An old joke about libertarians is that they are fond of saying, “That works very well in practice, but how does it work in theory?” It’s an old joke that goes back before such a thing as libertarianism existed. It is often used to zing the excessively intellectual. The joke itself is a twist on the fact that strategy, based in theory, often fails miserably in the field. The world of theory is neat and tidy, while the real world is messy. Ideologues can’t grasp this distinction and live only in theory, which is the point of the joke.
No doubt, libertarians will take exception to this characterization, but this truth is an issue faced by all outsider politics. What often makes them outsiders is an excessive adherence to ideology or to a set of narrow demands. Their unwillingness to compromise makes them unappealing to most people. The various green movements are a good example of theory clashing with reality. You can talk people into being more environmentally conscious, but people are not giving up their cars to please mother earth.
Some on the alt-right suffer from this malady. The reaction by some of them to the British election smacks of that old joke about practice versus theory. Here’s Mike Enoch criticizing Nigel Farage as a gatekeeper, while offering a defense of Carl Benjamin, of all people. Richard Spencer went down the same road when he was on the same YouTube show this week. In both cases, they jam the results into their preferred moral framework, rather than analyzing the results in the proper context.
Farage is a single issue guy, who is first and foremost a politician. He is not a strategist or a political theorist. He is a pitch man, selling a simple idea. Britain needs to get out of the EU and begin functioning like a normal country again. Beyond that, he has no strong opinions on much of anything. In fact, he is willing to embrace the popular side of anything in order to eliminate it as an obstacle. His forays into meta-politics are always with an eye on influencing practical politics, which is where is he is best suited.
The way to think of this is to consider the doughnut shop. Political theory is a debate about how retail commerce, like donut shops, fits in with a preferred social organization. Are doughnut shop keepers bourgeois flunkies of the capital class, oppressing the proletariat, or are they an organic resistance to central planning? In the world of political theory, the choice of signage is not a topic of debate. The closest things come to the actual doughnut shop is having the debate in the doughnut shop.
Meta-politics is the debate and discussion of actual doughnut shops and the various ways of making doughnuts. This is the same as comparing the merits of anarcho-capitalism with other types of libertarianism. The practical benefits are described and compared, but in a largely abstract way. After all, the relative merit of one policy compared to another is similar to the comparison of one type of doughnut versus another type of doughnut. Often the people doing the comparing matter more than the comparison.
Finally, politics is the act of selling doughnuts. The guy running the shop is not all that concerned about the propriety of selling more cream filled versus plain, as his primary task is to sell doughnuts. In theory, having 85 types of doughnut on offer makes sense, but if it results in lots of waste, then having just the five most popular types is going to make more sense to the doughnut maker. This works in practice, so he is not going to care if it violate theory or rustles the jimmies of the food critics.
In this regard, a guy like Farage is the doughnut maker. He is focused on winning over as many people as he can to his single issue. Politics is a sales game, where the salesman is always trying to figure out the needs and motivations of the voter. His politics, therefore, have to be flexible enough to fit many situations. The good salesman removes all of the reasons to say no. He attacks the objections, rather than just pitch the benefits. In politics, the game is to avoid disqualifiers so the voter focuses only on the pitch.
That’s why Farage’s new party won big, while Carl Benjamin, Sargon of Akkad, and UKIP were humiliated at the pols. Farage is a likable guy, who avoids taking controversial positions on inconsequential issues. He maintains his focus on the one issue that matters to him, Brexit. Benjamin is a smarmy ideologue who never misses a chance to step on a rake. He embarrassed himself and anyone associated with him, by confirming all of the claims made by his critics. It turns out that there is such a thing as bad publicity.
The alt-right guys will contend that winning is pointless if it does not result in a change in policy or a change in the political culture. That is a fair point and something anyone voting Republican the last 30 years can understand. The GOP has won many elections, but delivered very little to their voters. In the case of the British election, this analysis does not apply as the vote was not an actual election. It was a test of the political atmosphere in Britain that will influence the upcoming struggle to find a new Prime Minister.
It’s why calling Farage a gatekeeper or part of the problem is pretty dumb. The election results give support to the Brexit hardliners in the Tory party and give cover to the moderates, who can now side with Brexit. Britain leaving the EU has enormous downstream consequences for nationalist movements all over the continent. The British leaving the EU strips away the taboo. It is no longer unthinkable for other countries to consider leaving the EU as an option to being ruled by Brussels.
