The pejorative du jour on social media these days is “cuckservative.” The word is a combination of cuckold, i.e. the husband of an adulteress, and a conservative. There are those who promise it’s used to describe Republicans in Congress and conservative media figures who are sell outs. They claim it’s similar to “RINO” or “squish.” Matt Lewis at The Daily Caller and Erick Erickson have been called ones for shining light on the term. One person described it as people on the right who are actually trying to conserve Marxism.
@TaylorMVLR What happens when Marxism, by force, becomes the "traditional" ethos of a people is they seek to conserve Marxist principles.
— FinMin Taylor Swift (@SwiftOnEconomy) July 25, 2015
The only issue is this isn’t the case and people should be careful before using the “cuckservative” term. Looking into the actual history of the term shows it has nothing to do with “sell outs” and everything to do with race. Specifically white supremacy. Gregory Hood at American Renaissance writes “cuckservatives” advocate positions which really humiliate them and whites (emphasis mine).
While the Beltway Right obsesses about non-issues like the Export-Import Bank, the Dissident Right is creating a vocabulary to fight “conservatives” who are more eager than their supposed leftist enemies to destroy racially conscious whites. While cuckservatives claim to adhere to abstract principles, wiser men and women understand that ideology is often the echo of racial, cultural, and ethnic interests. And since cuckservatives no longer bother concealing they care nothing for their own white supporters, frustrated whites are looking for alternatives.
Alfred W. Clark at Occam’s Razor basically calls “cuckservatives” self-hating whites (emphasis mine).
Although the cuckservative is eager to show his PC bona fides by openness to other races, he really doesn’t want to know about other races. Human biodiversity terrifies the cuckservative, as deep down he has bought into blank-slatism and egalitarianism. The cuckservative would rather just have a Herman Cain or Clarence Thomas poster on his wall than actually have to honestly think about race.
There are scores of tweets on the #cuckservative which fall along these lines.
— Cypriot (@dkwoqc) July 25, 2015
#cuckservative hashtaggers are not really racist as much as we know what happens to white countries when they stop being white
— A. wyatt mann (@awyattman88) July 26, 2015
To quote Jazz Shaw, “#headdesk.” This is just absolute idiotic thought and tribalism at its worst. It flies in the face of what the hallowed document which helped form this nation proclaimed (emphasis mine).
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
A part of the problem those screaming “cuckservative” have is they are just blind in their belief the only place for conservatism is the white race. Someone wrote a response to Ace’s great piece on the “cuckservative” term, by claiming blacks aren’t worth talking politics to.
And let’s be frank, Ace. Blacks are never going to vote for liberty. The GOP loves to point to its sterling record of supporting and improving black civil rights from 1865 through Eisenhower. The Democrats blast them with gibsmedat in 1965…and well, we see where their loyalties lie.
This is horrifically shortsighted. It was amazing, yet unsurprising, how much agreement there was between FreedomWorks and Center for American Progress representatives during their joint summit on justice reform in DC. This wasn’t talking government spending, it was talking freedom, liberty, and getting the government out of things they shouldn’t be involved in. Rand Paul speaks at Bowie State and Howard universities and gets people nodding their heads in agreement. He’s discussing the importance of government getting out of the lives of others, not placating them or speaking about reparations. Paul is thinking long term and hopes to eventually get more conservative and libertarian African-Americans, instead of the current crop of leftists. It may take 30 to 50 years, but that doesn’t mean it’s not worth the effort.
Ace is correct in saying there are always racists next to the movement, who really hope to influence what the Right could become. See David Duke. Ace is also correct in noting the Left wants the Right to “own” the racists, even though 97% of the right wants nothing to do with them. A part of this is tactics because conservatives and libertarians have always had a tough time turning questions around. It’s possible they don’t want to come off as cold hearted or just expect accusations of pandering. They’ve got to be willing to get beyond this or else the Right will keep shrinking. To suggest the Right should just ignore other races just isn’t going to work and will hurt more than help.