Where's all the right-leaning creatives?

  • 🏰 The Fediverse is up. If you know, you know.
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
I fucked up, I bought a Scott Adams book ("coulda stopped there, haha") and now the algorithm is telling me to buy Razorfist books and self-published SciFi about killer memes or something.
 
Scarmiglione said:
If so well that's a simple issue and resolved within my post. Using art as a platform for petty grievances is something only faggots with weak visions will do. People inclined to lean 'right', even on petty issues, generally won't do that. There are petty crypto-rightists who really are just losers who hate queers and browns and the rest because of the shitness of their own lives and are to some greater or lesser extent driven by their weaknesses rather than their strengths, and if the worst of these had their way we'd have crypto-rightist netflixisms in all of our media, but we don't. This isn't happening. And the reason for that is that huge organisations like netflix and mass media in general if not dominated by strong vision at the top naturally become wretchocracies because concentrated power, if not tightly controlled and dominated, starts to leak. Then you get parasite accumulation. Leaking power structures are how leftism grows powerful. And someone inclined toward parasitism is going to be inclined towards the behaviour of parasitism and wretchedness in all things. They follow anything that seems to be dropping scraps of power. The entertainment industry is no longer ruled by titans, and the scraps of their empire can be fed upon for a time. It's a great place for these creatures. Look closely at how EVERY leftist political cause plays out and you'll find the same principles at work. Power without merit or work, inversion of value, celebration of the ugly, black lives matter, feminism, all varities of the libtard disease it's all the same shit. It makes perfect sense that only the shittest people who believe the shittest things are the ones reducing art to a soapbox.

Simple question. Simple answer. The rest of this is going to take longer, so again I'll use spoilers.

Yes, that's exactly how it works. The spirit of the right is not inherently humanist. Exercising your own power under the goal/condition of not infringing upon or even actively working towards bringing about the flourishing and empowerment of others/all is one way to exercise your power and will over the world. Total disrespect towards and instrumentalisation of others is another.

The easy reference point to your example is slavery. Would it not make sense to say that the pharaohs were leaders of the right because they didn't own libtards or preach nationalism and bodybuilding for all? If so what the hell were they? You can say the right-left paradigm only applies to the modern world, but the fact it survived beyond the french revolution is all we need to know it's tapping into something deeper than the shape the petty issues of our day are taking. It's about what's underneath our politics and what has always been underneath our politics. Eating the bugs and drinking the soy is gay as fuck, if you want to do that and even go further and play hall monitor from behind a screen to bully and shame stronger people than yourself about the inevitability of their defeat and their subjugation into the exact same state you're celebrating as a good thing you are unquestionably a creature of the left. Weakness is at the heart of your being and it's also your weapon. However, if you're the guy making everyone eat the bugs and soy while saving all of the wagyu beef for yourself, you are not the creature of the left. You are a new and terrifying kind of great man of the right. A new feudal lord declaring hunting illegal except for you and your friends because god (or the environment, the ghost of MLK or whatever else you please) likes it that way.

Humanist rightism exists, Thomas Carlyle being a perfect example. His disciple Curtis Yarvin largely preaches the same stuff today. The faith in the power and vision of humanity's greatest, but paired with the belief that respect and the opportunity to flourish to the greatest extent possible without comrpomising the same rights of anybody else being properly due to all. But this isn't the essence of right/power-realist thought. More like a weird happy mutation that gets fantastic things done but never lasts. Balancing free encouragement of self-fulfilment and civil responsibility is an extremely difficult thing that tends to result in either a gigantic war or 1968 eventually.
Don't tell me what i'll classify as what. Cromwell was a great man of history who was greatly admired by Thomas Carlyle. That should tell you all you need to know but i'll make it clearer. Cromwell's government was a monarchy. More power and responsibility were concentrated and exercised in his hands than most people who have ever had the gall to call themselves kings. The idea that there's a meaningful difference between a King and a Lord Protector is a joke, but i'd like to see you try to make this case anyway. Cromwell could quite easily be called the most far-right figure in the history of Britain. Working his way up from a lesser army command he came to exercise pharaoh-like control over Britain. The fate of all beneath him was decided between himself and God, parliament was allowed to continue to exist in some form under his rule, but not to limit his authority. The reason he was able to beat the old monarchy is because he was quite simply more monarchic than them. Cromwell is a case of a right wing rule in Britain being deposed by even further right wing rule.