The point of all this is that what we saw in Britain is a good example of why outsider politics remains on the fringe. Ideologues can’t understand why candidates don’t run as ideologues, refusing to compromise on anything. The alt-right guys want candidates to run as open and avowed racists. In the case of Farage, they wanted him to talk about the Paki rape gangs and knife wielding Muslims, rather than his main issue. They simply don’t get why valiantly losing is a bad idea, so they criticize guys like Farage.
It’s also why the Left has been so wildly successful, compared to their numbers. It has been popular for generations to accuse liberals of being unrealistic dreamers, but in reality they operate like cold blooded pragmatists. They win every small fight so it makes it easier to win the next small fight. They are like rats gnawing at the support cables of the status quo, knowing that one day the cables will snap. They never confuse political philosophy with retail politics and they never lose sight of larger goals when in small fights.
Farage winning the election is a small victory, but that’s what it takes to change the culture, winning the small battles. It is the cumulative effect of changing a mind here and a mind there, of normalizing a bit our stuff here and anathematizing some of the orthodoxy over there. It’s messy and boring, which is why ideologues don’t like it, but it is the only way dissident politics can change the culture and eventually change politics. What our side needs is more guys like Farage and fewer rigid ideologues scolding him.
To support my work, please contribute here.
Mike Enoch Peinovich responds to Z’s blog post
I hate when Jesus explains the parables!
Just reading the comments, shows why the right fails. The issue is Brexit, and how to get England back to self-rule, as opposed to being ruled by the EU. But conservatives in the comments are bored by that, and immediately start putting on powdered wigs and blathering about “isms” or arguing about “what are we going to do when we get power?” when the Right has no power. It amazing how the Left eats, drinks, and sleeps politics – but you can’t get conservatives to focus on the real world and think about real politics for 2 seconds, before they’re yapping about some theory or their guns.
The left got where they are, by taking it one issue at a time. They got Gay marriage, by first attacking “homophobia” then touting tolerance, then pushing civil unions, and then going for Gay marriage. One step at a time. Some people on the Right can’t get that. The most important thing for the UK is to leave the EU and regain its sovereignty. Without that, nothing is possible. Of course, the Right has always been known for its political idiocy.
Left and right are an illusion. Democracy is a society run by The Saturday people. Just run your analysis with that thought in your mind
AND inexplicable events suddenly become clear.
Infiltrate both sides of the spectrum and define the acceptable parameters of thought. You can’t lose then.
Farage isn’t a British Orban, but he’s about as good as you can ask on immigration. He’s well aware of the Islam issue and I do think he hides a bit of his power level. And the Guardian crowd haaaates him, so he can’t be all bad.
Farage is atrocious on immigration and an appeaser of Islam.
Farage is useful at present, but history has shown him to be more than happy to throw nationalist parties under the bus if it helps his career.
That would be unnecessary if he himself were a genuine nationalist; the BNP under Nick Griffin–which Farage joined in the attack on–had more momentum and a far higher ceiling than UKIP or its successor ever did.
At least he’s useful.
Lots of great discussions today !!!!
So true. So many perceptive and knowledgeable people. Just another day at the Z blog.
Z has the best comment section on the interwebs.
Zman, I’m definitely more of the type to just cut the damned Gordian knot, but as usual you make excellent points and good sense. How do you respond, however, to the argument that we just don’t have the time for the gradual march through the institutions that the Left used to gnaw away at and ultimately sever the support cables for
White civil society (nuclear family, Christian morality, rule of law, etc.)? When one considers the pace of social and political and particularly demographic degradation over the past decade, I do not believe it is a chicken little statement to claim, as I would, we’re lucky if we have another decade.
As Yogi Berra said: “In theory, theory and practice are the same. In practice, they are totally different…”
Farage understands that politics is about power. The right needs to understand this..the important thing is gaining power. Everything else is details. Once you have power, you can implement your agenda and then justify it however you like. But getting power is what is important. The right needs to be shameless. Say whatever you need, do whatever you need, make whatever alliances you need..but get into power.
I call them “lottery libertarians”. They only want to win the jackpot and if they can’t (or if it takes work or process or small victories) they won’t bother doing more than writing whiny essays on while reality is unfair.
Tom Woods recently tried to address “Why is there no Libertarian Country” – ignoring the talking points, basically he asked if a Communist/Socialist or Cronyist countery is BETTER. Here was the definition shift. He wants a Utopia that cannot exist (part of his list of bad stuff was police were corrupt, e.g. on the drug war – but if you don’t have actual working mechanisms to address corruption your Utopia won’t exist). Communist countries exist. Liberal democracies exist. Monarchies existsed.
