Connect with us


To what degree is infighting necessary?



To what degree is infighting necessary

It’s hard to be choosy about allies when the modern day Bolsheviks are pressing a boot to our necks, trying to rid us from every sphere of public influence. But at the same time Conservatives need to counterattack these narratives, and people who serve as nothing more than political sandbags are an impediment to setting our own narrative. Is the best defense a good offense, or can we withstand a protracted siege in which Leftism will fizzle out as it ventures in to the abyss of social media echo chambers. Because, that’s where Leftist are developing their ideas, and such is why the Left has revealed itself as being as extreme, if not more, than what many on the right had been saying for years.

Conservatism, in contrast has been a welcoming movement, but welcoming anyone and everyone, elevating those who are only talented at being on the intersectionality totem pole and saying other people’s talking points in response to the onslaught of the Left’s ad hominem attacks. Our inability, or unwillingness, to gatekeep has elevated several bad mouthpieces both in media and in office. I want to use a few examples, and yes I will name names, to explore how as a movement we should purge the phonies from our ranks as a movement, in this weekly installment of Conservative Grifters.

Last week, I published an article on Bill Mitchell. Mitchell is one of the most obvious grifters in Conservative media. This was not my first attempt to take a swing at Bill Mitchell. Following the Parkland shooting, in which he was a vocal proponent of gun control and an opponent of the 5th Amendment, I wrote, “Bill Mitchell reveals his phony conservatism on constitution.

Mitchell is one of those annoying people that believes Trump is playing 4D chess when, in reality, he’s caving under political pressure, a topic worthy of another article. Trump supports infringing upon the Second Amendment, and Bill Mitchell is on his knees like a dog smiling at his master. It’s quite pathetic for him to support Trump in this as if the GOP is really in danger come midterms. Our 2nd Amendment rights are not some pawn in a chess match against a fabled Blue Wave. Those of us who think that rights aren’t negotiable are more than the 0.001%. Mitchell is as he says in one instance: he’s not a purist. And if you’re not a “purist” on the Second Amendment, you have no business claiming conservatism, let alone having a large platform among conservatives. It’s the same as Tomi Lahren on abortion. But the 2nd Amendment isn’t the only part of the Bill of Rights that Mitchell regards little.

Nothing has changed in the last eighteen months. Yet now he’s vulnerable, not thanks to my own doing but, in large part, due to the scrutiny and devout trolling of others who launched a crusade against Grifters like him. But Mitchell’s noticeable dwindling in Twitter followers was the doing of his own ego, not them either. My article Bill Mitchell and Yippy tied his lack of transparency about fundraising to his outlandish claims of working with the next Google. It took the work of the trolls, better known as the Q Slayers and paired it with my own research on Yippy. My second attempt to uncover this grifter yielded far better results. Why? Because there is strength in numbers, devotion, and truth. It’s a shame the internet oft requires devoted numbers to spread a message far and wide, against the grain of the opposition.

Our EIC wrote a compelling piece on how Conservative should use social media.

Reach is everything on Twitter. It’s like a tree falling in an empty forest. If a Tweet is sent out, and nobody reads it, was it really a Tweet at all?

When we post a standalone Tweet, it has an opportunity to be seen by our followers and the followers of those who retweet us. When we reply to someone else, it has an opportunity to be seen by the same people as a standalone Tweet PLUS those who follow the person we’re responding to. Though fewer of our followers will see a reply than a standalone, there’s a chance to reach a different audience.

As noted above, I often troll those whose views I oppose. But sometimes I’ll reply to people I agree with wholeheartedly. There’s no rule about who you reply to, though I strongly recommend being cordial. The left gets unhinged. It’s incumbent on patriots to keep our cool, take the high road, and express our indignation intelligently. Just as we laugh at unhinged progressives, so too do they laugh at unhinged conservatives. But when we’re cordial and thoughtful, their only complaints can be about substance.

