Monday, July 8, 2024

Dieuwe de Boer: The Funeral Pyre of Progress

It’s been nearly eight years since I started publishing political and cultural commentary. One thing that has changed is the danger of labels. It was notably risky even two or three years ago to be labelled as “far-right” or “racist” with a number of other more dangerous labels: the worst of which can still cause damage.

Progressive devotees have expanded the scope of who and what is “far-right” to epic proportions. The most milquetoast conservative is far-right, the classical liberal is far-right and the sensible centrist is far-right. The world’s richest man is far-right. The US Supreme Court is far-right. The next president of the US is far-right. The most popular party with German youth is far-right. The largest party in France is far-right. The prime minister of Italy is far-right. The largest party in The Netherlands is far-right. New Zealand’s coalition government is far-right. The pro-transvestite Free Speech Union is far-right. Even 20th century progressive cultural icons like arch-atheist Richard Dawkins and bestselling children’s author J K Rowling are far-right. I could go on forever…

This is not some fringe view of the far-right: this is the view promoted by mainstream broadcasters and public servants that receive untold millions in public funds.

Going to the gym is far-right. Homeschooling is far-right. A mother braiding her daughter’s blonde hair is far-right. Cooking whole foods and organic gardening are far-right. The publicly funded Disinformation Project proudly identifies the ‘cottage core’ aesthetic with white nationalism.

Everything that is good, true and beautiful is fascism. Ugliness, perversion and degeneracy are progress. They thought if they presented options in this simple binary way that people would always choose progress. No one would choose to be the bad guy, right?

This worked initially to marginalise normal and historic views that had become outdated by progressive orthodoxy, but the left have been too successful. They worked their ideas into every public institution and private corporation. Then something unexpected happened. A pandemic (an ultimately underwhelming one at that) gave their bureaucratic and administrative functionaries unlimited emergency powers for several years.

They used that not only for technological tyranny, but also to expand their cultural power by fast-tracking the next phases of the sexual and climate revolutions.

That victory marked a turning point that will prove to be the funeral pyre of progress.

Non-political people began to question “the experts” in larger numbers. Whereas previously the ‘far-right’ constituted maybe 0.1 per cent of the population, this was quickly expanded to five, 10, 20, even 30 per cent in some jurisdictions, who suddenly found themselves labelled as far-right, to their initial bewilderment.

Didn’t like lockdowns, sceptical of big pharma and big business, horrified by the degradation of public schooling, don’t think there’s a climate emergency, feel like throwing up when you see a pride flag, not a fan of mass migration and think maybe things used to be spiritually and materially better in the past? Does only a single item in that list speak to you? Far-right!

As much as we like to think labels don’t affect us, they do: they shape perceptions, friendships, what news we pay attention to, and so on. The far-right, however, is not some coherent political coalition and its existence is only real insofar as the left have defined it: ‘the opposition to and reaction against the natural end of progressivism’.

This is why the expression of (so called) far-right politics is vastly different and even contradictory between jurisdictions, since it simply reflects ideas moulded to the expectations of a particular people in a particular place at a particular time.

Where this is useful is in its normalisation. If milquetoast conservatives get into government as ‘far-right’ and govern in a way with no perceptible difference to the liberal consensus, as often happens by way of regime containment, then it normalises the idea of far-right government. This is a good thing because it makes it easier to win; as others have observed: a win is anything that makes the next win easier.

Everywhere, even where still in power around the world, you get the feeling the left are demoralised. They achieved complete victory, implemented their goals and then everything started to crumble under the weight of inherent insanity and immorality. The next generation was supposed to be all-in on diversity, inclusion and the global Green New Deal. Instead the youth who agree with them are nihilistic, suicidal and depressed (imagine my shock) and the ones who disagree now actively seek the destruction of the progressive dream. The dissenters don’t need to be the majority; they only need to care more. The future belongs to those who show up.

Your history is far-right. Your grandfather’s politics? Far-right. Rob Muldoon? Far-right. General Freyberg? Far-right. Richard Seddon? Far-right. Sir George Grey? Far-right. Rev. Henry Williams? Far-right. Captain James Cook? Far-right. King Alfred, Charlemagne, Augustine, Caesar, Aristotle, the Apostle Paul…You guessed it: far-right.

The architecture, the music, the art, the achievements of your people? Far-right.

Everything that everyone believed and did until two generations ago? Far-right.

What is not far-right is the systematic destruction of your nation and identity. There is now no room for the left to back down. The endgame of progress has been reached.