Yes he hated the theater because it was gay and got in the way of his vision of how britain ought to be. Cromwell was a creative man of vision and power and Britain was his great work. I assure you a lot more creativity went into what he did to the Irish than anything that was happening on a stage that he put an end to. Charles II was a monarch, but he didn't dare reach nearly as far as Cromwell.
I live in a western country in which it was illegal to go outside for non-vital reasons last year. I live in one of the most overbearingly policed and regulated cities in the world. Nobody was consulted on this, it simply happened. Charles II and Cromwell couldn't have dreamed of having this much power over so many. The real state of my government is that at the highest level I am a subject of the new global pharaohs and at a closer level (national, regional, local) the whims of these pharaohs is left in the hands of the wretchocracy because they don't give a shit about the welfare of individuals on the ground and understand that these miserable incompetent fucks could never threaten them and will oppress the peons extra hard to compensate for their personal weakness. It's the same reason the Third Reich's concentration camp prisoners were watched by fellow prisoners.

I live under the worst aspects of Right and Left government, and art suffers for it. Absolutism and tyranny alongside incompetence, weakness and ugliness. And the level of creativity is here pretty much dead. My country produces almost nothing of cultural note or value. Virtually all internationally notable artists from this place found their success elsewhere. And as for monarchy vs democracy, who mentioned democracy? I didn't. I simply don't believe in it. Not in the sense I think it doesn't work, but in the sense I believe there are no real democracies. I don't live under one, and I don't believe anybody does.

Again, I would love further challenges and replies to make further refinements to my thinking. And thank you for the two so far. I'm greatly enjoying this thread.
Click to expand...
Care to tell us what country?
 
They're nowhere to be found because having gone through creative writing (fiction) classes and art classes I can confirm that most if not all creatives are total lolcows. Seriously, just take a creative writing course in a community college and you'll get to read stories about social justice, a confessed lesbian tranny, or, if you're really unlucky, a story about sentient cats who live in a magical realm who cause conspiratorial events in the real world who like dirty socks. No I shit you not, a grown woman actually penned that and printed it.
 
Scarmiglione said:
How did i do? Please reply if you have thoughts of any kind. This line of thinking is still in a draft stage.
Click to expand...

In all honesty, not great imo. Constructively, I was lukewarm on your argument but entertaining it. When I got to the example of Lovecraft you lost me. I'm a big fan of the Old H.P. but a man of strength and confidence he is not. You seem to interpret Right Wing as "Race Realism" or something. A peculiarly American take on things. But aside from that Lovecraft was not "exploring human excellence" in his work. Unless perhaps you are interpreting themes of human innocence and purity under threat as human specialness defying disorder. Which isn't Lovecraft. His themes are less Man as a noble being standing against the abyss, than naive butterfly about to be stepped on by a foot it cannot comprehend. In personal life, it's true - he was racist (but again, Right Wing isn't what you seem to be appropriating it as). He grew up in New England in a very WASP environment and was further isolated by physical weakness. Later in life he moved to New York where he dwelled in a small apartment in an area with a lot of poor Black, Italian and other immigrants (hardly the best impression of any racial demographic for a timid, bookish man who would regard even a mildly raucous good time as Chaos). Even so, his racism diminished as he got older and he married a Jewish woman later. Frankly, I can think of few worse candidates for the robust, Randian creative caricature you seem to envisage.

But the wider point is that I don't think Right Wing is what you're talking about in the same sense most of us are.

And to relate that to the wider thread, I'd ask what is a Right Wing creative, these days? Because it feels in this thread, and for justifiable reasons, it is no longer defined by attributes it has but by attributes it lacks. To whit, it is not Progressive. And anything that is not Left Wing Progressive is now being hemmed in to one single definable space no matter how varied it is internally. Which is why we can get Scarmilione's take of Defender of Western Culture / Race version alongside someone else's "Free Speech Liberal" take all grouped together - it's not a question of "Right Wing Creatives" as much as it is "Creatives Who Don't Subscribe to Progressivism". We have two conversations going on here. One based on the thread title and what Right Wing means to them. And one based not on the title but the practical realities of the culture war. The former is lending itself to discussions of whether there's an inherent link between art and Left Wing views. And the latter to "keep silent if you don't want to lose your career" examples.

