One of the most common fallacies in modern politics, particularly growing with the Right, is þe olde Motte & Bailey fallacy. Take, for example, the oft quipped “fight like the Left”. The Motte here is that it means standing up to the Left and proactively pushing back. In this form, it just means not being part of a “surrender caucus” that clutches at pearls before giving in to go to some purported “cocktail party”. The Bailey, as has become increasingly obvious, it to adopt the tactics of the Left. But even then that is only a peak into the Bailey as when it comes to socialism, it’s never just the tip. Increasingly we’ve seen endorsements of Communist analysis and even Communist frameworks, such as those from Antonio Gramsci, forming a type of Right-wing critical theory complete with praxis, while concomitantly we’ve seen acceptance of National Socialist thinkers like Carl Schmitt. Thus, we see a warped type of Molotov-Ribbentrop pact with American characteristics.
Replete with such underpinnings comes a cessation of worrying about an unbridled government and a learning to love Leviathan, complete with corporatism, where the power of the state is used to guide society towards a purported Common Good. And that same Motte & Bailey trick was used to get us here, as, once again, J.D. Vance has demonstrated. First, the Motte:
"The failure to use political power that the public has given is a choice, and it's a choice that has increasingly had, and I think increasingly will have, incredibly dire consequences for ourselves and our families." – JD Vance, 07/16/2019 pic.twitter.com/3z3eCejucl
— Jason Hart (@jasonahart) September 24, 2025
We can see that this is presented as the more innocuous call to use political power rather than let it fall by the wayside after elections. That is what brings people in and allows the Bailey argument to worm its way in sub rosa. And what is that Bailey?
The Bailey isn’t a call to use political power for the purpose of limiting government to its proper rolls and defanging the beast that the Left so loves, but rather a call to embrace Leviathan in order to impose the vision of their Nomenklatura.
"Our critiques of the administrative state are very often correct. But our answer to this can't be every single time the American people give us power the only thing that we try to do is to trim down the thing that they gave us control over." – JD Vance, December 2023 pic.twitter.com/SNobLySDgf
— Jason Hart (@jasonahart) September 23, 2025
“Fight like the Left” means “be like the Left” with the only difference being the desired end state of society that the government will mould like clay, tabula rasa after breaking down the old order.
The alternatives presented are a false dilemma fallacy of their totalizing vision or our totalizing vision. In other words, it is a question of which Norman holds the reins of the Norman Yoke, not whether we should be shackled to it or not. The promise it that they are the good guys who will always do good things with the power, and that you should have nothing to fear if you are also one of the good guys.
It is the lure of Tolkien’s “One Ring”. That has always been the prelude to the lose of liberty and freedom. It is how you transform a political part in less than a decade from one that was enraged by socialism to one that openly embraces government ownership of the means of production… for the common good” of course…
BARTIROMO: The idea of government owning portions of public companies — this is something that free-market have to get their heads around.
BESSENT: Maria, there are decisions that the US government makes that we believe are good for society pic.twitter.com/Hh3TRxmTed
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) September 24, 2025
The solution that far too many have found is that to defeat Communists, they must become the Bolsheviks to their Menshiviks.
