Posted on 12/23/2025 5:57:42 AM PST by ProgressingAmerica
John Stossel interviews James Lindsay, famous for fighting wokeness on the left. Lindsay is vigorously investigating wokeness on the right, mostly but not limited to those following the ideas of Nick Fuentes.
----
A new section of the right is foolishly bashing liberty … and even embracing Marxist ideas.
That's why some call them the "woke right."
Is politics linear or a circle?
Linear = Radical Left>Left>Middle>Right>Radical Right
Or is it a circle where there is little difference between the radical left and radical right?
Great question.
I honestly do not know the answer.
I know the current system has failed.
I am just not smart enough to come up with an ideal solution.
“Woke Right” is a nonsensical term. Anyone who espouses the “values” of the left is and always was a leftist hungry for power.
There are plenty of conservatives who want to “ban” things which many say fall under the category of “free speech” - some examples: drag queen story hour, gay pride parades, islam, transgender theory
I agree with many of them.
does that make me a “marxist?”
Woke MAGA is one of their weirdest developments I observed in 2025.
I’ve never heard of a single conservative praise Marx (as a person) in all my life. Have some conservatives conceded about some points made >> How about the term disenfranchised? or the term Capitalist. Or the many republicans that accept open borders (Bush, etc) or taxing wages and calling it income to get around the direct tax requirement. Payroll taxes in general and social benefits paid by employers and given tax benefits to said employers. Limitations of the right to contract. Establishment of corporations as persons. Federal reserve system of fractional banking and it’s notes being declared leal tender as opposed to coinage of real money.
The rest of the "woke right" keyword, sorted:
I guess I may have seen some make believe “conservatives” once up in Custer State Park in So. Dakota as a couple guys were doing about the same thing as poking the buffalo. They appeared to be going up very close to one to get a close-up picture. There was no form of cover closeby that I could see, but we left before I saw the end result. I always thought most folks knew better, even without the obvious warning signs.
I've heard of this Hans Herman-Hoppe character. Not impressed.
"I am not arguing that liberty should not be the highest goal of a civilization. Although, I would entertain that there could be higher goals...(prosperity of the people, happiness of the people, longevity and continuation of the culture and traditions, etc...) However, even accepting that liberty IS the highest goal...the question becomes, "What is the best system to achieve that end?"
The next question becomes...."Is the current system the best system?""
The next question is process of elimination. Tin pot dictators wearing crowns did not create liberty, they opposed it. So Monarchism is invalid. The process also eliminates communism, fascism, and socialism. You get left pretty much with the U.S. at the end.
Perhaps there's some system the world has never seen. Of those that the world has seen, monarchism is nothing but totalitarianism that knows how to properly crust itself in gold and expensive furniture so that it looks visually appealing. Other than that, kings are dictators. Tyrants.
"Regarding the Constitution, there are only 2 options...."
No. There's three options. The third option is that The U.S. Constitution requires an active and engaged citizenry and we the voters of the United States have failed to give our Constitution what it needs to be effective.
"wrote a book in 2001 called 'Democracy, the god that failed'"
Yeah I know of that book. It's a really good thing for us that the U.S. is a republic, not a democracy.
Hoppe's prognostications would be more applicable to the low quality democracies over in Europe destroying themselves. Europe has always been more fitting for some form of totalitarianism such as monarchism.
The C word is a rare commodity to 99& of the politicians in m congress these days. The ones that do mention it end up being trashed, like Paul, Massie and Greene.
So, you would say #2...?
The Constitution was poorly drafted and incapable of preventing the 3rd world “melting pot” to which we are currently subjected.
I really suggest you read ‘Democracy, the god that failed.’ I think it would be right up your alley. From many of your previous comments, I think you and I believe many of the same things.
I was always a Constitution supremacist. Reading that book got me to start questioning some of my previous believes. Since reading it 5 or 6 years ago, the cracks have only widened.
https://www.amazon.com/Democracy-Economics-Politics-Perspectives-Democratic/dp/0765808684
Although I generally agree with Stossel he's a hard libertarian.
No. “Marxist” is not being used as a pejorative here.
Your terms are acceptable and not anathema to liberty. It is important to understand that the word “censorship” has been taken over and weaponized by the left so that this word does their bidding.
Just as they took over words like “monopoly”, “democracy”, and many other words.
I am not sure any document could have addressed John Adam’s concerns.
Pieces of paper will eventually be subverted by homo sapiens—no matter what the pieces of paper say.
If necessary the meaning of words can be changed over time—the left has been masters at that.
Seriously. You do not know what you are?
"I know the current system has failed."
Look, I agree that progressivism has failed, the goal should be moving toward the future of what the Founding Fathers gave us. It was correct and much of it is still there.
The Founders vision is the best the world has ever seen. We have moved backward, not forward.
They ought to be smacked into reality too and immediately be labeled a COMMUNIST, that's exactly what they're espousing.
I admire the Founding Fathers—and I even agree that we probably could not improve on the document they wrote.
The problem is that document no longer exists in the real world.
Imagine a Supreme Court of Sotomeyers and Jacksons.
No document can survive that.
I agree. One notes that all the 'talking heads' are also media figures themselves.
A cousin of mine, a retired LEO, was for awhile inundated with spam courtesy of his providing his real name and email to "conservative" sites, and in looking closely at them, I tracked back for him quite a number of those sites to two guys out of Florida, simply doing the data acquisition game via "conservative" news offers. We are data to the big wide world, and targets for their messaging of all sorts.
Stossel, with whom I often agree and sometimes disagree, is himself his own product, and his YouTube videos are a profit center. Nothing wrong with that, as long as we are aware of it. Social Blade on StosselTV
He, because it is how the system works, also looks for donations, as does Free Republic, StosselTV Donate
Not a criticism, but rather just more information. We "think both Stossel and Lindsay may be overstating things." What is reasonable, when any stampede starts, small or large, is to observe and perhaps not be swept up into that "latest thing." The Fuentes and Tate stuff are stampedes for most, to be sure, and Stossel is a far more moderate voice. Best wishes.
Calling people names is not fixing the problem.
The leftists are busy planning for future victories instead of attacking their “extremists”.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.