Jordan Peterson’s Exodus Series

[FollowingHim]

The "conservative movement" is an abject failure. They couldn't successfully conserve anything, not even the women's bathroom.

As I try to catch up on the history knowledge I should have acquired many years ago, I am sadly realising that all conservative movements fail. The failure of a conservative movement is therefore not necessarily evidence that the people in that movement are compromised. It's just a failed strategy.

The problem with conservatism is that, by definition, it is an attempt to hold onto the past.

That is unsustainable. It works for a time, but it eventually fails, because society will always change - it will always "progress" somewhere, whether good or bad.

If a society is a vehicle, there are always several different types of "progressives" fighting over the steering wheel trying to take society somewhere, and a large mass of "conservatives" trying to put the brakes on and hold society the same as it was in the good old days. Sometimes the conservatives do manage to put on the brakes, but it only holds for a time. Every time the conservatives fail, however briefly, the vehicle moves forward - sometimes slowly, sometimes in short jumps, sometimes rapidly. But always forward - there is never a reverse gear*. And in a direction chosen by whichever branch of the "progressives" happens to be in charge of the steering wheel at the time.

So conservatism cannot win. Only progressivism can win.

Secular conservatives (which these people all are, regardless of their personal faiths) will inevitably fail, regardless of their personal sincerity or lack thereof. They are not suitable leaders to follow, because they will lead you to failure - even if everything they say is correct.

Which means the only potentially successful political strategy is to have an actual goal, and try to steer society towards that goal - try to progress towards it. Most of those strategies also fail, as there are too many to all be successful - but it is from one of those strategies that the winner emerges. The majority of the progressives lose, and all the conservatives lose - but one of the progressives movements wins.

We could for instance try and retake society for Christ, try to progress towards a theocracy. That might completely fail. But it has a very slim chance of succeeding, while being a secular conservative has zero chance of succeeding. So the choice of who to follow is obvious, from a cold calculating mathematical perspective.

*(sometimes it turns close to 180 degrees giving the illusion of going in reverse, but it is always an illusion - actually a progressive movement that wanted to take it in a direction that has similarities to "the good old days" just happens to be dominant at that time. The old days do not actually return, at such times the new regime just looks a bit like the old one.)

 

[The Revolting Man]

As I try to catch up on the history knowledge I should have acquired many years ago, I am sadly realising that all conservative movements fail. The failure of a conservative movement is therefore not necessarily evidence that the people in that movement are compromised. It's just a failed strategy.

The problem with conservatism is that, by definition, it is an attempt to hold onto the past.

That is unsustainable. It works for a time, but it eventually fails, because society will always change - it will always "progress" somewhere, whether good or bad.

If a society is a vehicle, there are always several different types of "progressives" fighting over the steering wheel trying to take society somewhere, and a large mass of "conservatives" trying to put the brakes on and hold society the same as it was in the good old days. Sometimes the conservatives do manage to put on the brakes, but it only holds for a time. Every time the conservatives fail, however briefly, the vehicle moves forward - sometimes slowly, sometimes in short jumps, sometimes rapidly. But always forward - there is never a reverse gear*. And in a direction chosen by whichever branch of the "progressives" happens to be in charge of the steering wheel at the time.

So conservatism cannot win. Only progressivism can win.

Secular conservatives (which these people all are, regardless of their personal faiths) will inevitably fail, regardless of their personal sincerity or lack thereof. They are not suitable leaders to follow, because they will lead you to failure - even if everything they say is correct.

Which means the only potentially successful political strategy is to have an actual goal, and try to steer society towards that goal - try to progress towards it. Most of those strategies also fail, as there are too many to all be successful - but it is from one of those strategies that the winner emerges. The majority of the progressives lose, and all the conservatives lose - but one of the progressives movements wins.

We could for instance try and retake society for Christ, try to progress towards a theocracy. That might completely fail. But it has a very slim chance of succeeding, while being a secular conservative has zero chance of succeeding. So the choice of who to follow is obvious, from a cold calculating mathematical perspective.

*(sometimes it turns close to 180 degrees giving the illusion of going in reverse, but it is always an illusion - actually a progressive movement that wanted to take it in a direction that has similarities to "the good old days" just happens to be dominant at that time. The old days do not actually return, at such times the new regime just looks a bit like the old one.)

This is not true. Franco was successful in Spain.

 

[Bartato]

And now you’re absolved from having to expend any effort to make things better. The whole game is rigged, you can’t win, so what’s the point of trying.