Dinosaurs are extinct, Tigers and cockroaches exist. You can ride horses as ehy exist. Unicorns don’t. Pegasi don’t.
The closest you can get is if those who wish liberty are moral (so don’t need much government) and militant (will literally shoot evildoers).
Thomas Paine wrote to exhort the suffering army at Valley Forge, not to the RedCoats to try to convince them they were wrong.
Final post. But after 2012, if I told you that the next GOP candidate for POTUS would publicly and unabashedly state he wants to: 1) ban all Muslims; 2) build a wall with Mexico and create a deportation force; and 3) torture terrorists, and this man would then BE ELECTED as President, you would think I was insane. Let us reflect on where we are now and thank God we are alive in these times. As my donation to this board, go find Jon Stewart’s Comedy Central bit, “Blowjob Rollercoaster”, it’s about 8 minutes and it will make your day. Takes some looking for it! Cheers folks.
Getting a real Brexit, rather than a BINO, is a pretty big deal. It shows that the Anglo-American Deep State can be beaten. The UK voted for Brexit, but the Deep State and their bidders dug in, and prevented it from happening. The UK voters actually seem intent on reminding the Deep State that they actually have a say in policy.
Regarding immigration, if Brexit happens, it is a lot easier for voters to affect change the more decentralized decision making is. Brexit is a big win for those of us who despise the incompetent Western ruling class.
THIS. Farage is a genius to start up the Brexit party. Brexit is a red herring. The real issue here, which Zman has noted in the past, is whether the UK is a democracy or not. That is the real question Farage is putting to the test. Does voting count or can the oligarchs, deep state, “them”, whatever you want to call them, rule the day? Was Mark Twain right? And if so, what comes next??
The real issue is what sort of society we have and who gets to make the rules.
The UK voters actually seem intent on reminding the Deep State that they actually have a say in policy.
This percentage does not translate into parliamentary seats, not even close. When UKIP was peaking under Farage, they managed to secure zero seats in Westminster.
See that’s the beauty of the Brexit Party (and of the old UKIP): since they’re a single-issue party, they haven’t got an actual political platform. This leaves the globalists free to run Westminster without prole interference.
If Brexit got 10% of a GE vote they’d decimate the Tory party and hand Labour the win.
When I first realized Trump was the real deal was during the “somebody’s doing the raping” interview with Don Lemon. Stupid rape comments sunk Aiken, Sargon and UKIP!!, etc., etc. But in that interview, rather than act like your stupid average GOP, Trump said rape like 165 times and came out of it looking like he cared about women and was worried about it (citing leftist sources – NOTE, HUGE THING NEVER USED BY US – aka HuffPo and Fusion) and his interviewer sounded like a functional retard. At that point, I said, holy shit, this guy could actually beat “them”. LOL
Yes. The moment Sargon ran, I knew UKIP would be better for Sargon than Sargon would be for UKIP. He tried to take Gamergate methods into normiespace and got a much needed reality check.
Mister Metokur is a mean little SOB, but his roast of Sargon is right on target.
You are 1000% correct. I follow Metokur especially, but a lot of these youtuber spergs because it’s pretty funny. But I thought to myself, my God man, with all this shit on record, I mean these are audio files they can play on repeat, etc., etc., how in the world is he going to play to a normie audience. And you got your answer Sunday…
Carl Benjamin is smart enough to know exactly what he did. I can only conclude he did it deliberately and moreover it was choreographed by MI6. Nationalism is at root about keeping foreign men out of your female population’s pussy. Benjamin deliberately conflated ukip with the attitude of rapist Muslim gangsters. He should have pivoted to Rotherham any time a journalist mentioned rape.
Farage has openly stated that he wants to replace EU immigrates with Commonwealth immigrants. ie…. he want to replace Poles with Pakis and Jamaicans.
What is the point of winning the Brexit fight if this will be the result?
The left does not win every small fight. What they actually do is keep the desired end result in mind and look for any path that will move them towards that result. My desired end result is a space where white people are allowed to freely associate and organize. I fail to see how Britain leaving the EU and filling itself up with Pakis and Caribbeans gets me towards that goal.
If I’m a Brexiteer, I don’t care if Farage wants to legalize bestiality. He helps the Brexit cause. That’s what matters.
Keeping one’s eye on the ball is the key to success.
