[N]on-whites and non-dudes are all conforming to non-libertarianism, and that’s because there is something else important going on. Conforming is normal, and not conforming is always a little weird and strange, even in societies which tolerate and encourage a lot of independent eccentricity, which ours no longer does. That [is] why most “heterodox contrarians” have serious mental problems and dysfunctional personal lives without any track record of real accomplishment.
The ones who don’t have problems, who are socially well-adjusted, successful, with stable family lives and who … have healthy amounts of intellectual firepower to actually rigorously reason their way through incoherent cant and groupthink are still usually quite quirky, disagreeable, and quarrelsome, but more to the point, *vanishingly rare*.
The ugly truth is that progressives are the high status winners who are anti-male and, with increasing viciousness, anti-white and thus both implicit[l]y and explicitly promise to raise the social status and life prospects of non-dudes and non-whites. Any non-progressive movement has no choice but to pick from the smart fraction of people who are not down with that program, who have to lead people who are mostly losers, and who are all birds of a feather.
And Handle actually understates what Progressives promise. The offer to non-dudes and non-whites is obvious. But Progressivism makes an offer to the white dudes as well: For the small price of their intellectual honesty and dignity, they can be allies in the war on (who else?) white men. It’s an offer most Men Without Chests can’t refuse. Easier to be a coward than an outcast.
Of course, Progressives of all stripes brand themselves as non-conformist and anti-Establishment. I leave it to the reader to determine how much truth there is in that advertising. (Hint: Who is more likely to be invited to speak at a fancy university or corporation: Donald Trump or Angela Davis?)