Tucker's New Weapon Against the West
Woke Right Isolationism does not discuss policy. It discusses particular idealism, which if not implemented as policy, is considered to be flawed.
A dangerous narrative is taking hold in modern political media, championed by figures who mistake isolationism for strength. By portraying global geopolitics as a series of conspiracies run by "gangs," these commentators are eroding the intellectual maturity required to maintain a global empire.
The logic of the new isolationism suggests that anything serving an ally’s interest must inherently be "bad" for America, because it must be part of a rival structure of power - as if structures of power cannot have mutual interests. This fatalistic view ignores the reality that global stability is not a zero-sum game.
Arguments involving "Khazar Jews" or "Greater Israel" that have become mainstream are distractions from the actual mechanics of power involving shipping trades, nuclear deterrence, and energy security. These myths are used to consolidate power by creating an "us versus them" mentality that mirrors the very "gang rule" it claims to oppose.
True Republicanism and classical liberalism require a higher degree of tolerance, even for views we find distasteful. The impulse to "cancel" or persecute fringe actors is a sign of a society that has lost confidence in its own principles.
That being said, If the U.S. is to remain a world leader, it must move past the "low-IQ" traps of conspiracy and refocus on a mature, analytical approach to national interest.
The problem is, once you get essentialist ideologies, like Catholic Integralism, or Radical Christian Nationalism, there's an inability to see an external economic based interest that isn't necessarily tied to some pure ideal or conspiracy.
For them, if it's not the pure ideal, it's a conspiracy, and if it's a conspiracy it's because the enemy of the ideal - pretty childish.
These ideologies project that dogmatic totality on competing pragmatic perspectives, and competing solutions, in order to debunk them as insufficient.
Thus their puritan perspective renders any moderation as blasphemy, and any step of action needed to protect national interests as a calculated act of evil.
It does not discuss policy. It discusses particular idealism, which if not implemented as policy, is considered to be flawed.
Like the islamists.