Right wing activism vs left wing activism (PIRGs)

I have more things I want to write about than time to write about them, and some of those things I posted as comments over at Steve Sailer’s blog.  So I’ll bring some of them over until I get more free time/high spoon days or run out of relevant commentary.  First up are some comments I made about the difference between right wing and left wing activism, including the PIRGs (public interest research groups) as an example.

“There’s also a professional activist culture for Republicans, it’s just not as effective [as professional left-wing activism] because it’s oriented towards milking the base. HSLDA is a case in point. Doesn’t always start that way, but the right-wing activist stuff always seems to end up there, mysteriously.”

“…the left funds professional activists opaquely, with small fees that hit thousands or millions of people, where they skim off a portion (the PIRG system is a great case in point). It tries to not directly milk its base. The right, conversely, does nothing but overtly milk its base and avoids opaque funding mechanisms, favoring direct appeals, even if they have a con-artist sheen.”

“The PIRG money for student PIRGs, the main ones Americans hear about comes from the students, not the government. They also don’t tell students they can claw it back and the few students who figure it out have a major struggle to get a few hundred bucks back out of thousands spent per year. So it’s opaque funding, but not so much that people have a strong incentive to try to eliminate it. That structure is typical of liberal activist stuff. There’s other examples like obscure state level taxes that cost a few bucks a year per person, but in a state of millions, that’s real money.

The hijacking foundations is also a liberal special. Conservatives are fairly bad at working that angle, too. The Birchers in their prime were a good conservative activist alternative approach, but they relied on historical conditions that are unlikely to be replicable by conservatives these days.”

The context was something that is currently on alt-right and other conservative-ish minds, effective activism techniques.  Some people were doing the whole “Republicans HAVE JOBS LOL” thing that is standard when this comes up, but Democrats have jobs too, and not just activist-ing.

Relevant discussion from My Posting Career (naughty words galore warning), but mostly in this discussion they dismiss the successful right wing organizing that does exist (pro-life activism) and are unaware that right-wing women were the mainstays of previous successful right-wing activism before the degeneration into base-milking in the wake of the 1960s.

I’ll come back to the right-wing women thing over and over again, because smart right wing women were the backbone of pre-1960s conservative and Republican organization.  Then that energy mostly got diverted into homeschooling and other acceptable fringes.

Advertisements

Sarah Palin is Lisa Jackson

In both cases the people in question were slack about doing their jobs and that is why they had the ‘secret’ email accounts.  Less paperwork/weeding through hundreds of emails.  Less…work.

Also, both nailed by their own provincialism.

I picked these two examples because the media treated one example verrrry differently than the other, both the mainstream media and the right wing media.  The mainstream media tried to present Sarah Palin as specially corrupt, while the right media tried to present Lisa Jackson as specially incompetent and affirmative-actionish.  Both women, despite being quite on opposite sides politically, were actually playing standard roles.  Government officials, both elected and unelected these days seem to think doing their jobs is beneath them, but by gum y’all had better be ready to pay more taxes/vote in more bond issues.

I would also note that for complicated tribal reasons, a surprising amount of doxxing was done to both women which resulted in their having to suffer some consequences for their slackness.  Just think of the possibilities if this was done As A Rule for government officials!

Nobody thinks of government as containing people who are fellow community members anymore.  It’s all very atomized and deracinated.  Nobody, especially conservatives, seems to want locals as their government anymore.  But that’s also real community and real authority, not bouncing around all over the country for promotions just like in the terrible private sector.

Something to consider when conservatives go on their tears about the evils of “government”.  It’s supposed to be their very neighbors, friends and relatives, but they are too blinded by ideological haze to think of it that way.

An example of where the Bureaucrat Wiki would sure come in handy (graphic content warning in link)

Someone who took the time to find out which employees are doing these things (they are listed in a search-only directory, it would require Nerd Power to do online-only, some phone calls to the Denver EPA office otherwise) would be doing a pretty impressive job of setting up a means to demand accountability from government employees who think they can literally do whatever the poop they want.  That link is pretty gross, because the people involved are doing appalling scatological things in their workplace.

Just posting all the EPA employees by working through the search-only directory with contact phone numbers would be a powerful and useful act.  Better than pointing and laughing followed by laments that “these people can’t be fired.”

I talk about the Bureaucrat Wiki as an idea in its own permanent page.