A Defense of Yangism

Rebel Yell writes:

Challenge accepted.

If Yang is polling at 1% in the polls and some other candidate wins the Democratic nomination, then nothing has been lost by supporting him. After all, what is the persuasive argument against voting for the best candidate in the Democratic primary? Among other things, I would argue that is Yang because he is offering $1,000 a month, seems practical and mild mannered and has a good grasp of future challenges. Getting $1,000 a month from the feds strikes me a great consolation prize.

Blompf is currently polling at 43.6 percent in the RCP average. He is a lock for the Republican nomination. Thus, I would argue that the people who support #Blompf2020 and #MIGA2020 should start making the case for their candidate. What exactly is the Southern Nationalist case for supporting Donald Trump’s reelection? Is it because Blompf is going to reduce current immigration inflows? Is it because Blompf is going to have an “America First” foreign policy? Is it because Blompf is going to stand up to China and end chronic trade imbalances? Is it because Blompf is going to rebuild our infrastructure, end social media censorship, quell Antifa violence or end the tyranny of political correctness?

I’ve been an ideological populist for 15 years now. I support a foreign policy of realism, restraint, diplomacy and international peace. I support an economic policy based on developmental capitalism rather than free-market capitalism. As a populist, there are plenty of issues where I unironically have common ground with Yang like on Universal Basic Income, Medicare for All, a VAT tax on Silicon Valley, student loan debt relief, infrastructure spending, democracy dollars, postal banking, and so forth. He has a lot of good populist ideas. Huey Long supported Universal Basic Income back in the Great Depression.

The real problem here is that conservatives and libertarians take for granted that White identity politics means that the politics of everyone must by default be aligned with their politics and the Republican Party. In reality, conservatives and libertarians who believe in economic freedom are only 27% of the population. In contrast, populists and moderates who believe in economic fairness are 29% of the population and outnumber the entire Right combined by ourselves.

Realpolitik? Strategically dumb? As a populist, I would say it makes much more sense for me to write about politics from my own perspective and values than from that of conservatism or lolbertarianism. There is a vastly greater audience in the center of the electorate. There are millions of White people who agree with the conservatives on social issues like abortion, but who don’t really like their Charlie Kirk positions on economics. That’s a huge niche waiting to be filled and it is what we are doing.

Note: I’m being slightly humorous here, but I don’t see any reason why this should be controversial. There are Southerners who are conservatives, populists, moderates, libertarians and progressives. Seeing as how a nation includes everyone rather than just one political tendency, I would argue it makes much more sense to colonize the entire political spectrum and argue from the pro-Southern point of view from every tendency rather than to continue to prop up Blompf and mainstream conservatism.

As for wasted energy, I would anyone who thinks we are wasting our time to check out our ongoing Southern History Series. Speaking for myself, I have been vastly more productive in creating content as of late now that I have written off the current president who has been negative cloud hanging over the entire movement for the past two years now.