I'm just going to address the first one (is there a link between Left Wing thinking and artistic ability) by saying "The Left Can't Meme". Commercial creative success vs. actual creative ability is perhaps something we should explicitly call out as whether or not that's what we're talking about.
 
The reason there isn't any right wing art in the mainstream anymore is that corporations have an iron grip on all traditional media and most of the internet. The people running these corporations are probably not leftists, and I'd assume a lot of their employees aren't either, but they are pragmatic. If society is leaning left, they'll do their best to follow.
Their iron grip on media has caused this to become a feedback loop. Mainstream society is left leaning, the media leans left, people are mostly exposed to left wing content, and the leftism isn't challenged as much as you might expect.
We could have easily seen the reverse happen, but this is how it worked out.
So if you're seeking mainstream success and have right wing views, its best to remain apolitical or even pay lip service to leftism.

However there's plenty of modern right wing art out there if you put in the effort to find it. Its just not promoted. You probably won't see it on netflix or the trending tab of youtube, definitely not on TV.
Scarmiglione said:
I'll make it easy. I'm a native of the anglosphere, but not british or american.
Click to expand...
Australian, or maybe a confused Indian.
 
Overly Serious said:
In all honesty, not great imo. Constructively, I was lukewarm on your argument but entertaining it. When I got to the example of Lovecraft you lost me. I'm a big fan of the Old H.P. but a man of strength and confidence he is not. You seem to interpret Right Wing as "Race Realism" or something. A peculiarly American take on things. But aside from that Lovecraft was not "exploring human excellence" in his work. Unless perhaps you are interpreting themes of human innocence and purity under threat as human specialness defying disorder. Which isn't Lovecraft. His themes are less Man as a noble being standing against the abyss, than naive butterfly about to be stepped on by a foot it cannot comprehend. In personal life, it's true - he was racist (but again, Right Wing isn't what you seem to be appropriating it as). He grew up in New England in a very WASP environment and was further isolated by physical weakness. Later in life he moved to New York where he dwelled in a small apartment in an area with a lot of poor Black, Italian and other immigrants (hardly the best impression of any racial demographic for a timid, bookish man who would regard even a mildly raucous good time as Chaos). Even so, his racism diminished as he got older and he married a Jewish woman later. Frankly, I can think of few worse candidates for the robust, Randian creative caricature you seem to envisage.

But the wider point is that I don't think Right Wing is what you're talking about in the same sense most of us are.

And to relate that to the wider thread, I'd ask what is a Right Wing creative, these days? Because it feels in this thread, and for justifiable reasons, it is no longer defined by attributes it has but by attributes it lacks. To whit, it is not Progressive. And anything that is not Left Wing Progressive is now being hemmed in to one single definable space no matter how varied it is internally. Which is why we can get Scarmilione's take of Defender of Western Culture / Race version alongside someone else's "Free Speech Liberal" take all grouped together - it's not a question of "Right Wing Creatives" as much as it is "Creatives Who Don't Subscribe to Progressivism". We have two conversations going on here. One based on the thread title and what Right Wing means to them. And one based not on the title but the practical realities of the culture war. The former is lending itself to discussions of whether there's an inherent link between art and Left Wing views. And the latter to "keep silent if you don't want to lose your career" examples.

I'm just going to address the first one (is there a link between Left Wing thinking and artistic ability) by saying "The Left Can't Meme". Commercial creative success vs. actual creative ability is perhaps something we should explicitly call out as whether or not that's what we're talking about.
Click to expand...
The Lovecraft and Tolkien points are my least favourite parts of my postings in this thread. Tried too hard to reach for accessible examples to make my point. But despite that you still have misunderstood me. I will take responsibility for that though as my first post at least was rather mediocre. My later posts would probably clarify this but I did end the first one with a call for replies so I don't blame you for not reading the whole thread before posting this either.