That’s fantastic. Have you ever thought that maybe you’re spewing a counter narrative? One designed to take you and others like you out of the game? Maybe you’re the controlled opposition since you’ve been convinced to not even attempt to resist.

This is not true. Franco was successful in Spain.

Pinochet in Chile too

Franco and Pinochet both beat the communists back for a season.

 

[NBTX11]

The conservative movement may fail, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't fight to keep society from going to hell and pushing wicked sinful agendas down our throats. Sick and tired of sin being shoved in my face every time I turn on the TV or log on to social media. We need someone to carry the mantle of conservatism. I don't have a megaphone. These guys do and I am glad they use theirs to espouse biblical principles.

 

[Bartato]

The conservative movement may fail, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't fight to keep society from going to hell and pushing wicked sinful agendas down our throats. Sick and tired of sin being shoved in my face every time I turn on the TV or log on to social media. We need someone to carry the mantle of conservatism. I don't have a megaphone. These guys do and I am glad they use theirs to espouse biblical principles.

We are all very tired of sin and wickedness being shoved in our faces all the time. All of us "little people" need to do everything we can in our own lives to promote the Kingdom of God and rule of Christ.

 

[rockfox]

And now you’re absolved from having to expend any effort to make things better. The whole game is rigged, you can’t win, so what’s the point of trying.

That’s fantastic. Have you ever thought that maybe you’re spewing a counter narrative? One designed to take you and others like you out of the game? Maybe you’re the controlled opposition since you’ve been convinced to not even attempt to resist.

Far from it. We should expend effort. But we need to be knowledgeable about just who these people are who appoint themselves as our thought leaders and how they get there. We need to be realistic about the nature of the beast we face and what the system's strengths and weaknesses are.

Most on the right have no idea what the game is and are busy playing the rigged theatrical edition.

This is not true. Franco was successful in Spain.

True, but there is really no relationship between the U.S. conservative movement and Franco's Spain. U.S. conservatism is a failed, zombie movement.

 

[FollowingHim]

This is not true. Franco was successful in Spain.

This is a prime example of what I meant in my footnote, where I said comservatives can sometimes appear to have won, but have not. A conservative seeks to conserve the existing system, or go back to one recently lost. Franco however did not restore the monarchy. The previous king was still alive, and had living sons, yet they were not restored to the throne. Franco did not conserve the old system, he created a new one with himself as dictator. He was "progressive" in that way. However, his new system bore many similarities with the old one.

There were two competing progressive ideologies (communism and fascism to be oversimplistic), and a conservative one (restorationism). The conservatives - the supporters of the former king - failed. But the least radical of the progressive ideologies won.

Note that I am using the word "conservative" in a strictly literal political sense. That may be confusing in some cases - in this manner of speaking, during the fall of the soviet union, the communists were "conservative" as they wanted to conserve the existing system, and the anti-communists "progressive" as they wanted to change it. So the conservatives again failed. I know this is not how we culturally use the words usually. It is a useful angle to look at things from though, and the angle used in my above post, which only makes sense when read in this way.

 

[steve]

Entropy reigns.
Let’s face it, every system has failed, multiple times.
Yah set up the perfect system in the Garden. It failed.
He set up multiple systems over the centuries, and man has created failure out of each of them.
The question for us is, how are we to live in a declining system? There will be outbreaks of conservatism as men of conscience come into power, but we are in a semi-controlled crash as we head into the end times and we cannot expect to return to a conservative society.
So, again, how then shall we yet live in a deteriorating system?
Chew the meat and spit out the bones, there are none righteous that we can follow. We have to find the righteous part of what each one is saying and go with just that.

Sorry for the rant

 

[frederick]

Entropy reigns.
Let’s face it, every system has failed, multiple times.
Yah set up the perfect system in the Garden. It failed.
He set up multiple systems over the centuries, and man has created failure out of each of them.
The question for us is, how are we to live in a declining system? There will be outbreaks of conservatism as men of conscience come into power, but we are in a semi-controlled crash as we head into the end times and we cannot expect to return to a conservative society.
So, again, how then shall we yet live in a deteriorating system?
Chew the meat and spit out the bones, there are none righteous that we can follow. We have to find the righteous part of what each one is saying and go with just that.

Sorry for the rant

Jesus prayed saying, I do not pray that You should take them out of the world, but that You should keep them from the evil one. They are not of the world, just as I am not of the world. Sanctify them by Your truth. Your word is truth (John 17:15-17).
We live in this world but we are not of this world. We are temporary sojourners passing through on our way to our eternal home. The only one we can follow and serve is our Master, and He has given us His example to follow. It is neither conservative nor progressive, it is holy. Therefore it will always be, as much as we are able, consistent with His Word.

