3

I've been doing some thinking over the past few days. I believe the left have a monopoly on presenting their ideas as exciting and visionary, as terrible and as authoritarian as they maybe. Allow me to justify my belief why I think this is the case.

Whenever the left present an idea, they present a vision which is all rosy and in which will be the ultimate solution to all the problems that you may have. This is true, no matter the scale of the idea they propose. Whether it be a simple government programme reform, or an entire revolution of the system that exists. People seriously believe that communism will be the solution to end all problems in the world. This is equally true on a smaller basis, where leftists say that their idea of taxing the rich and redistributing the wealth will be great for all of us. This paints a rosy picture for the people who hear it, getting them excited at their newly found wealth or "slice of the pie" if you will.

The lack of being able to create a rosy vision for an idea by the right can affect them. To have a freer economy or to have lower taxes is immediately shunned by the left who dominate the sector by saying that this will make the earth a hell. If you have coal mining and coal power, you will have pollution on par with Beijing. If you have nuclear power, there will be a Chernobyl. The right rarely make their views positive, even though they could actually be good. When was the last time a tax cut was seen as good for the poor and middle class? When was the last time deregulating the economy was seen as something that will create jobs for the average person? The right aren't as good of marketers of their ideas as the left are.

The right need to make their ideas trend. Instead of being purists like Libertarians who think that everything will be legalised after Gary Johnson's inauguration, the right have to make sacrifices in terms of what they want to push and present ideas that are popular to everyone. The right can definitely make their ideas populist. The left are able to make their draconian ideas popular by just painting a picture saying that there will be 0% poverty or that everyone will be richer. The right should employ the same tactics. Say that taxes and deregulating will cause a decrease in poverty (it actually will). If you focus on being relentlessly positive about your ideas, there will be a chance for the right to dominate for ages.

We should do more to present left-wing ideas as a dystopia. We don't do enough, and we're slowly creeping back to a situation where the government is taking more and more control of the economy. Whenever someone says that there will be free housing, mention that it's going to be shit quality and that the free market can provide higher quality for cheaper.

We have to use the same tactics as the left in order to present our ideas to the masses. Make the ideas mainstream. There's no point posting it to right-wing blogs that right-wing people already agree with. There is a demand for our ideas to be mainstream. Whenever you go mainstream, you've hit the jackpot. Donald Trump had constant coverage on the mainstream media, presenting his ideas to everyone. He won. If there is a continuation down the route of obscurity and not having priorities in what we believe, the right has no chance of achieving the restoration of freedom, both socially and economically.

Only when we get the public opinion to view right-wing ideas as cool and something to aspire to will we win the long game. There's no point in winning the presidency, just to do a tiny bit and for that to be trampled on by the next left-wing government. We have to look out for the long game. We have to be populist to win.

I've been doing some thinking over the past few days. I believe the left have a monopoly on presenting their ideas as exciting and visionary, as terrible and as authoritarian as they maybe. Allow me to justify my belief why I think this is the case. Whenever the left present an idea, they present a vision which is all rosy and in which will be the ultimate solution to all the problems that you may have. This is true, no matter the scale of the idea they propose. Whether it be a simple government programme reform, or an entire revolution of the system that exists. People seriously believe that communism will be the solution to end all problems in the world. This is equally true on a smaller basis, where leftists say that their idea of taxing the rich and redistributing the wealth will be great for all of us. This paints a rosy picture for the people who hear it, getting them excited at their newly found wealth or "slice of the pie" if you will. The lack of being able to create a rosy vision for an idea by the right can affect them. To have a freer economy or to have lower taxes is immediately shunned by the left who dominate the sector by saying that this will make the earth a hell. If you have coal mining and coal power, you will have pollution on par with Beijing. If you have nuclear power, there will be a Chernobyl. The right rarely make their views positive, even though they could actually be good. When was the last time a tax cut was seen as good for the poor and middle class? When was the last time deregulating the economy was seen as something that will create jobs for the average person? The right aren't as good of marketers of their ideas as the left are. The right need to make their ideas trend. Instead of being purists like Libertarians who think that everything will be legalised after Gary Johnson's inauguration, the right have to make sacrifices in terms of what they want to push and present ideas that are popular to everyone. The right can definitely make their ideas populist. The left are able to make their draconian ideas popular by just painting a picture saying that there will be 0% poverty or that everyone will be richer. The right should employ the same tactics. Say that taxes and deregulating will cause a decrease in poverty (it actually will). If you focus on being relentlessly positive about your ideas, there will be a chance for the right to dominate for ages. We should do more to present left-wing ideas as a dystopia. We don't do enough, and we're slowly creeping back to a situation where the government is taking more and more control of the economy. Whenever someone says that there will be free housing, mention that it's going to be shit quality and that the free market can provide higher quality for cheaper. We have to use the same tactics as the left in order to present our ideas to the masses. Make the ideas mainstream. There's no point posting it to right-wing blogs that right-wing people already agree with. There is a demand for our ideas to be mainstream. Whenever you go mainstream, you've hit the jackpot. Donald Trump had constant coverage on the mainstream media, presenting his ideas to everyone. He won. If there is a continuation down the route of obscurity and not having priorities in what we believe, the right has no chance of achieving the restoration of freedom, both socially and economically. Only when we get the public opinion to view right-wing ideas as cool and something to aspire to will we win the long game. There's no point in winning the presidency, just to do a tiny bit and for that to be trampled on by the next left-wing government. We have to look out for the long game. We have to be populist to win.

4 comments

When you say 'The Left', who/what do you mean?
That's usually a very loose and general term, but you seem to be referring to a specific group of people.

People seriously believe that communism will be the solution to end all problems in the world.

Who does? I've never met anyone that believes that, and I've met people that identify as communists.

The lack of being able to create a rosy vision for an idea by the right can affect them.

Again, I'm not sure what you mean but 'The Right'. I know conservative/politically-right people that have an optimistic view/plan for the future.

Instead of being purists like Libertarians who..

'The Right' is not a cohesive group that will ever come together any more than 'The Left' will.
Those are general groupings of ideas that contain many different types of people. Different people on the same 'side' can and will still be in opposition to each other on some things.

We have to ..

.. stop acting like we're on teams.
Acting like people can be neatly split into two teams is a mistake.

[–] keebyjeeby 1 points (+1|-0)

Sensible, balanced and non-reactionary response. What are you doing on the internet?