Why has the right in the West been on a constant losing trail for so long despite the conditions for white people getting objectively worse everytime the right loses?
Historically speaking
Why has the right in the West been on a constant losing trail for so long despite the conditions for white people getting objectively worse everytime the right loses?
>Right whing is when white supremacy
Mutt-alert.
I live Germany and this can clearly be observed here as well.
That just means that the culture dissolving mutt poison got to Germany as well. White Nationalism is a spook invented by rootless yeowmen protestant shitters. Not to mention that "when times were based" (aka medieval dark ages), no one cared about race either, and it was purely religion based hatreds, which then evolved into nationalistic hatreds of Europe around the time of 30 years war.
>Nazis
>right-wing
Because conservatism is moronic. This very post is b***hing about things getting worse for whites without realizing that A) the average white person has it far better than most minorities and B) right wing conservative moronation is making life worse for literally everyone. The idea that minorities are succeeding at the expense of whites is comical.
>The idea that minorities are succeeding at the expense of whites is comical.
They are making lives for white people except for corporation owners maybe worse in many ways and on top of that vote for social policies that explicitly benefit them at the expense of whites.
>They are making lives for white people except for corporation owners
>corporations bad!
Leftoid cope.
Corporations are not benevolent actors and will frick over the entire country to make as much money as possible. Right wingers are too moronic to understand this for whatever reason. It must be that aversion to education that they’re proud of for some reason.
Lives of literally everyone are getting worse. The normal upward mobility of the children of immigrants is not coming at the expense of whites, it’s a normal thing. If a poor family came from Sweden or England their children would naturally probably make more money than their parents.
If you’re so worried about the well-being of society you should focus less on the broke Mexicans escaping poverty and drug violence (you’d do the same as them if you were in their position) and more about how the nation is a corpatocracy shithole.
Upwards mobility has always been rare. Rags to riches and the American Dream have always been myths. There have been decades long studies on how true rags to riches is and few people make it and even the ones who do often end up falling back down the ladder.
Ever heard of affirmative action?
Aa is minor as frick. Legacy kids, donor kids, athletes, foreign students and more extremely outweigh AA admins and you still have to do the course work. White women benefit from AA way more then minorities do.
>right wing politics is when white people
Because of morons like you polarizing politics and infantilizing an entire set od groups that vaguely share the same ideals.
>Because of morons like you polarizing politics and infantilizing an entire set od groups that vaguely share the same ideals.
The opposite, I think much of it has to do with infiting between those groups, focusing too much on their differences rather than common goals.
>Not to mention that "when times were based" (aka medieval dark ages), no one cared about race either, and it was purely religion based hatreds
Religious hatred was pretty much a forefront of racial hatred, it is what gave Europeans a sense of unity against Non-European peoples (who happened to be infidels) before there were attempts to built multiracial societies as later in the New World. In racially homogenous societies people hardly think about race at all because it's not necessary when there are no other races among you.
I really think you should touch grass because I'm a gun-toting, proud American conservative who voted for Trump, and you sound like you're being radicalized.
The "right" and "white people" do not go hand in hand. Why do you connect the two?
And even if they were connected, what makes you think white people are the ones that are "supposed to" win when the right wins? It's an arbitrary choice for it to be white people. There is no attachment though because "right" politics is completely a-racial. It's about creating a political system that seeks to work within the assumption that natural law and social traditionalism are either good or inevitable. The "left" rejects those ideas fundamentally and seeks to command and control everything. The "left" sees the world as a complex system that if they could just make enough tweaks and force certain changes here and there, then everything will be perfect. This systems view (those words are now pretty much exclusively associated with Marxism) have roots in post-enlightenment German philosophers like Hegel. It's history that confuses you into thinking "right" political thought is connected to "white people." Get it out of your head because it's not true.
Also, how do conditions get objectively worse? Certain aspects of society are worse for everyone. And where they're not, it's a product of "left" racism: "correcting historic injustices," etc. That's a product of racism itself.
>infighting between those groups
>groups
Don't let people decide for you where to draw the lines between groups--if lines should even be drawn! The only appropriate lines in my view are between people who predominantly take moral action, and those who predominantly take immoral action. Melanin is a stupid basis for drawing lines. Even if IQ differences exist on average, lower IQ people can do what is morally right while higher IQ people can do what is morally wrong.
Also have you considered that you don't understand religion?
>In racially homogenous societies people hardly think about race at all because it's not necessary when there are no other races among you.
Haha no. Also caste, wealth status, occupation and faith are factor
>how come people who base their worldview around losers have always lost?
it's a mystery dude.
The right in the USA is running the table on the rest of the country due to a series of technicalities. No Republican president has won the popular vote since 2004, and that was a guy who lost the popular vote 4 years earlier and was installed by a Supreme Court decision. The Supreme Court is now 4/5ths Republican-nominated justices who lied about their stance on Roe v. Wade in order to secure a lifetime appointment.
Gerrymandering is a nationwide practice, but the bottom line is that if you had all districts drawn by algorithm, Republicans would lose out drastically. The Minnesota State Legislature has a Republican supermajority despite the fact that there are more Democrats than Republicans in the state.
