There's No Right-Wing In Modern Politics.

[Supreme Misogynist]

What the normies and the media call "far-right" today are just liberals and centrists from 10-20 years ago. No political party today seriously advocates for basic far-right policies like banning abortion, revoking women's rights, mass deportations, criminalizing LGBT, etc. Supposedly far-right parties "Save the West" chuds are voting for today are all controlled opposition at the end of the day. Sure, they might be better options than the far-left alternatives, but they still won't challenge the post-WW2 liberal democratic order.

Chesterton said it the best: “The whole modern world has divided itself into Conservatives and Progressives. The business of Progressives is to go on making mistakes. The business of Conservatives is to prevent mistakes from being corrected. Even when the revolutionist might himself repent of his revolution, the traditionalist is already defending it as part of his tradition. Thus we have two great types -- the advanced person who rushes us into ruin, and the retrospective person who admires the ruins. He admires them especially by moonlight, not to say moonshine. Each new blunder of the progressive or prig becomes instantly a legend of immemorial antiquity for the snob. This is called the balance, or mutual check, in our Constitution.”

[Sustacel250]

I understand the perspective of chesterton because he was atheist of his country back in the day. Let me explain. Today atheists like dawkins are edgy. In his times "catholic" in an anglo country was the equivalent of "being edgy" so tolkien or whoever wanted to be edgy could say "I am atheist", in an attitude of superficial defiance like oscar wilde level, that sort of edgy contrarian attitude.

As for his opinion, he dislikes progressive vs conservative as a framework, I agree, and I dislike it as well for another reason. Lets not expand on this for now.

However I disagree with the idea there is no right wing. In my perspective there is no left wing and left is not real. I let you know (so you understand my bias) that I take the jonathan bowden definition of "left" as pretty much accurate. He says left is subversion of order, anti hierarchy and so on. I can agree with his framing. This is going to be 80% of my political bias in this response to you.

You say parties are all controlled opposition. I agree, but I think left is the "controlled opposition". You seem to think is the right. Here we will disagree. I think the SJW is the controlled opposition, feminism is, the LGBT shit is, the BLM is fake.

And the reason to construct controlled oppositions is to create left vs right and make the right prevail defeating a puppet that i not real. So for example, churchill framed in his parliament (at the time) the world as "zionism vs communism", so people wanted to pursue zionism. For doing zionism first the elites had to embolden communism so people woould hate it and then they would pick the zionist option. Worked like this in my country, in germany and everywhere else. The elites will want to achieve "the reaction".