The left is founded ultimately on the overthrow of the French monarchy, the old ways. The people that did this were scum. It wasn't that the King didn't exactly have it coming. But the people that did it did it out of spite, vengeance, hatred. They tortured his children, killed his family- this is the birth of the leftist movement as a whole. The right was founded on the opposite end, the monarchs, the conservation of the old. That has shifted over the years to where we are today, but ultimately, the foundations of the right are antithetical to the left, which is why at the end of the day, there can be no true compromise. They want you dead and your children raped- they did it before and will do it again.
It's twistedly quite funny that even back then at the beginning, you could see a clear & dire contrast in the moral stature of the two sides. King Louis XVI (besides having massively helped the USA win its freedom from Britain not too long before the Revolution) was the first French king in a long time who was actually personally
not a degenerate - he never had a mistress, was strictly faithful to Marie Antoinette and didn't have any disturbing fetishes, for which he was actually mocked by the decadent French court of his day.
Marie Antoinette too, virtually all the lurid shit about her being a lesbian or some other wack degenerate was made up by niggers who hated her for being Austrian or otherwise getting in the way of their political games (this is where the very term 'libel' comes from actually,
the bullshit pamphlets which invented increasingly bizarre & hateful attacks on the monarchs were caled libelles). The last time Marie Antoinette got applause & popular support, in fact,
was when the revolutionaries accused her of incest - specifically raping her son - which went too far for the women attending her trial and even Robespierre (who got mad because he knew such an unbelievable charge would make her seem more sympathetic). Meanwhile the people flinging all this shit at the monarchs were turbo-degenerates engaging in one of the most ridiculous cases of projection in recorded history, including the aforementioned Marquis de Sade (seriously, you would think if anyone couldn't be taken seriously for accusing
anyone else of rape or sexual crimes in general, it would've been that mega faggot).
Same pattern repeats itself throughout history, of leftists projecting their own sins onto right-wingers in attempts to drag the latter's character into the mud in which they already wallow. The Russian Revolution was more of the same, Tsar Nicholas II had a mistress but was otherwise reputably a kindly family man (maybe his
only virtue, since even most monarchists have to concede he was objectively a bad ruler) and his wife Alexandra's own sole virtues by turn were her well-recorded genuine affection for him & their kids, so of course the coterie of Bolshevik freaks including Lenin would accuse them (especially Alexandra) of being degenerate tyrants presiding over a decadent court even as animals like Stalin & Beria went around raping schoolgirls, fags like Yezhov & Goloshchekin raped school
boys, etc. Admiral Kolchak (leader of the White Russians who tried to stop the Bolsheviks after the Tsar fell) likewise was a far better man personally than his many enemies, sure he had a mistress like the fallen Tsar, but at least he didn't abuse his wife & son into committing suicide like Stalin or regularly rape little girls like Beria.
And today, who's the most recent right-wing martyr standing out in popular memory? Charlie Kirk, by all accounts & appearances a wholesome family man who didn't cheat, do drugs, beat or otherwise abuse his young children (or any other family member for that matter), etc. The creature who killed him - a furfag whose life was going nowhere despite having been born into a functioning and stable household, literally in bed with a troon. The chorus of other creatures cheering the latter on, mocking Erika Kirk or outright openly wishing that she would be raped & murdered and their kids trooned out - filthy degenerates to the last, not a single one you could classify as a normal person making positive contributions to society among them. Donald Trump has his vices, as Nicholas II or Kolchak did, but you can't possibly tell me with a straight face that someone like Hunter Biden - a crackhead who got footjobs from underage hookers and was involved in corrupt schemes abroad with his dad - is a better man than he. And I don't doubt there will be more examples of both as this dark age crawls onward.
It was in understanding this historical truth - in finding that yes actually all the leftist thought leaders of the past were massive scumbags whose personal lives were in such disorder that it boggles my mind anybody ever thought they said/wrote anything worth paying attention to re: how to run society - that I came to understand that the cynical idea that all history & conflict is 'morally gray' and that there were never any good or bad guys was false, probably a lie spun by the camp of projecting psychopaths in one of many attempts to cover their own asses tbh. Absolutely there are good and bad guys here, and there were in the past; I know good Goddamn well who's who & who I want to win now, and a lot more people ought to as well.