Indeed, any infighting on a social media front needs to follow much of these guideline with regard to the mind we are trying to change. But choosing a target is difficult. Bill Mitchell was lying to his audience and doubling down, along with being anti-gun. People who are anti-gun need to be cast out of the Conservative movement, just like how Tomi Lahren fell out of favor for being pro-abortion. Life and guns are the two most motivating single issues in politics and it works almost entirely in Conservatism’s favor.

Another thing we see on social media are those who use the tactics of the Left. One of the most prominent Republican social media accounts is Candace Owens, who is largely a race hustler, just one wearing our jersey. And we can argue about her impact, but her individual movement hasn’t had enough, if any, success to warrant the high praises and platform. Though she consistently gets more retweets than Ben Shapiro, I would bet her reach isn’t nearly as broad. With that said, I believe she is a race hustler and most likely an ineffective messenger, however, infighting to cast her out would do little to improve the movement. The demand for race hustling is great. Should she fall someone else will take her place, a CJ Pearson or otherwise. It solves nothing in the long run.  So the difference between a Bill Mitchell and a Candace Owens, is that Bill Mitchell had a narrower niche, in that he has one of the largest platforms for a devout Trump/QAnon cultist.

But now I want to broaden the conversation to politicians, which is where the main concern truly is. So why did I start with social media figures?

Because social media is where we see people excuse bad behavior with calls to not infight, usually in regards to personalities, Trump’s included. These excuses are where we get to the heart of the question. Reagan once talked about the 80% principle. But the principle can no longer be applied by Conservatives because we do so at our own demise. The 80% agreement quota fails to weigh issues proportionately to their value. Should no amnesty for illegal immigrants be weighed equally with lower marginal tax rates. Should cuts to future spending be viewed as championing fiscal conservatism as cuts to current spending. Should support for the death penalty be weighted equally with Second Amendment absolutism. Should fewer regulations be on equal standing with outlawing abortion?

The answer to all of these is no because not all issues are equal. You mean to tell me that perceived rise in racism and antisemitism is a more pressing issue than our $22.5 Trillion in debt. In the words of Joe Biden, “come on, man!” This is not to say we cannot focus on multiple issues at once, rather a politician should be held to account for failing to adhere to Conservatism on higher ranking issues.

Among politicians who have royally stabbed their constituents in the back of Mitch McConnell, Lindsey Graham, Devin Nunes, Kevin McCarthy, and countless more. But these politicians are masterful in their betrayal. McConnell has employed meme culture to distract people from his mediocrity. Graham went all in for Brett Kavanaugh to make voters forget how he also went all in on Obama’s Supreme Court nominees and ran a failed 2016 campaign because he was an acknowledged RINO then. Nunes went all in for Trump against the Russian Hoax to distract from having one of the worst voting records among Republican House members. And McCarthy finagled his way into being the ball-less Paul Ryan’s replacement. These hardcore backstabbers need to be expelled from the Republican Party if we are to save it. Yet they know the short attention span of people and the forgiving nature of voters towards their own elected officials, and make themselves impervious to primaries. Just think in 2014, Mitch McConnell trounced an excellent primary opponent. That primary opponent is now the Governor of Kentucky.

To say that we mustn’t gatekeep our own politicians is to happily perpetuate mediocrity on our team. Yet we would drain precious resources supporting primaries against the aforementioned RINOs. Instead we need to be well informed and support Conservatives in open seats and Conservatives challenging the out of favor notorious RINOs. The Democrats have the money, the Koch Brothers hate our movement, and Republicans foolishly give to the RNC rather than the individual candidates. So what money we are willing to donate needs to go directly to Conservative candidates and organizations.

The American Conservative Movement seeks to bring to light Conservative challengers and expose the RINOs, particularly those vulnerable to a primary. But NOQ Report is just a publication. In order to win this necessary fight, we must all get informed, give, and act.

We are currently forming the American Conservative Movement. If you are interested in learning more, we will be sending out information in a few weeks.

American Conservative Movement