If I’m a Brexiteer, I don’t care if Farage wants to legalize bestiality.
Brexit was 80-90% an immigration issue. I bet a lot of his voters would be VERY dismayed to learn what Rosie writes, namely that Farage is all for mass immigration, as long as the immigrants aren’t white, rather than POC from Ye Olde Empire.
Keeping one’s eye on the ball is the key to success.
How is jumping ship right before the endgame keeping eyes on the ball?
Exactly. If your entire appeal is based on giving the people what they want in the face of elite resistance, it certainly helps to actually speak for those people rather than coyly triangulating. Trump would not have won in 2016 without speaking forbidden truths about immigration, for all that he’s fizzled since. The other Euro nationalist parties have done this without beclowning themselves in the Left’s minstrel show. As with Nigel’s previous incarnations, I’m betting that history’s verdict of results achieved won’t support the endorsements he’s getting here today. You may get Brexit with Nigel but you won’t change Cuck Island.
The Eternal Tory Party indeed.
Brexit was/is all about immigration. Just like nobody voted for Trump based on tax cuts and embassy moves, nobody voted for Brexit based on Atlantic fishing permits and Ag quotas.
If Brexit is not about immigration then paying attention or supporting it is just a huge waste of time.
I’m no expert on British politics, but I don’t see Brexit as an immigration issue but a welfare issue with immigration limits as the means. The British underclass thinks that if they can get rid of a million immigrants they’ll see another 200 pounds in their welfare checks and some better welfare housing and less crowded hospitals. If only we could get the blacks in this country to see the light on that. They’re just too stupid.
Democracy is always and everywhere about maximum personal extraction from the state with minimum personal contribution—-JR Wirth.
It wasn’t the Brit underclass that voted for Brexit.
>>> If only we could get the blacks in this country to see the light on that. They’re just too stupid.
I generally avoid talking to Blacks, but I strongly suspect that a not-insignificant percentage of them understand that the Dem policy of unlimited Hispanic immigration is directly counter to their own interests.
The harm done to the working class, if only to a “potentially-working” class, is the single most politically marketable argument against mass immigration. Even the wealthy, liberal Democrats in my family seem to understand this.
The white underclass don’t vote. Brexit is a middle class and skilled working class issue. Add in some posh chances like Farage who are angling to privatise the NHS.
This was a view that vaulted Lincoln to power in 1860. His insistent theme was ‘preservation of the Union’, and it worked. In 1860 the abolitionists called him a cuck. Yet by 1865 they had everything they wanted; had they run as (say) the John Brown Party, they’d have succeeded in winning none of their objectives because they would have lost the election.
Lincoln did not promote bestiality, either. That might have thrown the election to Breckenridge, with unknown consequences.
Lincoln did abvocate beastiality though.
There seems to be a common issue on our side of the divide with being fixated on what we are going to do after we “win” instead of worrying about winning first and then figuring it out.
We are the Underpants Gnome Party.
Z: “The alt-right guys…simply don’t get why valiantly losing is a bad idea, so they criticize guys like Farage.”
Funny, and on the mark, I think. The admirable Mark Collett did a YouTube video about a month ago called “Nigel Farage & the Brexit Party”, where he respectfully criticized Farage for being motivated by ego, and spoke of his habit of trying to derail would-be leaders to the right of him, out of selfishness and desire for the spotlight to be on him alone. Made sense to me at the time. But if you don’t follow it closely it’s hard to know for sure what’s really going on from here in the U.S.
Collett is a very good analyst. He’s basically taking a scalpel to the ego of posturing rightists and examining their psychological foundations through the medium of their political positions.
I stopped reading this piece in the middle because I had a sudden urge to walk down to the bakery.
Bloodsugar! Bloodsugar! Bloodsugar! Fatcart!
Go fry up some Bacon….Bacon….Bacon. BLT for breakfast.
Eat Meat….support ranchers!
I’m still looking for bacon seeds to plant in my garden !
Farage and Brexit per se were both debatable issues on the dissident right. The real story here is that TDS came out for Sargon, which is inexplicable given their rightful mockery of him not long ago. That was almost as jarring as hearing the Exodus Americanus hosts endorse the idea that black Christians were better neighbors than non-Christian whites.
