I think any "secular right" is doomed to fail

it will eventually become leftism

lemme make a very basic argument to you

I won't be offended at all if you think its dumb or unworkable and it's also not very developed

please, I'd love to hear it

I don't necessarily disagree that any secular right will become leftist either, I want to explore that later

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PizBVqcAn0o

@fallot https://nonaurosedferro.wordpress.com/2017/01/27/a-model-for-secular-conservative-thought/

I think I've read this before, reading

you can skim the first part, it's just background

why don't you go on while I read

nah that's the argument.

so the argument is utilitarianism

is that right?

Maybe a derivation of utilitarianism.

But more of a law and econ point about transaction costs

it's the same as prozakian nihilism

this kind of pragmatic/utilitarian ideology will always fail, it is inferior to leftism

in moral terms

I agree

PC leftism will always be morally superior to it

My goal was to come up with a way to justify a secular right-ism

I think nationalism is a temporarily workable solution

I think the best argument is the transaction costs point, but I think it will always be eroded

basically an antichrist ideology that raises the nation to god levels

fascism++

that in theory could work for a few generations at least

the other argument I am still going to write at some point is basically Filmer's argument filtered through Darwin, which is that all authority flows from Fatherhood, which imposes a non-theological hierarchy

I don't agree that this is a non-theological hierarchy

as fatherhood must also proceed from somewhere

Filmer's premise was God as Father, but I think you could do with out that

if it is incidental, then this is just arbitrary

and argue that it procedes from biology

yeah, it has to be "God the Father" to work

to work well

to work okay, you can sub in Darwin maybe

I appreciate the procession from biology but

that also removes your ability to raise this one aspect

and also, it reduces to utilitarianism

because your argument is ultimately "this works"

no framework for what working ultimately is, or what is good or bad