The two senators from Wyoming represent a quarter million people each. The two senators from California represent 23 million people each.
It goes on and on.
Republican ideas are not popular because only a moron could make average salary or wage and vote for them. They’re utterly in the pocket of big corporations, more so than even the Democrats.
Frick California not even Americans. No one ever wanted you
Your fentanyl-opioid fueled seethe is noted. You may return to the trailer park.
Your brown
>shitskin ESL LARPing as White to own le coastal libshits
2/3rds of the Black person population live in flyover states. Statistically speaking, I'm probably replying to a Black person right now.
I live in Ohio, and the facts I'm spitting are true everywhere.
btw Texas has more violent crime per capita than California.
Lol the right wing envy of California is hilarious. It’s not their fault nobody wants to live in your overgrown trailer park of a state.
>right wing envy of California
what planet do you live on
The one where rightoids have been moping and coping about wanting to take California from the stranglehold of libshits.
>the state with a massive population exodus thinks people envy them
Utterly delusional
A ton of states have it.
>MUH WYOMING
Frick off with this bullshit. The House of Representatives is proportional. The Senate is equal representation for all. The only reason you give a frick about Wyoming is because they vote for red team, if they voted for YOUR tribe you'd call it equity in action
>if they voted for YOUR tribe you'd call it equity in action
No, gerrymandering is an issue on both sides
that's a state problem
Walk into an Amazon warehouse in the U.S. and look at the managers and the rank-and-file workers. You might notice most of those managers are white and have college degrees and most of the workers are not white and don't have college degrees, and they're either immigrants or from the hood. Not all of them of course as there are white workers too in the mix. But if you're one of those managers, then you probably have a good salary and benefits, and if you're white and worked your way up into being a manager, then being a dependable little worker drone probably helped, but looking like the other managers and talking like them probably helped too even if Amazon is a "diverse" company.
Well, the worker drones are diverse but that's so much the case the higher up you go. So in that sense, "white people" are doing well. So as a thought experiment, if you were a white worker on the floor, you can either bet on leveling up and joining the other managers, or find a way to team up with the other worker drones like yourself.
Because the number one goal and priority of right wingers is preserving the capitalist system.
And capitalism breeds degeneracy. Capitalism needs open borders, mass migration, moral relativism, nihilism, degeneracy and so on in order to sustain it's cancer-like growth.
Whenever conservative right wingers get into power they are left with 2 choices: enact culture war policies but destroy capitalism in the process or preserve capitalism with all it's degenerate consequences. And every time they choose the second course of action.
This is the only good post in this thread
Because most humans want to be winners and most humans want to be part of the 'in group'.
The right is based on seperation, rejection and exclusion. Gay, black, woman, trans, indian, swede, left handed, brown eyed. The right can come up with a thousand novel reasons to mark someone as part of the 'out group.' Thus, simply due to statistics, it makes sense to be left leaning to have a higher chance of being accepted and to be part of the 'in group'
neoliberalism is right wing and they won
Christendom has been Subverted, Media has been Subverted, Culture has been Subverted, America has not been America since 1865, 1917,1933,1945,1963,1971. Notice how things have only gotten worst and worst, technological progress is the only thing keeping this entire bubble from popping. If winning means subverting thousands upon millions of moron Black person cattle into being mindless consumers, I wish not to be a part of such a system. Only people who unironically enjoy the modern world Post-1865 are those who got too comfortable and weak to dare harm there one true god Globo-homosexual who supplies them with all their useless utilities.
You're living in a World Corrupted and Planned to Fail even before your great-great grandparents where even born. These types of people only listen to violence, anyone who hasn't killed their enemies is a larping homosexual, take for instance any conservative movement that backpaddles year after year to broaden their acceptance upon the world stage. Rather than focusing on the people, there culture, there language, there way of life, they focus on laws and values. While the so called Left is the ones teaching the children, 50 years ago gays would either be completely ignored or blasted for there crimes against The Laws of The People, now they are actively encouraged and groomed at a young age who then proliferate and grow the problem. Zoomers are a great example of a Generation that is either totally aware of the situation or is totally groomed and subverted.
The Right is generally on the side of good and humans are basically evil. It's a losing battle.
The right is exclusionary and usually favors a hierachical society, be it through birth, meritocracy or other measures.
This, and a generally negative view about humanity as opposed to the positive view about humanity that leftists have, makes the right look like buttholes for the lack of a better term. Especially in a society where egalitarianism is held up as a big virtue through media and schools.
Leftists on the other hand promote a wordview that is, on the surface, "kind","humane" and a good thing for "all". All leftists ideologies are for people who view people as inherently good. They are cheap, easy "feel good" ideologies. It doesn't matter that they are unrealistic and generally bad in execution. They look good on paper and that's why they win.
The only way the right ever wins (in the long term) is either through force, by controlling media and education (in a democracy) or by having an autocratic/aristocratic state. Playing the optics game is a dead end unless there is a real threat where normies entrust the "evil" right wingers to do the job, be it a foreign power or an insurgency.
the right loses by definition
the right is the position that defends a former social order against revolutionary assault
if you find yourself there you're already losing
NatSocs were center left
You know the answer anon, but to say so would be anti-Semitic