The Dissident Right has two groups within it that are both are trying to subvert the group to serve their ends,
The Christendom Now faction and the Liberty Movement
Neither are really compatible with one another and both are essentially not part of the core which is more secular and focused around economic nationalism and immigration/race issues . Its Paleconservatism without the preaching
Herr Obersturmbahnfuhrer Mueller just presented to the corrupt Congress the roadmap for impeachment. The Deep State/’Rat Party/GOPe/Media Complex is coming after the President.
What will Whites/Conservatives/Alt Right do about it?
Best Guess: Absolutely nothing.
Its very very unlikely he’ll be removed from office of that being impeached will cost him an election, it helped Clinton after all.
its all clown theater and as such no one needs do anything especially worry about it.
In any case the people liable to help him if he asks are not our people. He’s not our guy, just an ally
who’ll jump in are Its Bikers for Trump and MAGA types including active duty who outnumber us by a huge margin .
They might decide its Der Tag if he is removed or an assassin gets through
In that case, all bets are off. Assume the US will cease to exist in a continent wide bloodbath and make your preps accordingly.
Damn, now I want a doughnut.
Today’s post calls to mind how things work today in the political arena. Conservative public figures constantly get asked to comment on global warming, abortion, and so on, and vanity dictates that they share opinions on all these things. Then the get hung out to dry by the media when they share their opinions. On the Liberal side, Hollywood and the media do the opinion sharing on various issues for the candidates, so the candidates can hammer away at the one or two things they stand for. Farage’s discipline to stay simply on point is a great example to follow.
“It’s also why the Left has been so wildly successful, compared to their numbers. It has been popular for generations to accuse liberals of being unrealistic dreamers, but in reality they operate like cold blooded pragmatists. They win every small fight so it makes it easier to win the next small fight. They are like rats gnawing at the support cables of the status quo, knowing that one day the cables will snap. They never confuse political philosophy with retail politics and they never lose sight of larger goals when in small fights.”
Spot on. Whenever some conservative or libertarian or fellow alt/dissident righter tells me how irrational the left is, I point out how they’ve been winning for over a hundred years. Irrational people are not that consistent .
Back before Trump’s presidential campaign, there was a lot of talk in the alt right about simply pushing the overton window rightward and Trump’s campaign platform was yuge in that regard. Then everybody got excited and that sensible idea got replaced by extreme ideological rigidity which I think is a byproduct of impatience (which I completely understand ).
Biology matters. Evolution has built us according to what has “worked” over the long history of our development. Our most fundamental habits of mind are inculcated during our early formative years when our brains are growing fast. When our environment consisted of hardship and existential threat, we learned the wisdom that helped us to survive and thrive, and that programming was sticky or we never made to puberty. We’ve all inherited this sticky memes trait (sometimes called stubbornness) and it’s why talking doesn’t really change minds late in life. If you want fundamental change in the mental habits of the masses, hijack early education. If you want to change the behaviors of adults, change the environment.
Farage is a single issue guy, who is first and foremost a politician. He is not a strategist or a political theorist. He is a pitch man, selling a simple idea.
Farage is a globalist plant.
Farage was sent to occupy the spot as the spokesman for the disenfranchised voters so that real nationalists wouldn’t occupy it, corral the insurrectionist vote in a harmless vessel.
He had to be good enough to stop the punters from going to real nationalists, but not good enough to get a Brexit vote – he did not deliver Brexit, he did everything to sabotage the Brexit vote, and afterwards, the implementation of same: he clowned around with a beer in his hand, gleefully breaking the First Law of Politics: never be caught on camera with alcohol in your hand. And instead of building a real party out of his voter base, he ran UKIP like his personal press agency, staffed with incompetents, cronies and Tory infiltrators.
Farage’s agenda was strictly about the EU and did not threaten the globalist hegemony in Wasteminster, so everybody was happy. Moreover, Farage is pro Islam and pro mass migration (and VERY pro Israel), but because of his superlative oratory, people think he’s against the globohomoization of their country.
So here we are, on the eve of the plebiscite, and every poll suggests that it will be a Bremain; the EU issue can be put to bed for the next twenty years, the dissident vote will be left disorganized and without a purpose, and Westminster can get on with the program of destroying Britain. Farage has done his job and is now ready to move on to his sinecure position at Goldman Sachs, so he prepares an exit following a noble defeat.
Everything goes as planned, except the bit about losing the referendum, and what does Farage do? Well, he takes revenge on his voters for losing him his GS job and absconds his team after ten years of struggle, just when the finishing line is in sight, burning down UKIP in the process, so they will have no chance of making it to parliament to press the issue.
