1,372 words

In politics as in war, the best defense is a good offense. Conservatism has catastrophically failed to conserve anything because it is an inherently defensive ideology born out of a defensive — if not downright cowardly — mindset. It does not take a political genius to predict that those who want to just be left alone so they can grill in peace will lose to those who want to burn Western civilization to the ground.

The Left’s cancel culture has served them well, as it has allowed a small and evil, yet strident and highly organized minority to terrorize the silent and disorganized “moral majority.” If the Right does not organize and strike back with a cancel culture of its own, it will continue to be pummeled.

Our situation is similar to a nation without nuclear weapons that is confronted by a rival which has them. Such a nation has three options: acquiesce to being dominated, rely on third parties to defend it, or acquire nukes of its own. What is not an option is to shame their arch-rival into giving up their nuclear advantage.

Nobody is coming to save us, and even if they were, we would find ourselves dependent upon them. Our only options are to either acquire a “nuclear” cancel culture of our own, or submit to being dominated by some of the most depraved and hideous people to have ever existed.

Boycotts are one such way to cultivate our own cancel culture. But how is this to be accomplished? And is this even feasible?

A recent poll conducted by the Homeland Institute clearly shows that boycotts are feasible. 41.8% of respondents said they would follow through with boycotting a company if they had to pay 10% more or drive an extra mile if said company was accused of being racist, compared to 29.1% of respondents who said they would boycott a company if they had to pay 10% more or drive an extra mile if it was accused of being woke. When we compare the numbers, those willing to boycott an allegedly woke business is almost seven-tenths of those willing to boycott an allegedly racist business.

If businesses cower in fear of being accused of racism, then seven-tenths of the accusation’s potency is nothing to sneeze at. Returning to the metaphor of nuclear weapons, one does not need exact parity with an opponent to achieve deterrence, only substantial parity. The question of whether we have substantial parity is if we can destroy a business that earns our ire, or at least devastate their shareholders. We absolutely can, given that the average net profit margin for businesses, excluding financials, was 7.77% as of January 2023, with some sectors showing significantly less.

Keep in mind that the Homeland Institute’s poll was conducted at the national level. Your mileage may vary based on the particularities of each area. While Right-wing cancel culture will be weaker in some areas, it will also be stronger in others. Making a business go broke for going woke should be an easy task if it has a slim profit margin and is located in a predominately white Republican area, or if it at least has a supermajority of customers who are white or Republican.

The recent boycotts of Target and Bud Light are further cause for hope. The fallout from these is still ongoing, with America First Legal suing Target for misleading shareholders about the risks of its woke diversity, equity, and inclusion policies, as well as marketing which caused a $12 billion loss in share value. Meanwhile, the United States revenue of Bud Light’s parent company, Anheuser-Busch, fell by 10% in the second quarter of 2023. And while it is not an economic boycott, the #BanTheADL campaign promoted by Keith Woods on Twitter/X further suggests that a Right-wing cancel culture is viable.

Furthermore, boycotts play upon one of our people’s weaknesses and turns it into a strength. White conservatives are notoriously difficult to spur into productive action. For decades they have done nothing except show up at the polls once every two or four years. The regime’s Rainbow Terror of anarcho-tyranny has chilled public participation, as intended. Even on the dissident Right, the number of those who are willing to go beyond consuming content are a minority. But a boycott merely requires them to refrain from doing something, rather than doing something, such as turning up at a rally.

Boycotts are especially appealing now that Bidenomics is straining everyone’s budgets. People can kill two birds with one stone through boycotts, because they can help one to save money while striking back at those responsible for their financial situation in the first place.

While I concur with Oswald Spengler that “optimism is cowardice,” pessimism is also defeatism. We need to understand that we are starting at absolute zero after decades of lethargic inaction. Accustoming our people to activism is akin to teaching a child to ride a bicycle. They will usually need training wheels. Thus, I would rather focus on praising the progress that we have made thus far rather than emphasizing the fact that there is still a long way to go. The Bud Light and Target boycotts are a huge improvement from the Freedom Convoys, which a mere year-and-a-half ago fizzled due to subversion by controlled opposition. Even Donald Trump, Jr. counter-signaling the Bud Light boycott appears to have done little or nothing to hinder it.

Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals provides some additional insight into how we can build a Right-wing cancel culture. One of Alinsky’s rules is to stay within your people’s experience. This rule must be bent, because there is a first time for everything, and our people are waking up from a decades-long slumber. If they don’t get wet, they will never learn to swim. The inverse of this rule is to go outside of your enemy’s experience. The establishment is accustomed to dealing with outrage from the Left — but until now, never from the Right. They have as little experience as we and our people do in Right-wing boycotts. They have also never before had to worry about appeasing both the radical Left and radical Right at the same time. This is their minefield to navigate, and ours to exploit.

Alinsky likewise recommends isolating the target and keeping up the pressure. If we target a business for wokeness, we can demand that its rivals disavow their wokeness and affirm American values.

Keeping up the pressure requires discipline. Thankfully, peer pressure on social media can work both ways. Just as the Left bullied people into declaring their support for Black Lives Matter, we can do the same and ridicule those who don’t pledge to keep up the boycott as “sunshine patriots” and such.

Also, the Left always has yet another demand after their first demand is met. Once a target caves, we should always demand something else until they are reduced to groveling in absolute subservience.

But isn’t it then illogical for businesses to submit to our demands? No, because most people — and especially corporate executives — are cowards, and are thus also illogical. We should exploit this as ruthlessly as they have exploited the American worker.

The next rule is to keep things fun and not allow ourselves to become a drag. This is easy, because we can make memes ridiculing the target business — and we have a natural talent for meme-making. There are also few things sweeter than exacting revenge upon someone who has condescended to you in the past. Of course, we must be careful not to target too many businesses all at once, or to abuse the term “woke” until it becomes as meaningless as the charge of “racism.” This must be gauged through good political instincts on the fly more than through any abstract theorizing.

Joel Davis has predicted that if the #BanTheADL campaign is successful on X that the Anti-Defamation League will then pressure advertisers into boycotting X. This is the perfect casus belli for launching our own retaliatory boycotts.

This will be a total economic war, and our people are primed and ready for it. Smug judges handing down harsh sentences for Proud Boys while the system coddles child rapists have filled our people with righteous fury. All we have to do is channel it.

*  *  *

Counter-Currents has extended special privileges to those who donate at least $10/month or $120/year.

1. Donors will have immediate access to all Counter-Currents posts. Everyone else will find that one post a day, five posts a week will be behind a “paywall” and will be available to the general public after 30 days. Naturally, we do not grant permission to other websites to repost paywall content before 30 days have passed.


2. Paywall member comments will appear immediately instead of waiting in a moderation queue. (People who abuse this privilege will lose it.)


3. Paywall members have the option of editing their comments.


4. Paywall members get an Badge badge on their comments.


5. Paywall members can “like” comments.


6. Paywall members can “commission” a yearly article from Counter-Currents. Just send a question that you’d like to have discussed to [email protected]. (Obviously, the topics must be suitable to Counter-Currents and its broader project, as well as the interests and expertise of our writers.)

To get full access to all content behind the paywall, please visit our redesigned Paywall page.