 

[MemeFan]

As I try to catch up on the history knowledge I should have acquired many years ago, I am sadly realising that all conservative movements fail. The failure of a conservative movement is therefore not necessarily evidence that the people in that movement are compromised. It's just a failed strategy.

The problem with conservatism is that, by definition, it is an attempt to hold onto the past.

That is unsustainable. It works for a time, but it eventually fails, because society will always change - it will always "progress" somewhere, whether good or bad.

If a society is a vehicle, there are always several different types of "progressives" fighting over the steering wheel trying to take society somewhere, and a large mass of "conservatives" trying to put the brakes on and hold society the same as it was in the good old days. Sometimes the conservatives do manage to put on the brakes, but it only holds for a time. Every time the conservatives fail, however briefly, the vehicle moves forward - sometimes slowly, sometimes in short jumps, sometimes rapidly. But always forward - there is never a reverse gear*. And in a direction chosen by whichever branch of the "progressives" happens to be in charge of the steering wheel at the time.

Second Conquest law:

Any not explicit right-wing organisation will eventually become leftwing.

 

[MemeFan]

Far from it. We should expend effort. But we need to be knowledgeable about just who these people are who appoint themselves as our thought leaders and how they get there. We need to be realistic about the nature of the beast we face and what the system's strengths and weaknesses are.

Most on the right have no idea what the game is and are busy playing the rigged theatrical edition.

Push toward decentralization. Always.

Leftist ideas can only work when there is no competition or subsidies. Decentralixation fixes both.

 

[Bartato]

Second Conquest law:

Any not explicit right-wing organisation will eventually become leftwing.

"Right-wing" vs "left-wing" isn't really the issue.

The issue is actually "submission to Jesus Christ" vs "the way of the serpent".

I'll grant that "left-wing" is largely contrary to Christ. Sometimes"right-wing" is also contrary to the rule of Christ.

 

[MemeFan]

"Right-wing" vs "left-wing" isn't really the issue.

The issue is actually "submission to Jesus Christ" vs "the way of the serpent".

I'll grant that "left-wing" is largely contrary to Christ. Sometimes"right-wing" is also contrary to the rule of Christ.

There is really a issue between rightwing and leftwing. Fundamental difference between right and left is hierarchy. Right is that hierarchies are natural and left is that hierachies are evil.

Why do think leftists have problems with Christian God as concept? Some god has a right to tell me, a gay, that I'm behaving evil? . Only a false one.

Without hierarachy there is no judgement, only suggestions between friends. Same with male/female relationships. No way that my husband can tell what I can do. I'm indepedent woman. Thats how leftists treat Bible. As a suggestion.

Additionally, one of key reasons conservatives are losing is because institutions have become leftwing. What national US institutions are now rightwing? Name college, newspapers? If you can they are exceptions.

There was cheating in Brasil elections. What could Bolsonaro do? No institution would support him, so could do nothing.

Rightwing in USA currently lacks power, especially on federal level.

 

[Bartato]

There is really a issue between rightwing and leftwing. Fundamental difference between right and left is hierarchy. Right is that hierarchies are natural and left is that hierachies are evil.

Why do think leftists have problems with Christian God as concept? Some god has a right to tell me, a gay, that I'm behaving evil? . Only a false one.

Without hierarachy there is no judgement, only suggestions between friends. Same with male/female relationships. No way that my husband can tell what I can do. I'm indepedent woman. Thats how leftists treat Bible. As a suggestion.

Additionally, one of key reasons conservatives are losing is because institutions have become leftwing. What national US institutions are now rightwing? Name college, newspapers? If you can they are exceptions.

There was cheating in Brasil elections. What could Bolsonaro do? No institution would support him, so could do nothing.

Rightwing in USA currently lacks power, especially on federal level.

Victor Orban seems to be doing pretty well in Hungary. He is about the only national leader that I have any respect for.

 

[NBTX11]

What national US institutions are now rightwing? Name college, newspapers?

There's still a few. Hillsdale College comes to mind. There are conservative newspapers with big circulations also. The New York Post comes to mind. Smaller local papers tend to be more conservative.

But yes, they are vastly outnumbered by left wing organizations.