Lovecraft was absolutely exploring human excellence, just not in the typical image we would hold of excellence. He's exploring the dark side. The result of our intense fascination with power taken to its logical conclusion. Space-madness. Lovecraft was a right-winger in the sense he stood somewhere between Joseph De Maistre and Nick Land. A man who believed in something like the righteous natural claim of the sensitive and radiant to excel above the base and simple, and a prescient vision of the absolute horror that lies in the far future of the aristocratic unshackling of the vital accumulation of power. What is cosmic horror but the magnificence and terror of Pharaoh's tyranny amplified to a degree that places us on the level of ants crawling at the base of the pyramids?

Do you understand my interpretation of Lovecraft now? This post alongside my ones made after my first ITT should clarify the issue somewhat. As it stands you have gotten an idea of what i believe constitutes "rightness in art" that's actually the polar opposite of what i'm proposing. It is absolutely not about "Defender of Western Culture / Race". I actually argue in later posts that making art with the explicit intention of doing this would be the expression of something approaching a left-wing impulse. Western culture wasn't created by people cargo-culting the general idea of a 'western culture'. This limp Burkean softheadedness is the reason the supposedly 'right-wing' politics of our day are so gay. The great spirit that animated 'western culture' was the commonness of this understanding of the nature of power and achievement. This understanding is coded into everything that Lovecraft wrote. This is what makes him a man of the right. Not which party he voted for or how he felt about niggers.

The right is defined by attributes. We can forget this and start mangling our terms and ideas, but the fact remains. The attribute is power. There is an inherent link between art and Right Wing views. There as a negative connection between art and Left Wing views. That's what I've tried to go into more detail on in my later posts.

The left have commercial creative success, but look at the nature of these successes, and then look at the nature of the creative successes of the past which have proven themselves in the trial by fire that is cultural memory across centuries and millennia. The left have crippled actual creative ability because the inherent and essential nature of leftism is weakness and dissociation. If we aren't talking about what else is there?
 
Dave. said:
They're nowhere to be found because having gone through creative writing (fiction) classes and art classes I can confirm that most if not all creatives are total lolcows. Seriously, just take a creative writing course in a community college and you'll get to read stories about social justice, a confessed lesbian tranny, or, if you're really unlucky, a story about sentient cats who live in a magical realm who cause conspiratorial events in the real world who like dirty socks. No I shit you not, a grown woman actually penned that and printed it.
Click to expand...
As a right-leaning creative, you are completely correct. We're all nuts. The current climate makes it necessary for the conservative nuts to keep a lower profile, though.
 
The only reason I'd even be considered "right-leaning" is because of the current "anyone to the right of Mao and Stalin is Hitler" zeitgeist and my writing thus far hasn't really reflected a particular leaning when I asked others for critiques in the past. I'd still get cancelled with the swiftness for any number of opinions if I were dumb enough to voice them publicly with a face attached.
 
💗Bitchstopher Columbitch💗 said:
1. Creating controversial things can get you cancelled and exiled from the community.

2. What gets popular is often influenced by who you know. Since the kingmakers of the creative world often lean left, they use their influence to promote other lefties and quash people whose opinions they disagree with.

3. Right wingers tend to be older people who have kids and jobs. Young people who have time to dream and create tend to lean left.
Click to expand...
This I agree with strongly. Except #3 If you have a dream regardless of your age... FINISH IT.

The only way I believe you can work around this is the following.

1. LOTS AND LOTS OF MONEY. I now have this but back then I was frozen out of the industry by the whisper network and one of my main characters was a bi-sexual... 30 years ago before it was fashionable to be part of the alphabet community. I got nailed because I would not back away from my beliefs.

I don't give one flying fuck about the cancel culture of today, because they do NOT have the financial sledge hammer I have accruded over the years. I don't even care if I make money off of my next project. I can pull it off because I... HAVE... THE... MONEY...

And that is the problem with a great many creators, they simply do not have the ability to fight back financially.

2. Go to another country than the US. I hate to say this but I do not have a US content provider. The reason is that they come from Generation FAIL in their beliefs and mindsets.

When I did -my- comics I had a do a 22 pages plus cover and be ready to be shipped out in 21 DAYS. The many assholes who call themselves "illustrators" expect lots of money.... but they fucking can't keep a schedule if their lives depended on it. So I hire abroad and mostly NDA work. Because I... PAY... WELL... because the content given to the content provider is of MY concepts which are IP protected.

