Is America a Reactionary Country or Not?

It’s actually a good question. I suppose the answer is somewhat up in the air. RR writes:

Do you really believe that US Whites are horrifically rightwing? This 2 years after 44% of Whites elected a Black president. Are you being hyperbolic? Is it your opinion that White political opinion has drifted rightward since 1960?

Well, look at all of these insane Tea Party lunatics. A bunch of them are going to win. Those are the craziest bunch of rightwing nuts we’ve seen in a long time. The Tea Partiers are essentially John Birchers. The John Birch Society has taken over the Republican Party! Married with some seriously insane Christian fundamentalists.
Tea Party lunatics may well take over the House and possibly even the Senate. There is no way that could happen in any other White country on Earth. In fact, US style radical rightwing politics hardly exists anywhere on this planet, though to some extent it does in Chile and the UK.
There are some other radical rightwing regimes, but they don’t campaign on minimal government, near-Libertarian neoliberalism. They mostly campaign on “Kill the Commies,” or something like that. The only regimes I can think of like that are Colombia and Guatemala.
Elsewhere, the Radical Right usually campaigns on populism, poverty reduction, etc. You hardly see the US rightwing, “kill the poor,” fuck the middle class, minimal government, celebration of inequality stuff anywhere else on Earth, with a couple of exceptions above. Neoliberalism is hated all over the globe, for good reason. Only in the US do people actually campaign on this shit.
And nowhere on Earth to my knowledge does the Right campaign on batshit nuts Protestant fundamentalism, with the possible exception of Canada. Protestant fundamentalism is hated all over the world, with good reason.
One of the problems with the US is that rightwingers all over the world flock to the US to escape whatever brand of socialism they are living under.
Most Indian immigrants to the US are high caste. Vietnamese, Lao and Hmong immigrants are fleeing Communism, and all vote Republican. South American immigrants in the US, especially from Venezuela, are typically from the elites. The Venezuelans are hard rightwingers fleeing Bolivarianism. Most Nicaraguans in the US are hard rightwingers who fled Sandinismo. Cubans in the US are hard rightwingers fleeing Castro.
Many immigrants (such as some of our commenters) from Russia and the East Bloc are rightwingers fleeing various types of socialist and Communist regimes. Even most British immigrants to the US seem to be Tories. Many or most Filipino immigrants seem to vote Republican. They mostly come from the Filipino middle class. After the Iranian Revolution, Shah’s hard right supporters fled to the US. They flavor the Iranian community to this day.
Rightwingers around the world properly see the US as a rightwing anti-socialist paradise and leading light of anti-Communism. Hence, wealthy and reactionary elites have been fleeing progress, running backwards, all over the globe to the seek their dreams in rightwing America.
This has been going on for a long time now, and it’s about time the Democrats put a stop to it. If you’re fleeing a Left regime, you usually get to flood into the US no questions asked. People fleeing murderous rightwing death squad governments, as in Guatemala and El Salvador in the 1980’s, have high rates of rejection. Over 98% of such folks were rejected as possible Leftist sympathizers. They were put on planes back to El Salvador. The US Embassy would tell the Salvadoran government when the planes were coming in. The army would be waiting while the planes landed. They would go through the passengers and pull some of them off. They would usually end up tortured to death.
In some cases, the US government would check names against databases of the Guatemalan and Salvadoran governments. They also tested palms to see if guns had been fired recently. Results were reported to the governments down there, and these folks would be pulled off the planes and murdered.
The upshot of this bullshit is that we have allowed millions of hard rightwingers to flood into the US since we have decided we are the world’s destination for anyone fleeing the Left. All this does it create millions of permanent Republicans when they get citizenship. This exacerbates the already frighteningly reactionary character of US politics. Why the Democrats go along with this is beyond me.
To give you an example of how out of it the US is, all of Europe has been electing socialist parties of one type or another since WW2, with the exception of Thatcher in the UK. Even Europe’s so-called conservative parties are to the Left of the Democratic Party, and they refuse to dismantle the social democracies already in place. Even Thatcher barely touched the social democracy, and she is probably one of the most hated UK politicians of the past century.
Even backwards Mexico has been governed by an openly socialist party since the Civil War. The PRI is a member of the Socialist International. The PAN, a conservative party, won recently, but they are only social conservatives. They have not dismantled Mexico’s social democracy – free healthcare for everyone, free education for all through university level, etc.
So even Mexico is ahead of the US. How embarrassing.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

0 thoughts on “Is America a Reactionary Country or Not?”