 

[Asforme&myhouse]

They are gatekeepers full stop. Their purpose is to control the narrative and keep the right on the reservation. They are bought and paid for. Not just purchased, but in many cases recruited, coached, managed and made into a big thing; nothing organic about them.

Candice Owens is a good example of this. She was a liberal before she was suddenly super conservative (like many of these controlled types) but she is actually just an actor. She is one of a famous handful who their talent agency bios got leaked. Not just talking heads, politicians too (such as Laura Boebert) and on the left as well: AOC has been open in interviews about answering a talent search for her position. And not just pundents but talk show hosts, even Tucker Carlson, who has stated on the air he is part of the elite, is personal friends with Hunter Biden, and wanted to join the CIA.

If you see them on mass media they're controlled. If media tells you to hate them they might still be controlled. It's the ones you never hear of, the ones they don't dare name even as they gain a following, that are the legitimate voices.

I don’t have any firsthand knowledge of whether or not these folks, individually, are controlled opposition. However, I do know people who have through foia requests uncovered the fact that the vast majority of county governments across the country have entrusted their digital security, including elections security, to antifa connected organizations. The leftists have vast opportunities to control our elections. I cannot believe that they wouldn’t take advantage of that. If I know this, how can the leaders of the conservative political movement not know. In reality they do know because that information has been passed on to them, and yet we continue to focus on future elections, while largely ignoring the need to secure our elections. Unsecured elections are fake elections. If they truly wanted to win they would be exposing this situation, but they don’t. Why?

Am I still going to vote? Yes. Will it make a difference? I doubt it, but I’m going to make the left have to lie and cover their tracks every step of the way.

 

[rockfox]

Additionally, one of key reasons conservatives are losing is because institutions have become leftwing. What national US institutions are now rightwing? Name college, newspapers? If you can they are exceptions.

Another reason is they're not really conservative according to your definition (hierarchy). There are a lot of other reasons too but we in the US don't have a genuine right wing movement.

Push toward decentralization. Always.

Leftist ideas can only work when there is no competition or subsidies. Decentralixation fixes both.

That will help. But not if you leave the money powers intact.

I don’t have any firsthand knowledge of whether or not these folks, individually, are controlled opposition. However, I do know people who have through foia requests uncovered the fact that the vast majority of county governments across the country have entrusted their digital security, including elections security, to antifa connected organizations. The leftists have vast opportunities to control our elections. I cannot believe that they wouldn’t take advantage of that. If I know this, how can the leaders of the conservative political movement not know. In reality they do know because that information has been passed on to them, and yet we continue to focus on future elections, while largely ignoring the need to secure our elections. Unsecured elections are fake elections. If they truly wanted to win they would be exposing this situation, but they don’t. Why?

Am I still going to vote? Yes. Will it make a difference? I doubt it, but I’m going to make the left have to lie and cover their tracks every step of the way.

The politicians all know the elections are rigged. So long as any part of the election is in the hands of computers it will be rigged. The GOP has long been the loyal opposition. Not really an opposition, they are simply allowed to speak that which their handlers allow them. Just enough to keep the right wing on the reservation but not so much as to give up the game.

 

[MemeFan]

There's still a few. Hillsdale College comes to mind. There are conservative newspapers with big circulations also. The New York Post comes to mind. Smaller local papers tend to be more conservative.

But yes, they are vastly outnumbered by left wing organizations.

You are proving my point. Exceptions.

 

[rockfox]

The NYP is owned by Rupert Murdoch's Newscorp, same owner as Fox News. They are the very opposition of genuine alternative media.

 

[MemeFan]

I don’t have any firsthand knowledge of whether or not these folks, individually, are controlled opposition. However, I do know people who have through foia requests uncovered the fact that the vast majority of county governments across the country have entrusted their digital security, including elections security, to antifa connected organizations. The leftists have vast opportunities to control our elections. I cannot believe that they wouldn’t take advantage of that. If I know this, how can the leaders of the conservative political movement not know. In reality they do know because that information has been passed on to them, and yet we continue to focus on future elections, while largely ignoring the need to secure our elections. Unsecured elections are fake elections. If they truly wanted to win they would be exposing this situation, but they don’t. Why?

Am I still going to vote? Yes. Will it make a difference? I doubt it, but I’m going to make the left have to lie and cover their tracks every step of the way.

Regime will pay for their cheating, just not now.

Legitimacy loss is even worse. When any relief using politics isn't possible then violence is only option. This will led to a revolution and elites heads on spikes.

Historical examples: fall of Roman Republic, French Revolution