The reason I point in this comment is that I PUT IN THE WORK... WITHOUT A WACOOM TABLET and I know how hard it is to create, because I was a content creator. And no one can take that experience on how difficult to create content away from me. No one. So when I hear the bitching from Generation FAIL I so want to take my HB pencil and shove it into their eye sockets... John Wyck Style. Because they don't know what hard work really is.

They have photoshop.

I had Letraset, Rotring Rapidographs and a god damned pencil. So again don't tell me how hard you got it to create, because you would not survive what it was like to create under pressure 40+ years ago.


But back to topic #2 Web toons, Tapas, and other sites will get you started and might get lucky. Indeego might be worth wild but Kicker Starter can suck my dick.

I've given up on the US market as Fuck Tard Gate keepers killed the market as a whole.


But I am in that wonderful situation that I worked so damned hard to get too. I can get my stuff published and not deal with them nor care if I make money or not.

If I do make money off of my projects proceeds will go to charity
 
Last edited:
Aaa0aaa0 said:
What about all the Christian moms on pinterest? The Christian music artists? The handymen and carvers? The Arabic speaking populace?

I feel like a lot of right wingers gravitate towards more practical crafts. Those don't always have big political sperging in them either (heard fiber arts was a bitch though).

I'm left leaning but not as far as the heads of the twitter art community try to be. Most people fall in line by either saying nothing or mimicking others as a defense mechanism. If you say lived in an islam ruled country who's artist all towed the virtues of islam, you too would appear to tow it as well even by virtue of silence. My left leaning friends would scream if they knew how much I post about troons here. Several of my followers would suddenly have a fatwa on me because of "terf" (really should just be gender critical) views, thus I am terf and deserve death. If I had money like JK Rowling I'd probably be like her.
Click to expand...
Yeah i was also gonna bring up the pinterest mom artists too. They mostly stick with landscapes or portraits of people they know/older celebrities, and it's usually not their career in the end. As far as young artists that draw fanart goes, they mostly stick with ecchi art. I personally only follow JP artists cause even if they're saying the stupidest shit imaginable it's not like I could read it.
 
Probably cancelled just recently Scott Cawthon the creater of fnaf was found out to be donating republicans so had to resign, or afraid to lose their social circles it's not worth the risk to be openly right wing creator in the current year.
 
1623959091274.png


Golly, I wonder why we see less overtly right wing art. Yeah, right wing people create stuff, but they usually don't advertise it as right wing. However, I'd say attitudes like this are very popular on the right and contribute to there being less of it. Paul Joseph Watson, Ben Shapiro, Liberty Hangout, and most forms of boomer conservatism are extremely hostile to even more conservative leaning fandoms like those of anime and gaming. Not just the fandoms, but even the art itself.

Every right wing person I know that reads likes Orthodox histories of historical events, Tom Clancy stuff, and self-help books. My suspicion is that you just don't like the right wing art that is popular.

Right Wing Art
Click to expand...

I see right wing art that I like all of the time, but only really from Japan. Kino No Tabi overtly advocates for gun rights, and individualism, while Welcome to the NHK focuses on the atomization of society , degeneracy and dangers of giving people a cushy existence.

I'm not particularly sure about what you even mean by right wing art though. You want something like Atlas Shrugged that calls on everybody to be ultra-selfish individualists and champions great CEO theory? Do you want something like Lord of the Rings that idealizes the small farming community, but argues that altruism, mercy, and kindness will save the world? Do you want something like Starship Troopers that argues for a world government that requires aspiring voters to prove a willingness to sacrifice themselves for the state? What is your understanding of right wing art?
 
Muu said:
Probably cancelled just recently Scott Cawthon the creater of fnaf was found out to be donating republicans so had to resign, or afraid to lose their social circles it's not worth the risk to be openly right wing creator in the current year.
Click to expand...
So it's not high art but the guy who made Five Night at Freddy's decided to retire, after getting angry tweeted at when it was revealed he gave money to republican candidates.

Sure this is a single example, and we can argue as to how creative 'jump scares: the franchise' is, but I think it does support the idea that being right-leaning is not so easy in some fields.
 
If someone in the Entertainment Industry isn't regularly talking about their lefty politics then there's a good chance they're conservative.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom