Does Being Realistic Mean Supporting Republicans?

Ghoul at The Right Stuff discusses "The Libertarian Problem:"

Libertarians are nothing but 2.0 hippies. World peace, free people, and lots of marijuanas. The 60′s kids never left. They simply adopted a capitalist twist to further push their utopian ideologies. 

Most libertarians I've known--and myself, when I considered the affiliation--are people that believe that there's no reason why leftist social permissiveness should be linked to an animosity toward wealth. The more astute might realize that a healthy economy is necessary to enjoy the previously-proscribed pleasures. Starving people don't consume pornography.

I must ask you to stop fantasizing about your alternative right-wing universe. I must ask you to stop LARPing, and start doing something that actually pushes for market values, and for traditional ideals. I’m asking all of you to stop with your political melodrama, and just be a damn conservative. Yes, I know that’s rather boring, and it doesn’t quite match up with your super special Hitler revivalism, or your anarchistic techno-utopias, but you are going to have to compromise for your values. I’m not asking you to stop gloating about how much philosophy and economic reading you’ve done, as I know that means a super-duper lot to many of you, and if you simply refer to yourself as “conservative”, people might think you’re uneducated. However, you are not “on to something brilliant” by taking your reading so seriously that you deliberately try to stunt the GOP organization. You’re just making things harder for some real American right-wing organization.

While I generally agree, I'm on the fence about his conclusion. When are conservatives allowed to admit they have an abusive relationship with the GOP? Anger, separation, forgiveness and yet another attempt to "work things out"--all one-sided. When is enough enough?

A conspiracy theorist could say that the Republican party looks like false opposition, collecting and neutralizing everyone who doesn't agree with the progressive agenda by offering them an ineffective outlet. And the higher-ups make a good living crying out, "No!," and shrugging their shoulders when the progressives win again.

One of the excised portions of my pieces about the Philosopher's Stone--yes, there were parts I left out--was that the left all shares the same Philosopher's Stone, taken from boiled-down Marx and Robespierre:  The successful are villains and we must use force to eradicate villainy. All that's left to argue about is the definitions of "successful" (which has devolved to "privilege"), "force" (regulation, social-media shaming or the guillotine) and "eradicate" (forced to resign, the gulag or the Ukranian famine).

Whether one is an intersectional feminist, a race-baiter or a window-smashing left-anarchist, they share that same assumption. The right is everyone who doesn't agree, which means that we usually don't agree with one another.

Is it any wonder we're exhorted to "Enjoy the Decline?" Leftists share a base-line assumption. Rightists do not, except that the dominant assumption is wrong. What hope is there? Is the answer to hold our nose and shake hands with the Republican Party once again?

There is hope, but not at the scale this article assumes. The old quote is that everyone is conservative about what they know best.

So, how are things in your neighborhood? Any leftists barking orders?

Want a national assumption on which to build a counter-consensus? Try this:  Decentralization is better.