BASED In Theory, Libtard In Practice

What did y’all think mass deportations meant? Vibes? Papers? Essays?

“Mass Deportations Now” was the centerpiece of Donald Trump’s 2024 campaign. But this pledge now faces the ire of public hostility in the second year of the 47th presidency. The latest shooting of a leftist protester interfering in immigration enforcement has further inflamed tensions over Trump’s immigration policies. There’s now debate over whether this could have been avoided.

The hysteric reaction to the ICE raids, and subsequent violence, was always bound to happen. Mass deportations were never going to be feel-good material. Public discomfort and violent left-wing opposition were to be expected. That’s why it’s imperative for the administration to tune out the noise and stay the course. There is no nice way to do mass deportations, and no serious way to convince leftists to accept them. The choice is either mass deportations or nothing at all.

The fight over ICE raids has revealed a curious lack of resolve among parts of the Online Right. Many members of this sphere are flipping out over the shootings and tactics of immigration law enforcement. These criticisms run the gamut, from sympathizing with the “brave white Americans” who died fighting immigration agents to arguing this all spectacle to undermine “serious” deportations. Some are just looking for a new reason to hate on Trump, others are genuinely squeamish at ICE’s strong arm tactics. But whatever the argument or motive, ICE criticism puts these right-wingers squarely on the Left’s side in this dispute. It doesn’t matter how much they dress up their criticisms with BASEDNESS. Their stance on this issue effectively makes them libtards.

Call it BASED in theory, libtard in practice.

It’s far too common for supposed “fascists” to share the same political stances as that of MS NOW viewers. You can log on to X and find people with Third Reich iconography shriek over Trump, cry over ICE, hate America, insist on subservience towards international law, demand socialism, worship crappy third world governments, and salivate at the chance to vote for Democrats. Only their veneration of Adolf Hitler differentiates them from the average leftist.

This has been a developing trend, but it’s become more evident with the ICE shootings. Popular podcaster Darryl Cooper demonstrates this attitude when he attacks federal immigration agents arresting people who get in the way of detaining migrants. Right-wing influencers who previously fantasized “right-wing death squads” now descend into hysterics over the “sadism” of ICE agents. X users call Border Patrol agents “mutts” while advocating for the same position as Rachel Maddow. 4chan, supposedly a cesspool of “neo-Nazism,” now hosts posts mocking MAGA for backing the “cruelty” of immigration enforcement.

The ultimate example of this mentality emerged in response to last week’s column on anti-Americanism. A Substack user who called himself both a “holocaust enjoyer” and a “National Socialist” delivered a diatribe in the replies about Trump’s violation of international law in threatening Greenland and the evils of imperialism. When reminded of how great Americans expanded this country through conquest since the Founding, he proceeded to denounce Andrew Jackson and co. as traitors. Remember: this is all coming from a guy who unironically proclaims himself a Nazi.

It’s clear that people like this only adopt right-wing branding for the shock value of it. There’s no deeper commitment to these ideas outside of memes and internet banter. To them, right-wing policies are only supposed to be dreamt of–not put in practice. Doing so risks them becoming icky and no longer BASED. According to these types, what matters most is citing obscure right-wing figures and deploying meme words, not your actual behavior. Your thoughts on historic events weigh more heavily for redpilled status than your reaction to contemporary events. Theory is far more important than practice.

This gets politics completely backwards. What matters most in politics is tangible results, not theoretical debates. You either win an election, or lose it. You either implement a policy, or you fail. You either secure your people in power, or your enemies do. There are no points for ideological wishcasting. In real-world politics, a vote for Democrats is a vote for liberalism. It doesn’t matter whether it was to punish Republicans for failing to restore the Habsburg monarchy. That doesn’t change the result of giving power to the Left and allowing them to impose their policies on you. The same applies for these ICE shootings. If your immediate reaction is the same as that of the average BlueSky user, then you are on their side. The subsequent rationalizations don’t hide the practical effect.

Theory, frankly, is overrated in politics. Most Americans have incoherent views and beliefs. They’re not coherently ideological and will give bizarre answers for why they support things. Think of MAGA types who will reference Martin Luther King to stress their support for immigration restriction. But what matters is what figures and policies they support in our day and age. If you can get the MLK-loving Republican to hate DEI and mass immigration, that’s a success. You don’t need to get them to question World War II, classical liberalism, or other things they wouldn’t understand to achieve that goal. The value in Online Right hobbyhorses is negated when those who advocate for them turn into libtards in moments of crisis. Meanwhile, the MAGA chuds stay on point. They may have silly beliefs, but their instincts are mostly right. The latter counts far more than the ability to properly cite Spengler.

The Online Right’s power comes from its ability to weaponize memes and social media to convince normies to back policies and ideas they wouldn’t otherwise consider. However, this power is undermined when our sphere decides to go lib when faced with issues that directly affect contemporary life. The Online Right will marginalize itself; it just becomes the Extremely Disagreeable Right that promotes Democrats and counter-signals anything right-wing people in power try to do. You only win through effecting real-world change, not through retreats to fantasy and wallowing in an internet ghetto.

There is value in discussing philosophy, controversial parts of history, and forbidden science. But if it just leads one to voting Democrat and crying over Renee Good, then what’s the damn point?

[Editor’s note: You can now preorder Scott Greer’s new book, “Whitepill: The Online Right and the Making of Trump’s America,” from this link.]