And when UKIP managed to stumble its way out of the embarrassing clusterfuck following Farage’s mismanagement and betrayal, he launches a new party to steal their voters, destroying UKIP for a second time.
Oh, and his children have German passports, just in case Brexit actually happens.
Felix, I disagree with you. The press and the establishment in the UK is on hair-trigger alert for any whiff of anything that sounds or smells like something they can call “racism” and they will use that to destroy their target. That’s how it works here!
Farage knows this and we know it. They have already tried very hard to brand the Leave movement as a neo-nazis and, so far, it hasn’t worked. But Farage only has to utter one adverse syllable about immigration and they will use that to smear the entire independence movement as nothing more than a bunch of slavering racists. We’ve worked too hard to let this happen and it will kill any chance of independence for a generation at least.
We are not in control of the narrative so we have to be smarter. If we charge at the enemy head-on we will just be crushed.
But Farage only has to utter one adverse syllable about immigration and they will use that to smear the entire independence movement as nothing more than a bunch of slavering racists.
Farage has been treated with kid gloves; you can’t be a successful Machurian if the establishment is licking your arse, so he gets a bit of hassle – also, nobody necessarily told the media that Farage was one of their own guys.
Compare the way they treat Tommy Robinson to the way they treated Farage, and you’ll know who’s for real and who’s a globalist agent. With that man’s career in City, it wouldn’t take the taxman five minutes to nail him on some kind of illegality.
I am a big fan of TR who is a real British hero. But note that he stood as an independent candidate in the Euros and failed to get elected. He has been successfully demonised. But that does mean that Farage is an establishment catspaw; if he was then he would never have started the Brexit party. Instead, he would have joined the Tories on the promise that he would “fight for Brexit” and then allow himself to fail.
Look, I could be wrong but Farage has been getting too much done to be just a safety valve.
But that does mean that Farage is an establishment catspaw; if he was then he would never have started the Brexit party.
On the contrary. Joining the Tories would be meaningless if he were a plant, his job is to herd the insurrectionists, the protest vote. He can’t do that if he’s part of the establishment. And he established the Brexit Party so UKIP wouldn’t get that vote.
And it’s not just a matter of Tommy being demonised, they tried to kill him. They swat his family regularly, harass them in the streets and sic murderous Mohammadans on him.
Farage gets none of that – he doesn’t even get audited! – and he’s regularly invited onto the BBC.
The Tory Party want out of the EU but they don’t want to stop Globohomogayplex. Farage is a Tory. Robinson is a Likudnik. Benjamin is an MI5 wrecker.
“But Farage only has to utter one adverse syllable about immigration and they will use that to smear the entire independence movement as nothing more than a bunch of slavering racists.”
The UKIP didn’t realize this and did themselves in because of it.
UKIP was formed as an anti-EU party. They were called oddballs and eccentrics and swivel-eyed little Englanders but they were tolerated. Laughed at but allowed to operate. As soon as we won the referendum, they started making noises about immigration. BANG! They suddenly became the Nazi Party and you could lose your job for just being a member.
BANG! They suddenly became the Nazi Party and you could lose your job for just being a member.
Concurrent with Farage’s exit.
Carl Benjamin when challenged on the rape issue declined to immediately mention Rotherham or Cologne. He simultaneously sounded like a white Muslim threatening white girls and then declined to sound like a paladin for the white race. There’s literally no one on the political map that thinks like him. Most people are authoritarian left from an analytical pov. No one is a spergy individualist.
Farage is a Tory Safety Valve. Robinson is a Mossad asset. Carl Benjamin works for MI5.
The Tory Party will unite around a Brexit Bill in summer just after Corbyn cucks to the Libgreenchuk and declares he’s a remainer.
Yeah I basically agree. Im starting to suspect that Farage may be an example of ‘prettier from afar (US) than up close (inside EU)’
Thanks for the info on his kids’ dual passports. This should be a deal-breaker for a politician of any stripe. That kind of “optionality” is a petri dish for cut-and-run expediency and opportunist grifting. I don’t want it for Israelis in this country and Brits should reject the concept vis a vis the EU as well.
To be accurate, Farage married a German women and therefore his kids can have a German passport in addition to the British one. He is divorced from that woman.
Not necessarily a Machiavellian move on Nigel’s part, granted. Dual passports should be vastly disfavored if not outright abolished for all countries, and for politicians, it should be a disqualifier, personally or within their families. You can only have one team at a time. If you aspire to lead the team, even the appearance of dual loyalties should be avoided.
