalism and media, a new group has emerged on the right, consisting of thugs, criminals, and young activists who were originally part of the leader's personality cult, but due to their devotion to the personality cult and the fight against the "Deep State", they began to develop an independent ideology that emerged from the personality cult and the propaganda machine, but is also more extreme.

What’s really interesting is how this has evolved beyond just a Trump fan club. It’s developed its own internal logic and its own set of goals. We’re even seeing tension now where some of the more radical activists criticize Trump for not being "America First" enough. It’s becoming a post-Trump project.

The Trump phenomenon acted as a catalyst for a distinct social and political sub-movement, essentially fostering a new class of operators. This emerging cohort is a mix of aggressive thugs like the J6 thugs, a specifically vocal segment of traditionalist Catholics, and a new breed of opportunists-like various crypto-entrepreneurs and grifters-who see the state as a vehicle for their own enrichment. As the movement drifts toward this new configuration, these figures have begun to coalesce around J.D. Vance, representing a shift where the energy of the original Trump personality cult is being captured and rebranded by a younger, more radicalized, and often ethically flexible political clique.

And so thugs like Enrique Tarrio become entrenched in right-wing politics and dictate its political dynamics, alongside fascist intellectuals and traditional nationalist media influencers.

reddit.com
u/Amazing-Buy-1181 — 9 days ago
▲ 16 r/thebulwark+2 crossposts

The TheoBros

I kind of became interested in the internal dynamics of fascist/right-wing movements, and I came across this video.

Since 2016, but especially after Trump's loss in 2021, Trump and his movement have removed all the old establishment that did not align behind Trump on January 6, including intellectuals or old donors. Trump also developed the "right-wing media", a right-wing media and ecosystem that would fight the media and the media that he decided brought him down, which also gave a voice to the young Baez, among others (young Catholics who started out as trolls on the Internet, such as J.D. Vance's associates), and with the vacuum created after Trump removed the right-wing intellectuals who did not align behind him, radical intellectuals who are interested in a fundamental right-wing revolution or young and aggressive influencers began to emerge (Charlie Kirk was moderate compared to this guys but was representative of this, TPUSA, Proud Boys).

Trump, with dog whistles and sometimes even aggression, encouraged the violence of his supporters, and groups arose who believed in conspiracies that came from the right-wing media and Trumpist ideology, mainly thugs from the lower class, and this is how groups like the Proud Boys were created. With processes that include a combination of traditionalism and media, a new current has emerged on the right, consisting of thugs, criminals, and young activists who were originally part of the leader's personality cult, but due to their devotion to the personality cult and the fight against the "Deep State", they began to develop an independent ideology that emerged from the personality cult and the propaganda machine, but is also more extreme.

And so thugs like Enrique Tarrio become entrenched in right-wing politics and dictate its political dynamics, alongside fascist intellectuals and traditional nationalist media influencers.

youtube.com
u/Amazing-Buy-1181 — 10 days ago

What Vance gets right about Nixon, and why the right is not an incoherent mess but actually returns to its Nixonian route

This topic is trending now due to Vance's speech at the Nixon library, where he hailed Nixon and blamed the "deep state" for taking him down, while at the same time, we see that the right is becoming critical of Reagan and it reminded me of something I wrote a few weeks ago. Vance is right not that the "deep state" whatever that means took down Nixon, but that Trump's governance and his movement are a modern, exaggerated version of Nixon's governance instead of Reagan.

Trump's neo-Nixonian model seeks to use state power against entrenched elites. In this vision, the Right imagines itself as fighting against traitors from the inside that seek to destroy America, and their economic model is based on the general idea of Capitalism, but a system where Trump can use the robust executive branch to reward allies and punish enemies who refuse to be in line, which is similar to Nixon's abuse of power (Nixon abused power many times not just in Watergate. Nixon getting caught on Watergate is like Al Capone getting caught on taxes)

The right wing of Trump and the people around him, is less Reaganite (aside from the worship of wealth) and more of a modern version of Nixon. Nixon also exploited the hatred of working-class whites for the establishment and liberal culture and, through a dog whistle, knew how to turn them on with law and order rhetoric.

Trump is a direct ideological descendant of Nixon's people: his mentor is Roy Cohen, who was McCarthy's aide and Nixon's advisor, and the one who introduced Trump to politics was Roger Stone, who was Nixon's protégé. Like Nixon, Trump's right wing also sees the media as the enemy and academia and law enforcement as the enemy (Nixon said: the media is the enemy, the professors in academia are the enemy). They also act in the name of "the silent majority" against the cultural establishment, etc., ultra-cynical and realist, and very aggressively nationalistic. An authoritarian and business-like approach that will always favor a policy that will bring them personal gain and control over resources, and an authoritarian domestic policy that pursues the "enemy within" and instead of ideological capitalism does not rule out the use of state power and the expansion of powers to punish enemies (Nixon even had a list of enemies against whom he tried to exercise his powers).

Of course Nixon was moderate in some aspects of his policies, but I'm talking in general style and governing and the way he sees the press and state institutions and outsider mentality.

reddit.com
u/Amazing-Buy-1181 — 10 days ago