What does “far-right” even mean anymore?

“Far right” is basically anything that contests the Establishment narrative.

Anybody taking the legacy, corporate media at face value these days is likely under the impression that the entire world is being overrun with “far-right” extremists, after all, anything orthogonal to the current WEF-inspired world order seems to be, by definition, far right.

If it wasn’t apparent already, it became obvious during the pandemic how establishment narratives are promulgated by corporate media cartels to enshrine elite-approved canon.  For that to work, it was key to neutralize non-conforming impulses, and the way to do that, it seemed, was to label it all as “far right”.

The term has now been so misplaced and over-used that it becomes impossible to differentiate between fast rising maverick politicians from skinheads with swastika tattoos. Make no mistake, this is deliberate.

The standard playbook is to cast anything gaining momentum as “populist” – which is always implicated as being  wrong-headed and retrograde, even though a literal definition of the word simply connotes that large swaths of the population are feeling strongly about something (usually some manner of getting screwed by the elites).

In an era where confidence and credibility of our incumbent institutions is in secular decline – given their stunning incompetence, not to mention self-serving hypocrisy and corruption, the public is becoming increasingly fed up with their betters. That means whatever appeals to them has to be repackaged as “far-right”, lest the movement gain momentum.

I refer the reader to Brandon Smith’s characterization of “negative branding”:

“One of the most favored propaganda tactics of [the establishment] is to relabel or redefine an opponent before they can solidly define themselves.  In other words, [they] will seek to “brand” you (just as corporations use branding) in the minds of the masses so that they can take away your ability to define yourself as anything else….

 

Through the art of negative branding, your enemy has stolen your most precious asset — the ability to present yourself to the public as you really are.

Negative branding is a form of psychological inoculation.  It is designed to close people’s minds to particular ideas before they actually hear those ideas presented by a true proponent of the ideas. ”

It’s not just dark horse, anti-establishment challengers who get the “far right” treatment, in this era of increasingly collectivist sympathies, it can be anything that reduces dependancy on the state or faith in the system.

Let’s be clear, there is nothing political, let alone “far right” around embracing fitness or valuing freedom. However anything  that confers greater autonomy on the individual, or instills the idea that one can improve their own lives without state intervention, is anathema.

Take an ascendent theme or personality that challenges the establishment – any thing that poses a threat to late-stage globalism or the Davos-class of elites who deign to define The Rules; hitch it to the “far right” by saying these extremists are co-opting or embracing that thing, and then it’s magically off limits – safely tucked outside the Overton Window via narrative alchemy.

This was how Bitcoin, the most emancipatory technology to arise since the internet itself, was characterized as “right wing extremism” .

It’s no problem if the target has no tenable relationship to right-wing politics: personal responsibility, physical fitness, or non-state, decentralized digital hard currency .  Just call it a “dog whistle”.

In Javier Millei’s case, signalling his intent to abolish Argentina’s central bank (as the core driver of that country’s incessant currency collapses and runaway Cantillion Effect), is enough to anger the guardians of the fiat money system.

If it’s an unambiguous rejection of an establishment core premise, call it “denialism”. I once saw a guy stomp off of a live podcast because, as he huffed at the host before he disconnected, “I can see that you’re a Russian Collusion Denialist!”, and then he was gone.

Of course, the entire Russian collusion narrative has since been totally debunked, and generally known to have been a Clinton campaign ratfucking, even in polite company.

More topical lately, is the insistence that belief in the most hysterical scenarios for climate change should be mandatory and that the most radical policy responses be non-negotiable.

Anybody flat out contesting the dogma, or showing research indicating that there is no climate emergency, or that the models (which have never successfully predicted anything) are probably wrong, is a denialist.

I too, would find it preferable if I could forcibly compel others to adopt my belief system. https://t.co/ch0AB5ru6g

— Mark Jeftovic, The ₿itcoin Capitalist (@StuntPope) August 26, 2023

And denialism is, exclusively, far right.

Shouldn’t we also be on guard against far-left extremism?

Here is where we see the hypocrisy on full display. When people or voices push back on WEF-inspired theology, they get branded as “right-wing” and even the term “conservative” carries baggage. It’s practically a slur.

Lefty?

People put that it in their Twitter bios and walk around with Che Guevara shirts. I’m surprised there isn’t a hammer-and-sickle emoji yet.

According to “experts”, it’s not clear that “left wing extremism” is even a thing.

It took a symposium of social scientists to sift through evidence “on both sides” of the question, the result was inconclusive and “left wing authoritarianism” or extremism remains, to this day, as elusive as ever.

“Although right-wing authoritarianism is well documented, social psychologists do not all agree that a leftist version even exists.

In February 2020, the Society for Personality and Social Psychology held a symposium called “Is Left-Wing Authoritarianism Real? Evidence on Both Sides of the Debate.”

The left employs dog whistles too, only they aren’t recognized as such under the prevailing zeitgeist.

The burgeoning “#degrowth” movement is a dog whistle for communism.  “Equity” is one for wealth redistribution, while “inclusivity” forays into racism more often than many care to admit.

The entire Overton Window is now a collectivist, woke sliver

If an entrenched elite goes so far off the rails that the citizenry rebels and chooses the unthinkable (Brexit, Trump, Bitcoin, “conservatism”), it is never because the establishment let down or even betrayed the public – it’s because, for some unfathomable and inscrutable reason, the peasants went “far-right”.

Left vs right is now meaningless. As I’ve written many times: the defining tension of our age is centralization, collectivism, statism, censorship, authoritarianism vs decentralization, individuality, autonomy, free speech, personal responsibility and self-reliance.

There are basically those who believe they have the ecclesiastical authority to tell everybody else what to do, how to live, and what is permissible to think and say. Then there is everybody who wants to be left alone to live their own lives in peace.

Unfortunately, there is also a growing contingent of the populace who want to be told what to do and think. 

It isn’t “far right” extremism sweeping the world that we should be worried about. It’s Stockholm Syndrome.

These are the people who willingly give the high priests of the establishment their gravitas – the ones who routinely change their Twitter profiles to endorse The Latest Thing™.

While they tend to be the most vociferous ideological berserkers online, acting as enforcers for the authoritarian collective, they invariably live lives of quiet desperation out in the real world. They would be completely rudderless if not for their digital emojis and sigils to guide them.

I expect these people will enthusiastically embrace Black Mirror style CBCDCs when they finally launch, allowing their lives to become fully gamified via their smart phones.

They are the same people who locked their shrieking children alone in a room for two weeks after a bogus PCR test for COVID, and they’ll be the same people who will post teary-eyed TikTok videos of themselves euthanizing their dogs after Prince William or Whoopi Goldberg tells them it’ll slow down global warming. (Future MSNBC think piece: “Why far-right extremists want you to love your dog.”)

They are the subservient herd, at least until they become disenfranchised or disillusioned with the social contract. Usually that happens when wealth inequality finally puts them on the wrong side of the poverty line, or when they see elites brazenly living by a different set of rules, or when the consequences of horrific policy blunders hit them where they live.

At that point, they start to look for alternatives, they go down so-called “rabbit holes”, and come out the other end shocked (or perhaps bemused) to learn that in the eyes of the establishment that betrayed them, they are now far-right extremists.

My next ebook is The CBDC Survival Guide and I’m sending it free to Bombthrower subscribers when it’s done (early June). In the meantime, subscribe now and get The Crypto Capitalist Manifesto while you wait. Follow me on Nostr, or Twitter.