It isn't important whether the right-wing wins or losesWhat's important is that your section of the right wing doesn't win
Frain for all: would you rather have squiggles as the leader of your country, or your favourite of the far-right mob (not Paugers or The Lord, they have at least shred of sense in them).
I thought about it. On one hand, you've got folk wanting to ban Islaam and criticism of government, bringing back more "liberal" death penalties, like for children and for drugs and for spies, practically legalising murder, throwing away any human rights, bringing the dread of world war and overseas settlements, and killing all who promote thoughts against the ideology as "foreign agents in the infosphere front". Not to say just all-about foppishness.
And I think about Islaamish law.
*Death penalty (public beheading or stoning) for
**those who have drugs (including alcohol).
**women who have sex with more than one man.
**those who have sex before marriage
**12+ year olds doing violent crime
*Cutting the right hand for theives.
*Throwing away human rights.
*Legalising murder to shield a family's honour.
*Flogging wives that disobey their husbands (unless their husbands ordered to break Islaamish code)
*Systemish legal discrimination against those not Muslim.
Way too far-right Americans:
*Death penalty for
**Those who have drugs (excluding alcohol of course)
**Spies and treason.
*Legalise murder to shield a business's "freedom".
*Ending of all public welfare and healthcare programmes.
*Curbed rights for blackskins.
*Throwing human rights away.
*Purposefully beginning world war with or without provocation of any kind, killing millions. This is worse than the successorship, as they only see war fit if in shield(of their lives or of the Islaamish faith's pride).
*For wielding core weapons much more loosely.