If mothers growing their own food are far-right, the pro-life church lady is far-right, the radical feminist who isn’t keen on transvestites is far-right, the liberal who gets fired for not using progressive speech codes at his corporate job is far-right, then no one is going to bat an eye at the real far-right – whoever they may be and wherever they may lurk. When the progressive says, ‘But he’s far-right!’ about someone with genuinely great reactionary political aims and the means to achieve them, no one will recoil in horror.

Instead they will think, ‘Ah, so he is just like me’.

The funeral pyre of progress has been constructed by the hands of its faithful devotees and awaits only the match that will set it ablaze.

Dieuwe is the editor of Right Minds NZ. In addition to conservative politics and reactionary thought, he likes books, gardening, biking, tech, reformed theology, beauty, and tradition. This article was first published HERE


Anonymous said...

I'd rather be right than wrong...

Anonymous said...

Labelling opponents id a form of non-argument known as argumentum ad hominem.

The standard rejoinder of those who have no counter-argument against an intellectually better-resourced opponent.

For the benefit of low watt bulbs, argumentum ad hominem means playing the man not the ball.

The standard response of triggered tots when they have no better comeback.

I accept just two counter-arguments: (1) prove my facts wrong; and/or (2) disprove my argument.

Leftists invariably do neither.

If they could, they soon would.

So clearly they can’t.

Frantz Fanon was a disreputable Commie racemonger.

But even a stopped clock is right twice a day:

“Sometimes people hold a core belief that is very strong. When they are presented with evidence that works against that belief, the new evidence cannot be accepted. It would create a feeling that is extremely uncomfortable, called cognitive dissonance. And because it is so important to protect the core belief, they will rationalize, ignore and even deny anything that doesn't fit in with the core belief.”

What I post below is a fancy way of saying dumb as dogshit.

Invincible Ignorance Fallacy

The invincible ignorance fallacy, also known as argument by pigheadedness, is a deductive fallacy of circularity where the person in question simply refuses to believe the argument, ignoring any evidence given.

It is not so much a fallacious tactic in argument as it is a refusal to argue in the proper sense of the word.

The method used in this fallacy is either to make assertions with no consideration of objections, or calling them excuses, conjecture, etc. or saying that they are proof of nothing, all without actually demonstrating how the objection fit these terms.

It is similar to the ad lapidem fallacy, in which the person rejects all the evidence and logic presented, without providing any evidence or logic that could lead to a different conclusion.

By far the easiest way to wave away an intellectually better-resourced opponent is to slap on a label.

One can then simply decline to engage with ‘bad’ people and chalk up a ‘win.’

I argue with people like this not for their benefit, but for the benefit of bystanders: those who read comments, but really if ever respond themselves.

TJS said...

I tried to find out, just quickly how to pronounce, Dieuwe. What I got was something like 'either' with a 'D' in front and 'either' is pronounced with the 'E' sound. However I could be quite wrong as it's said incredibly quick. Not like a good kiwi drawn out twang at all!
As I said I could be wrong, as I would have thought the w would be a soft 'v' sound.
But I am a lot closer to knowing this than before! Pardon my ignorance.

TJS said...

And now that I've got past the name I can read again...

That is exactly what the so called left did, got one thinking and before too long, became more informed, to make more, 'far right' opinions. Isn't it wonderful? Like a chemical reaction. Because who can tolerate utter nonsense when it is being portrayed as real stuff? Thank you, Jacinda, for being so bloody stupid and unconvincing.

ABTW, Shame about the RN party in France. The conniving toad pulled a sly one. Very unfair.

ABTW is Biden's favourite line.😂

Anonymous said...

To Anon - @10.55 AM. July 8 -

I like your statement, can I use it when "People tell me I am wrong, when I can prove I am right"?

Erica said...

Progressives in education have crashed but they refuse to acknowledge it.

We now have the worst rankings in international tests of English speaking countries in reading. Only about 2% of students in low decile schools can pass in written work and our maths results show students at year 11 are doing maths several terms behind what they used to do. We have the longest tail of underachievement in the developed world. Progressive Education is a complete failure.

Parents don't want progressives'social engineering forced on their children. Only about 10% of schools have adopted the transgender programme into their schools according to Family First. The number of schools using it have declined in the last few years despite intensive pressure and advertising. This means 90% of parents are far !right!

Thank goodness for ordinary people who have not filled their heads with garbage.

Doug Longmire said...

The msm everywhere, love to fling the term "far right" at anyone who does not agree with them.
Interestingly, I have not seen similar use of the corresponding term - Far-Left !!