If the Germans were still blood and soil I’d have no long term issue with the EU.
What a load of garbage. You could publish this somewhere and it would show up in Xirl Science.
Thanks for this zman. There has been a lot of traffic on here, and elsewhere, surrounding the question of “what do we actually do?”. I think the answer lies in the type of success that Farage is forging and your own (correct, IMO) analysis that the path to success lies in small and incremental victories.
I think that too many of our people long for a sudden and glorious revolution where we take to the streets and overthrow the globohomo order. I understand and sympathise. I, too, want to crush our enemies, to drive them before us and to hear the lamentations of their transwomen. But it’s a fantasy and a counterproductive fantasy at that because it gets in the way of doing little, unglamorous but useful things that will actually provide tangible benefits.
It is, as you put it, about gnawing away at the cables. Globohomo didn’t get where they are today by storming any winter palaces. It has taken 70 years or even longer for them to hollow out the foundations of our civilisation. Why does anybody think that this can be reversed in a one big spasm of righteous reaction?
Do we have the luxury of 70 years to turn things around? It’s tough to make that case. A serious dissident right has to rest on acknowledging that the political, cultural, and ideological wars are over and the left has won. The strategy and tactics for reversing a defeat are different from those of a contest between equals.
Sure, there’s value in “doing little, unglamorous but useful things” but let’s not kid ourselves: the other side is constantly expanding its own dominance through incremental mopping up operations. Each of us should contribute what we are most talented at and temperamentally suited for — whether it’s writing, winning elections, or storming the Winter Palace.
By asking the question you’ve answered it.
Where were we 70 years ago and where are we today?
At the current rate of change where will we be in 70 more years?
Traditional politics, fighting one small battle at a time is the pathway to oblivion for the USA.
I don’t think it will take us 70 years (and I agree that we don’t have 70 years). But it is going to take a few years and hard work and step-by-step progress. Even if your determined to wait for a Sulla, there is a much greater chance of a Sulla showing up if we have already laid at least some of the groundwork.
Skepticism of Farage and his motivations are reasonable, given his past actions and words.
For instance, Farage quit and tossed UKIP to the side after the successful Brexit vote, rather than ride herd over UKIP and keep his focus on making Brexit happen. He could have used his talents and UKIP to keep up the pressure, but instead left it to dangle when it most needed discipline.
And when UKIP, deprived of Farage’s leadership and discipline, branched out a bit, Farage tossed UKIP under the bus and gave rhetorical support to those who hate actual Britons.
To an outside viewer from the USA, Farage looks like the UK variant of the USA’s GOP “Boob Bait for Bubba,” where the GOP will talk up pro-life positions, immigration control, and traditional values on the campaign trail and then do squat when they win.
We will see, but unless I see strong agitation on Farage’s part for a No Deal Brexit, given that Parliament’s own law stated that 29MAR2019 was the drop-deal No Deal Brexit date, I will maintain my doubts regarding Farage. We already see Boris Johnson yapping about 31OCT2019, but given current law mandated a No Deal Brexit back on 29MAR2019 and no act of Parliament rescinding that, I still doubt the Tories are sincere on Brexit. If Farage does not go after them hammer & tongs, it will be reasonable to view Farage as a Boob-Bait / Gatekeeper.
Farage is at VERY BEST a strong civ nat patriot. It is possible that you had to be that to win the Brexit vote but he also shows the limitations of civ nat. The man is a complete HBD denier.
Harping on HBD and the JQ is what keeps the dissedent right on the fringes of serious public consideration. True or not, the Normies at this stage are repelled by it.
It’s not harping on HBD and Im actually fine w him being pro-Israel, I have such tendencies myself.
Farage is single-issue on the EU. Fair enough, maybe I became single-issue on Farage when he said this:
Farage is charming and he’s right about the EU. But he’d sell you down the river for a lollipop. So just know who you re dealing with and rooting for.
Here’s (to me anyway) a reasonable short summary from Wikipedia of what happened to UKIP. The story is more complicated than this, and maybe I’ve missed too much detail in following it from afar.
“The pressure UKIP exerted on the government was the main reason for the 2016 referendum which led to the UK’s commitment to withdraw from the European Union. Farage then stepped down as UKIP leader, and the party’s vote share and membership heavily declined. Following repeat leadership crises, Gerard Batten took over. Under Batten, UKIP moved into far-right territory by foregrounding an anti-Islam message. At this, many longstanding members–including Farage–left, with many joining Farage’s new Brexit Party.”
