BASED: A Vibe, Not An Ideology

The "New Right" isn’t so new when it comes to stated principles

It’s undeniable that the conservatism of today is worlds apart from the pre-Trump era. Immigration restrictionism, non-interventionism, and trade protectionism were all once condemned by the conservative movement. Now these positions are embraced by the mainstream Right. It would seem that the conservative movement has completely transformed its thinking and principles to accommodate this moment.

But that’s not quite the case. When articulating its principles, the New Right hits the same notes as the Old Right. What’s different is the urgent tone and desire to appear BASED. It’s a new vibe, not a new ideology.

This was exemplified in two recent texts. One is an official State Department Substack published last month. Written by Samuel Samson, a senior State adviser, it called for America to develop “civilizational allies” throughout the world. Its purpose was to defend Alternative für Deutschland and other right-wing elements from suppression by European governments. It’s undoubtedly good that the State Department feels the need to defend nationalists from censorship. The article was widely hailed by the Online Right as an example of how BASED the new administration is.

When defining the principles for this new foreign policy orientation, Samson turned to boilerplate conservatism:

Our transatlantic partnership is underpinned by a rich Western tradition of natural law, virtue ethics, and national sovereignty. This tradition flows from Athens and Rome, through medieval Christianity, to English common law, and ultimately into America's founding documents. The Declaration's revolutionary assertion that men “are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights” echoes the thought of Aristotle, Thomas Aquinas, and other European heavyweights who recognized that all men possess natural rights that no government can arbitrate or deny. America remains indebted to Europe for this intellectual and cultural legacy.

Essentially, he says “all men are created equal” means we must stand with the AfD. While the purpose is good, it does seem a strange argument. If standard conservatism can be redeployed to defend European nationalists, it shouldn’t cause too much complaint. But it still doesn’t make perfect sense.

A recent speech delivered by Heritage Foundation President Kevin Roberts further illustrated the strange combination of standard conservatism with a BASED vibe. The speech proclaims a new golden age that will return to the “permanent things” outlined by famed conservative intellectual Russell Kirk. The speech is a master class in mixing Online Right buzzwords with movement conservative theorizing. There are numerous references to “managerialism” and “liberal technocracy.” It emphasizes America is a nation, not an economy. It speaks in a more overtly Christian tone than Paul Ryan types would entertain. But the core of it is the same as that of old conservatism. This passage demonstrates that promises to bury liberalism by reviving the legacy of… Abraham Lincoln:

We are not here to tweak liberalism. We are here to bury it—and to resurrect something older and truer in its place.

We are tasked with renewing a conservatism that is pro-worker, pro-family, pro-God, pro-nation—just as it was under Abraham Lincoln. A conservatism rooted in the American tradition—not ashamed of our history, but proud of our inheritance—just as it was under William McKinley and Teddy Roosevelt, and then Reagan, and now Trump.

In this renewal, we are witnessing the rebirth of what the Founders envisioned—a republic grounded in virtue, guarded by borders, governed with consent and the rule of law, and guided by divine providence.

It’s gets stranger when he relies on Kirk to articulate Trumpism:

If this truly is a golden age, it will not be golden because of economic prosperity alone. It will be golden because of what we are remembering. And what we are remembering are the permanent things. As Russell Kirk taught us, these are the enduring truths that outlast kings and parliaments, fads and empires. They are what ground a people when everything else is in flux: belief in a moral order, fidelity to tradition, loyalty to place, reverence for the sacred.

Trumpism is a lot of things, but a deep concern for the “permanent things” is not one of them. Trump is not too concerned with the past–outside of it being great–and how things were done before. He offers a new way to make America great again. None of the things Roberts cites really matter to Trump.

Like the Samson Substack, Roberts’s speech has a good purpose in celebrating President Trump and immigration restriction. It’s more that the reasoning is odd. Roberts is head of a powerful conservative institution. It’s expected he will mix in Russell Kirk and paeans to Lincoln and “ordered liberty” in a speech about Trumpism. Yet, it still comes off as a strange mishmash of ideas and concepts.

The supreme purpose is to appear BASED. For both Samson and Roberts, that at least seems fulfilled.

There have been numerous attempts to fashion a New Right in the wake of Trump. Some have turned to European thinkers–from Catholic reactionaries to Nietzsche–for inspiration. But most of these ideas are off-putting to Americans and bear little relation to our traditions and present situation. The idea of a Catholic integralist American Republic is about as realistic as Middle-Earth suddenly appearing in the midwest.

Others have tried to turn to overlooked American political traditions, with mixed results. Paleoconservatives are still around, but many of them pretend little has changed since the antebellum era and are too hung up on old grudges to offer a successor ideology. The late Sam Francis has significantly influenced the New Right, particularly with his interpretation of James Burnham. But his race realism and disregard for traditional conservative ideas preclude his thought becoming the basis for the New Right. His ideas are cited, but they’re reworked to fit into the standard conservative framework. Francis’s Middle American Radicals are now fighting for the “permanent things” and “all men are created equal” against big government managerial elites.

Conservatives want to create a deeper philosophical framework for Trumpism, but they end up returning to the same conservative. It might not matter, however. The administration continues to deport illegals, defend ending birthright citizenship, eliminate DEI programs, champion a stronger executive, and promote economic nationalism regardless of which thinkers or ideological formulas are cited. The real motivator isn’t conservative theory, but being BASED.

This is a vibe that can’t really be defined. People just know when they see it. Sending in the National Guard to shut down illegal alien riots? BASED. Welcoming Afrikaners? BASED. Calling to arrest libtards? BASED. Supporting European nationalists? BASED. It’s a feeling more than an ideology.

All the stuff about Russell Kirk and natural law don’t really matter. Being BASED is what matters.

This dominant vibe has made the second Trump admin and conservatism much better than what it was like before. One can’t complain there.

But questions arise as to whether the BASED vibe can be enough to sustain a long-lasting movement. People are going to want to articulate Trumpism beyond boilerplate conservative rhetoric and appealing to the word BASED. Whether they will succeed in this endeavor is another matter. New ideological frameworks will be promoted, yet they may fail to unify people behind a solid political cause.

The reason why the New Right settles on standard conservatism with BASED sentiments is because it satisfies the disparate elements of the Trump coalition. Practice matters more than theory for the New Right. With political power obtained, the Right can just do things. The theory behind them doesn’t matter so long as they appear BASED to the MAGA faithful.

That’s how conservatism operates in the Age of Trump. It’s certainly better than what came before, but one at times is left wondering what we stand for. Owning the libs and being BASED are both good. However, their ability to sustain a transformative political movement remains to be seen.