Pithy Vilification with a Big Point: Explaining the Insult, “Cuckservative” (Glaivester)

Re-posted by Nicholas Stix

I think the simplest way of imagining the people that pro-whites call “cuckservatives” is in terms of Nazi Germany. Imagine German Jews flocking to join the Nazi Party. Of course, they’d be denied entry.

Imagine if, when the Nazis spat on, raped, maimed and murdered the Jews, the latter apologized and pandered ever more to the latter, and attacked ever more aggressively anyone who criticized or opposed the Nazis. Insane? Evil? Well, that’s what “cuckservatism” is all about.

My only criticism of the term is that I find it inappropriate. A cuckold watches or permits another man make love to his wife. But “cuckservatives” are themselves sleeping with the enemy. Thus, I believe that it would be more appropriate to call them slutservatives, and/or traitors, and/or saboteurs. However, I must acknowledge that the insult “cuckservative” has been wildly successful, based on how it has driven its targets bonkers.

To anyone who should complain that the analogy is inapt, because the Nazis slaughtered six million Jews in the Holocaust, I say, What do you think the racial socialist alliance has planned for whites? They’ve stated what they intend to do for years.
 

The Point of “Cuckservative”

By Glaivester
February 9, 2016
Glaivester

Someone on Twitter asked me what the point of name-calling, e.g., “cuckservative” is. Won't the term simply alienate people instead of change their minds?

I think this misses a vital point. While there are people who are mistaken on the amnesty question and on racial questions in general (that is, they think that aping the liberals is going to help the Republicans win, or believe that the liberal paradigm for race relations, e.g. "denouncing white privilege" is correct), there are many who are simply cowards who would sell anything out not to be called racist, or who are taking positions to please donors and who do not actually take their positions based on well-considered morality.

The point in such cases is two-fold; first, to counter the idea that hating your own people in the name of “equality” is a good thing. For someone to celebrate the idea that their ethnic group is going to become a minority in a country they created is insane. It is not something that anyone has done throughout history or that it is assumed to be normal that someone does. When someone says that it is racist to be against an immigration policy specifically because it will make whites a minority in the United States, the best response is to point out how ludicrous it is to call someone a name for wanting to keep the majority population of America what it has always been (more or less, obviously we are not going to revert to the WASPiness of the 18th and 19th centuries). The point is to have a counter-insult to “racist.”

The point also is to point out that many of these “conservatives” are determined to pander to those who hate them. They will reach across the aisle to Democrats who are not willing to reach back in return (note how all the Democrats in lockstep refused to defund Obama's executive amnesty), and are constantly trying to find ways to reach out to minority communities that have no interest in voting for anyone who does not support a generous welfare state and affirmative action, and more or less become a Democrat, while ignoring reaching out to their mostly white base. In other words, the term refers largely to “conservatives” who are desperate for approval by liberals, and who will concede whatever they need to, in order to get approval.

Note how in 2012 the Romney campaign was more interested in reaching out to blacks and Latinos, than in trying to reach out to the disaffected Paul voters who were concerned about interventionist foreign policy.

“Cuck” is an appropriate term, because it suggests a hatred or indifference to one's own blood, and to one's own friends, while supporting those who have no interest in being friends. The point of the term, when used amongst allies, is to remind oneself of what the problem with the traitors within are. When used at others as an insult, the goal is to make “cockish” behavior as unacceptable as “racism.” Maybe we will alienate people, and maybe people will embrace the term. But long-term, the effect will be the same as the term “racist.” People will try to deny that they are “cucks,” as people realize that they cannot escape disapproval by conceding to liberals.

The idea, in short, is to reverse the dominant paradigm of political discourse, which always favors liberals.

The fact of the matter is, the current immigration debate reflects an America that is being cuckolded; its people are being replaced by foreigners, whose children we are told we must support. As a Steve Sailer commenter pointed out in 2014, we lack a vocabulary to describe this, and so we are defenseless to stop it. The term “cuckold” isn't even in popular circulation to describe literal individual cuckolding, and we are supposed to think it fine to force a man to pay child support for the product of a wife's infidelity, with absolutely no negative consequences for the faithless wife. Terms such as “cuckservative” are a way of regaining that vocabulary, and of trying to reframe the debate in terms that are (a) favorable to conservatives, and (b) reflect the unstated realities of our current situation.

That is all.