  1. why do you keep implying that im some right-wing nut? just because Im a Russian anti-commie doesnt im lock-step with the GOP. the tea party is pretty lame in my opinion. so they win a few election, whats the worst that can happen? Glen Beck is hated by White Nationalists for being a PC Martin Luther King worshipper. Its not like the Tea Party is a Nazi party, or anything. and what about all these mexican immigrants? theyre left-wing. Mexico is ahead of the US now? wtf… then why do they keep coming here? plus, America has ObamaCare now, which is socialist health care, so you should be happy. and to prove to you that im not super-right-wing, im fully supportive of the DPA and NORML and would donate money if I had any. BTW, are you planning on voting for Prop 19 this November? I hope you do! looks like California’s finally going to legalize it. hopefully it will have a domino effect on the rest of the states.

    1. Mexico has a better social democracy than we do, so they are better in that regard. Mexico is a fucked up country, plus it’s a lot poorer than the US. The US is 4.5X richer than Mexico. That’s why they come here, in a nutshell. Plus they don’t fund their social democracy very well. It’s very poorly funded. But at least it exists.
      Most of us on the Left are not very happy about Obamacare.
      You keep implying that America is so wealthy because it’s so far right and anti-socialist, that’s why I keep taking you on.
      This is a socialist blog. We take on all the anti-socialist types on here, no apologies.

    2. Not just anti-Communism. That’s not the problem. Thing about most folks who avowed anti-Communists like you and some other commenters on here is that avowed anti-Communist types tend to be anti-socialist too. Anti-Commies think Communism and socialism are all the same.

      1. @Robert Lindsay
        Funny how you conveniently forget that the situation Mexico is in today is because of the US.
        I don’t know how much of a puppet state Mexico is if it is like the government in Serbia who basically does whatever Washington and EU tells them to do just to spite the Serbian people but it is probably controlled like Columbia.
        They released an Israeli agent just after 9/11 who tried to attack the Mexican parliament no doubt from pressure from Uncle Sam.

  2. Im a strong and committed anti-commie. Im also against full-blown socialism. But i support some socialist measures, like Putin’s nationalization of Russian oil, public education, and a social safety net. Im on welfare right now, so Id be a hypocrite to be an anti-welfare libertarian. Im still split, however, on public healthcare. Im concerned that it would lead to rationing.

  3. The tea party is a bad straw man, Bob, considering the members of the various groups clash on what limited government is.

  4. ” Even Europe’s so-called conservative parties are to the Left of the Democratic Party, and they refuse to dismantle the social democracies already in place. Even Thatcher barely touched the social democracy…”
    UPDATE: by this time tomorrow they’ll have dismantled it. Watch for the ‘comprehensive spending cuts’ this afternoon. They’re about to cut housing benefits while raising rents in all social housing, making millions homeless. Where are they going to go? Some sort of camps, I imagine, eventually. Will the British fight? Will we fuck! You just don’t know how far gone this country’s gone. This is the end, beautiful friend, the E -e-e-e-nd !
    I’ve been thinking about the prospect of Sarah Palin as US president. Does anyone remember the Lord of the Rings movies? (didn’t really capture the magic of the books but…) Remember the scene, where Galadriel, the elf-queen of the forest, is offered the ring of power by Frodo? She takes it and turns momentarily into a terrifying Goddess: ” … I would be as deep and terrible as the oceans (something like that) and everyone would love me and despair! ” and then she rejects the ring. Watch that scene again and imagine Sarah Palin as the terrible Goddess. Despair!

    1. Take a wild guess, Angela.
      I too prefer “Lord of the Rings.” Certainly over films such as “The Matrix.”
      I also prefer “Star Wars” over “Star Trek.”

      1. I wasn’t aware that white nationalists love Lord of the Rings. I like the movie too. I never saw any sort of racial angle in it. The cast was all white, so is that the only reason they like it? Because I didn’t see any racial subtext in the film.

  5. Robert,
    Sure the Tea Party has met with some success, but are they reactionary? They don’t like taxes and are in favor of smaller government. These are hardly reactionary positions. Additionally, the current success of the Tea party seems to be largely due to the state of the economy. So your “American as White Reactionary Redoubt” theme isn’t realistic. The country is steadily moving leftward, not rightward. You should be jumping for joy. Socialism is rampant. You guys are winning. What are you bitching about?

