The fact that the world view of atheism, Leftism, political correctness is self-destroying is often regarded in a positive fashion by the political Right, as if their preferred party were 'on the side of history' and they merely have to wait...
So reactionaries often wish for the self-destruction of the Left to come sooner rather than later - in other words, they anticipate with pleasure that the Left will soon become so powerful that the Left will soon destroy itself.
It is quite correct that when the Left collapses, when the Left destroys-itself, then the Right will take-over - this is correct, but which Right?
My point is that if the logic of Leftism is carried through to its self-destroying end, then it is not likely that Christianity would step-in and take-over.
Secular Right wingers might look forward to a brief period of rulership, yet they too are a self-destroying ideology.
Which leaves only the religious Right among whom Christians are not the strongest nor more rapidly growing major religion.
But, at a deeper level, to wish for the self-destruction of the Left is to wish for the triumph of evil - and to hope that from triumphant evil will come Good.
If evil is destroyed by Good, then Good may emerge from the chaos - but if evil is so dominant in the world that it destroys itself, i.e. evil destroys 'the system' by which evil is maintained, and chaos ensues, then where will Good come-from?
How likely is it that a society so thoroughly corrupted that it killed itself, would be re-born purified? Where is purity when corruption is everywhere?
Good could only come from outside 'the system', and for that we must pray - but if Good does come from outside, then why hope for the Left to triumph such that it will pull the social edifice down upon itself?
If we hope to be rescued by external intervention after collapse and evil triumphant, then why not hope to be rescued before collapse?
Why not hope to defeat evil before it triumphs?
No, we must not hope for the self-annihilating triumph of the Left in expectation that on the other side of evil chaos will lie our salvation.
We must not hope that the parasite will kill its host; must not wish for the cancer of Leftism to grow so large and metastasise so widely as to overwhelm the organism upon which the malignancy depends for sustenance.
Surely, to hope for the advance of evil - for whatever supposed long-term benefit - is oneself to be evil?
We must instead hope for the defeat of evil by Good, of the Left by Christianity, before it is too late.
(Although the 'defeat' of evil by Good is always partial and temporary in this world, nonetheless, that is what we must hope for.)
Note added: I think that the confusion arises, by which Christians find themselves hoping for the triumph of evil, as a consequences of failing to distinguish ultimate purposive evil from the proximate servants of evil.
At the level of people who serve evil, their triumph may indeed lead to their own downfall - so that an evil leader may have their own power and happiness destroyed as a result of their own evil.
Yet this is just another triumph for that purposive evil which lies behind things. For purposive evil, the destruction of its own servants is simply part of the plan - the aim is that human souls are used then tormented, some sooner, some later.
For purposive evil, all destruction is to its credit. All the servants of evil have some Good in them - for example the faithful servant of evil is at least faithful, therefore their destruction is always a satisfaction to purposive evil.
The unseen warfare, the ultimate spiritual conflict of this world, is not between humans. Humans may be strategic warriors on the side of Good, or tactical dupes on the side of evil.
We are servants, but servants that can and must chose their master.