#NeverTrump Exposes the Rot of Movement Conservatism


Call them what you will—cuckservatives, neoconservatives, movement conservatives, constitutional conservatives —but the #NeverTrump people on Twitter are a walking meme. They embody alt-right critiques of the standard Republican party in a way that borders on parody, chirping every basic bitch talking point we’ve identified as being part of their worldview without fail. Recently, I have been spending more time debating them (in 140 characters or less) than I should, but I did learn some fun and interesting things about the vestigial fans of the mainline GOP:

#NeverTrump bruises easily. Half the people who I was engaging with ended up blocking me. I can only assume this means I won the debate. Even when they went for character attacks first. Don’t dish it if you can’t take it, fam. They would also engage in very flaccid brigading, some liking each others’ tweets without even participating in the discussion. In any event, inflicting severe butthurt on your opponents is a spiritual victory, especially if they think David French should run for president. Speaking of which…

#NeverTrump wants a third-party conservative to run for president. This will split the non-Democratic vote and guarantee Hillary Clinton the White House in November. These people would rather kamikaze their own party—so a liberal woman they’ve spent 20 years castigating and demonizing can be President—than support Donald Trump, who is the furthest right on issues that matter to the general pool of Republican voters. Allowing Clinton to win would not only award the executive branch to the left, but the judiciary as well. The next president is guaranteed at least one Sanhedrin (SCOTUS) appointee and Clinton will not pick a conservative, let alone a constitutionalist. #NeverTrump means never having another conservative majority on the court. Such a decision reflects very poorly on the supposed conservatism of these closeted trotskyites.

#NeverTrump believes there is no difference between Clinton and Trump. The argument goes that Trump is just a Democrat running as a Republican who is lying about his entire platform; therefore he is the same as Clinton. I guess that’s why Democrats like him so much—oh wait they’re apoplexic about him. Betraying his entire base would also render his re-election virtually impossible in 2020—another brilliant conspiratorial move! While it is true that Trump is left of movement conservatism on eminent domain, abortion, government recognition of gay marriages, and transvestite bathroom usage, he is the furthest right candidate on critical issues like illegal immigration, Islam, border control, gun rights, etc. A border wall, a deportation force, and a proposed Muslim ban are not Clintonian ideas. I get that he used to be a Democrat, you know, because he is a wealthy New York urbanite. And I get that he has donated to/bribed Clinton, who was a senator for New York from 2001 to 2009—you try doing large real estate and construction deals in an urbanite blue state—but how does that make him literally the same as Clinton? Do you guys even remember that Trump was the de facto figurehead of the anti-Obama birther controversy? What a closet Democrat! White men have defected from the Democratic party in droves over the last few elections—is it so unreasonable for the new GOP to led by some of them? This is all part of the losing mentality of movement conservatives, where they don’t care about growth or popular support for their ideology, they just want to lose respectfully.

#NeverTrump buys into liberal paradigms and liberal moral authority. I know that sounds obvious on the alt-right since we understand that the mission of movement conservatives is just slower-paced liberalism, but on Twitter I saw this in action. #NeverTrump deployed a tactic right out of the thought-policing Buckleyite-SJW playbook, crying witch and expressing moral opprobrium at me for stating facts they did not like. I was accused of using “Stormfront rhetoric” and called a racist when I informed them that the Republican electorate is 90% White and that if White people became a minority there would be no more conservative government in the United States. Really this is an uncontroversial point—something even liberals understand when they boast about a new American majority—that demographics matter in elections and that different parties have different ethnic affinities, but hey, that’s “Stormfront rhetoric.” I didn’t bother nitpicking about rhetoric and dialectic with #NeverTrump, but it soon became clear I stumped them. There was no real counter to my response that: 1.) I don’t go on Stormfront, 2.) I am stating a demographic fact, and 3.) I am right. They had nothing more to argue on the demographic question than calling me names. This is why #NeverTrump conservatives are losers, they cannot answer challenges to their paradigms.

#NeverTrump still thinks everyone who opposes them is a Democrat (or an SJW), which is ironic given how liberal they are. While I was surprised to see them literally tweet that I was an SJW—maybe they use it as a synonym for collectivist in cucklish—thinking that everyone who opposes movement conservatism is a liberal Democrat is not new. In fact, when these same people were targeted by 2015’s cuckservative meme, they assumed the same thing, that only muh libruls could possibly be opposed to them. The failure of these people and their ideology to adapt to changing conditions, i.e. the political conflict between local and global and the post-1965 demographic transformation of the United States, is manifest here more than anywhere else. #NeverTrump can barely wrap its head around problems like race relations, let alone solutions like nationalism. We will benefit from this in the long run; not only are these effete miscreants losing the struggle over the redefinition of the American Right, but they don’t even understand who they are losing to or why.