    1. Reactionary means rollback. A reactionary wants to roll back progressive changes and go back the way things were in the good old days. Conservatives want things to stay the same. More logically, reactionaries are radical conservatives.
      Small government is reactionary because it means rolling back the size of government, getting rid of government programs and departments, etc. That’s reactionary.
      Nowadays almost all US conservatives are reactionaries though.
      The only ones who would not be would be conservatives who don’t want to get rid of the Dept of Energy and Education and HUD, who don’t want to get rid of Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security, etc. Nowadays they hardly exist, because most “conservatives” want to roll back all that stuff.
      You may be right towards the end, but most of us on the Left don’t consider Obama to be a socialist. That’s some kind of a cruel joke.

    2. Wow, so in addition to being a Black race realist, you’re also a Black conservative or a Black Republican. Why am I not surprised?
      Why is it that 98% of “race realists” are automatically rightwingers? I don’t get it. To me, race realism is just the truth. What does it have to do with liberalism or conservatism? It’s like saying that only if you believe the sun comes up in the east and sets in the West, you’re automatically a conservative, because no liberal believes such a thing.

      1. I suppose many liberals COULD be race realists, and as you’ve pointed out, many are when you scratch the surface, but they are too afraid of the social implications to dabble in that subject, whereas the conservatives are not. So you have some selection bias. Conservatives are more likely to openly embrace race realism because it doesn’t upset their world view. Liberalism has a strong component of egalitarianism and it’s hard to be an egalitarian and a race-realist at the same time. That would create way too much cognitive dissonance.

        1. …Not to mention that such a person would zap up a tremendous amount of energy trying to explain why he thinks other races are less intelligent and inherently violent, yet believes in fighting racism. It would be a tiresome fight. So liberals just chuck race-realism out the window and it gets no serious consideration by the left.

  6. Robert,
    So, in your opinion, being in favor of repealing the Patriot Act is inherently reactionary. Is that right? Or how about being in favor of decreasing the black crime rate to the level it was in 1950? One would have to be a member of the John Birch Society to want THAT! We have a constitution. Should we respect it? It seems to me that you would interpret any defense of the constitution as reactionary.
    From my perspective, being realistic is an inherently conservative undertaking. Daniel Patrick Moynihan, a Liberal, was realistic about the condition of the black family in 1965 and released a conservative report. Was Moynihan a reactionary? The post war US administrations were realistic in their suspicions of the Soviet Union. Were they reactionary?
    Respect for the truth is not correlated with political inclinations, but it seems to me that Progressives are more inclined to try to shape reality to their liking (BTW, I consider neo-conservatives to be Progressives at heart). Progressives seem to engage in change for the sake of change, simply because they enjoy it (which seems to be positively correlated with intelligence). The area of education is a perfect example.
    I would like to repeat a question AJ asked of you in the Black People 🙁 thread:
    what do you consider the difference between you and david duke, and steve sailer? you call them racist fucks, but honestly the things you say would be called racist by many people and the mainstream media as well. where is the racist line?
    I would be very interested in hearing your answer. While Sailer has been critical of blacks and is inclined to believe that genes influence behavior, I haven’t detected racial malice in any of his commentary.
    P.S. I enjoy your blog. I hope I don’t get banned, because you have to either love it or leave it since this land was made for you and me. Keep up the good work!

    1. Reactionaries want to roll back progressive changes and go back to the way things were in the good old days. Conservatives want to keep things the way they are not make any progress or progress.
      Sailer tries very hard to keep his racism under wraps. But last year he went on a jihad saying that “niggers and beaners caused the economic crisis.” It’s a complete lie, though I suppose you probably believe it. It’s now become a Republican talking point. Then he wrote an extremely snarky and frankly racist book against Obama. Sailer talks a good game, but I finally concluded that he’s a racist bastard. He really doesn’t like Black people at all.

        1. Paraphrasing.
          You support Steve Sailer, tulio? WTF man.
          You know what? I gave this guy the benefit of the doubt for a long time when everyone on the Left kept calling him racist. He’s a real sneaky guy and he tries really hard to sugarcoat his racist crap. I finally had it up to here with him, and I’m now convinced the guy is a racist, albeit sort of a Tea Party type. It’s as clear as air, it’s just that he paints a pretty picture and talks a good game to make it seem that that’s not the case.

          1. No, I said nothing of supporting him. I’ve only read a handful of his articles anyway. I don’t follow him closely.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *