The ultimate failure of the left was the insistence that everything about humans is mere conditioning; it’s all cultural artifact. So the solution to every moral evil is a matter of hammering on the culture until it changes. In other words, they start by denying the Fall. Their entire foundation denies God and substitutes a deity of their own imagining. Their moral perspective is a blasphemous delusion, and it cannot possibly work for very long. When you ignore reality, things will stretch only just so far before it all snaps back into place. That image of “snapping back into place” is one edge of the sword of God’s wrath on sin.
The only advantage on the right is that their worldview does embrace the Fall. Indeed, the right is shot through with varying degrees of belief that being self-centered is perfectly normal. Their major flaw is in rejecting the demands of redemption. In particular, they push such demands off into “personal religion” and allow precious little application of that religion to speak to their fundamental assumptions. People are generally bad, so get used to it and let’s make ourselves materially comfortable.
And this naturally means exploiting human moral weakness for profit. Not just taking advantage of it, but encouraging it. There is no such thing as “vice” except as a term of relative personal discomfort with natural human behavior. To the degree that this approach is somewhat closer to reality, it is more durable and effective. There is a Holy Cynicism, but this lesser cynicism is close enough to work well when few are aware of the difference. This is what calls for the other edge of God’s sword of wrath, where He gets more directly and assertively involved in punishing sin.
Meanwhile, the right-wing political spectrum is less easily united and controlled. Here in the US, it has coalesced into the mainstream who are easily steered, and there remains a very large group who think for themselves, giving rise to a wide variety of philosophical approaches that share the common theme of liberty, along with a presumption of nationalism, in which one’s idea of “nation” may vary from another’s. Given the massive noisy onslaught from the left, the differences among the nationalists isn’t enough to cause trouble. They have the fellowship of shared persecution.
The right-wing was quicker to adopt the Internet, and are more likely to get involved in the underlying protocols. Not so much to the degree of uber-geeks, but they have a good working knowledge of it. It’s a part of the DIY ethic burned into nationalism versus the leftist habit of hiring experts and giving them orders without dirtying their own hands. The political right has always been more technology savvy because it’s part of their willingness to get their hands dirty. Because of this the right has been more productive and profitable in ways that survive economic tough times. Thus, not is right-wing political activity generally cheaper, but typically pays its own way.
But same as the left, the political leadership of the right isn’t really nationalist — it’s imperialist. The difference is not always that obvious since there is a lot overlap in practice. Politicians are typically some of both, and most of them are willing to take the money because there is no real pressure to squelch that self-indulgence. To all appearances, globalists outnumber the imperialists, but the imperialists get more done with their constituency. Meanwhile, the actual projects of both globalists and imperialists are often shared, but without the imperialists and right-wing productivity, the left would have been broke long ago. If the left were to ever succeed at their whole agenda, we would all starve. Their globalist leadership seems intent on that very thing, hoping they can somehow make us like being slaves. In this, they are allies to the imperialists.
The flaw in this plan was the Internet. There have always been nationalists who resented the secrecy and dominance of the imperialist leadership on the social right, but their rascally individualism prevented effective cooperation amongst themselves. That is, it was a hindrance until the Internet made it so very easy for them to find more common cause. There has been a subtle cultural shift; the prickly individualism of meat-space nationalism has given way to a more cooperative awareness that they were all in this together. They learned to make common cause for as the path to their individual liberties. It was not entirely conscious, which is why it caught everyone off guard when someone who spoke their language got elected as POTUS.