Finally, #NeverTrump cannot distinguish a good war from a bad war, or supporting veterans from supporting wars. What I mean by a good war is one that both serves our national interests and is successfully concluded. What I mean by a bad war is one for which the there is insufficient justification, harm done to the security and status of the United States in the world, and defeat. In other words, Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan were all bad wars—the people who volunteered for them were misled, the people who led them were wrong at best, and these engagements were net losses. I made it quite clear that I supported allotting care and resources to veterans but am opposed to these wars, their goals, and the idea that they were worth fighting in—it was not enough for #NeverTrump. They support the Iraq War, even when informed that it led to the rise of the Islamic State and the Afro-Islamic invasion of Europe. This is what #NeverTrump actually believes, that the Iraq War was a good thing. Replacing Arab nationalist governments with violent and unstable Islamic theocracies is fine. They had no real response to this either, being frankly too stupid to ponder the consequences of actions they support.

At this point, the only threat movement conservatives like those in #NeverTrump pose to us is their ability to raise money. Their ideology has been so thoroughly trashed that it can be shot down without receiving an intellectual response, only name-calling and misdirection. With the rotting away of so much of their base, their average supporter has regressed to blindly supporting Bush II-era policies with the critical reasoning ability of an Australian aboriginal. These people refuse to grapple with the salient identity and demographic issues of the late republic, and thus their role can only diminish.

Lawrence Murray can be found on Twitter at @AtlanticCent, where he is a member of several Right Wing Bullycide Squads.

This entry was posted in America, Ideology, Politics and tagged , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

15 Responses to #NeverTrump Exposes the Rot of Movement Conservatism

  1. Bar Tar says:

    I can’t help but wonder if you’re not wasting your efforts. I, at least, never found it very profitable to argue with the endless hordes of useless idiots. All it ever did was make me better at rhetoric.


    • Twitter is entertainment if anything. Being called an SJW was hysterical to me beyond what words can convey.


    • Afton says:

      The point of arguing with idiots are the people reading the exchange. Kind of like the ads with the 1 idiot and the 1 smart guy explaining why ‘Product X’ is the best. The key is to not get bogged down in actually debating the chump. Make your argu, point out the violations of formal logic he makes in counter-argu, reiterate your points, peace-out.



  2. mark fleagle says:

    A picture is worth a thousand words…

    It brings to mind the meme: ‘Chasing down the Last White Person.’


    • Russian Limbaugh says:

      It sure does. I have already seen that meme produced.

      This one is a vast improvement to the original “ALISHTC”.

      “ALISHTC” 2.0 has the proven imagery there is danger ahead. Those children did not fully capture that reality.


      • The children one is supposed to make you feel guilt for leaving your descendants that world. But the diehard cucks see this as progress, not demise. But we’ll have to wait and see how they feel about violence against speech they disagree with.


  3. Russian Limbaugh says:

    This piece could not come at a more perfect time. Following ((()))gate, this will really hammer home the fact that the cuckservatives are already in their coffins and the dirt has already been dumped on them.

    The cuckservatives are stupid.

    Anyone that has debated them on disqus or twitter has lived out this experiment you displayed here. Excellent rundown as always Mr. Murray.


  4. Afton says:

    A great article, however I think you got 1 thing wrong.

    “This will split the non-Democratic vote and guarantee Hillary Clinton the White House in November.”

    I still remember voting for Ross Perot, and what a big deal everyone made about how he threw the election for Clinton. The media pounded it into our heads, so that we’d learn the lesson, and it continues to this day. Exit polling showed a different story, however. About 1/3 of Perot voters would have voted for Clinton, which means B1 would have lost anyway. I highly doubt the French Tickler is going to do even half as well as Perot did, and probably more than 1/3 would have been Hillary voters. If Bernie gets the nomination, it would be closer, but it wouldn’t be a slam dunk like with Hillary.

    Something like 45% of eligible voters don’t vote. Trump is going to pull in a bunch of those people, and it would only take a few points to make it a landslide.


  5. Pingback: #NeverTrump wants a third party conservative to run...

  6. Pingback: How Trumpenvolk Talk | ATLANTIC CENTURION

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s