Why Farage left, I don’t know but the party really drifted without him.
After Farage resigned, UKIP lost its focus on the EU and started bashing Muslims and immigrants. Now, Muslims in Britain deserve a lot of bashing, but with the present social climate, this is not the time to make that a major part of a political platform. The UKIP made themselves outcasts by picking the wrong battle at the wrong time.
It’s ironic that immigration is probably an important driver of Brexit sentiment, but it’s already baked in to the party’s support and there’s no need to make one’s self a target by talking about it. UKIP and Robinson made themselves liabilities by doing so.
Farage is smart enough to realize this.
Don’t forget that MI5 agent Carl Benjamin decided UKIP should start to promote then defend spergy jokes about Rape. Robinson was never allowed to run as a UKip candidate. No ukip was engulfed in defending a socially inept asset who deliberately used language that would piss off half the potential voting base. Robinson just carries the flag for Geller, Pipes, Israeli sponsored counter jihadism.
So since normies are repelled by biological reality, I must not mention it? Sorry. As Moran ya Simba stated, there’s such a thing as too much political strategy.
If you want to convince normies of something, it’s a good idea not to repel them.
“A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines. With consistency a great soul has simply nothing to do. He may as well concern himself with his shadow on the wall. Speak what you think now in hard words, and to-morrow speak what to-morrow thinks in hard words again, though it contradict every thing you said to-day. — ‘Ah, so you shall be sure to be misunderstood.’ — Is it so bad, then, to be misunderstood? Pythagoras was misunderstood, and Socrates, and Jesus, and Luther, and Copernicus, and Galileo, and Newton, and every pure and wise spirit that ever took flesh. To be great is to be misunderstood.”
― Ralph Waldo Emerson, Self-Reliance
Thus my sense that he’s a British Newt Gingrich.
The irony is that the fools in the Libedem Green ChUK wing of politics are so brilliantly undermining Jeremy Corbyns rearguard strategy of Tactic Ambiguity that Corbyn is going to be forced to openly declare he’s a remainer. Once Corbyn is forced to state this the Tory party will finally ratify the May_Gove_Johnson Bill and legal and factual Brexit will have occurred.
I have long thought about this. On one hand, perhaps this is God’s will, Israel is reconstituted, perhaps this is the inevitable march towards Revelations. On the other hand, nothing is known to us, so we must act like we can save the day. Hungary is a bright light, for example. What the left has are foot soldiers who do not waver and know where there true loyalties lie. Look at the obamacare vote. Many dems were sacrificed to jam that through. The GOP, we can’t even get these aholes to jam through decent immigration policies. Trump has done a lot by EO though, just check the refugee numbers and kinds of refugees coming in. Massive seachange.
Insofar as I know, Richard Spencer’s issue with Brexit is that it ultimately won’t make a dime of difference.
In light of the Trump experience, he may be onto something here.
Brexit is merely a starting point. It moves the fight against Anglo dispossession to the British Parliament where it belongs rather than Brussels. A good step, but hardly the slam dunk for re-Anglicizing Britain.
There is no “slam dunk” solution for either Britain or the USA.
Maybe not a “slam dunk,” but I can think of a Pareto Principle Solution that would solve about 80% of our problems…
There is no electoral solution
I’d like to see someone run on the single issue of ending Affirmative Action.
Government-enforced Affirmative Action is barely even a thing anymore.
Voluntary corporate “diversity initiatives” are a plague and nothing but a means to legally discriminate against white men.
This is a good point. Affirmative action is now the culltural norm and people are PC whipped into perpetuating it.
Then that’s the political tact to take.
Stress how diversity initiatives have taken over from AA – and therefore AA can be gracefully retired. (repealed).
At the corporate level the problem will then take care of itself as all of the companies with the most out of control “diversity” initiatives will go out of business.
Taking this tact is far easier than trying to fight the issue at the Federal level – and therefore having to go up against all the lefties moral arguments.
Let the dollars make the decision. Because they WILL.
To say that diversity initiatives are the reason that Affirmative Action can be retired is to accept the Left’s frame that “diversity” is good.
Every major corporation willfully discriminates against white men nonstop; it’s not about dollars it’s about the signaling of virtue. Abolishing Affirmative Action won’t change that in the least.
retiring Affirmative Action is just the first baby step; if we can argue that the diversity set-asides obviate the need for AA, than at least it opens the door for a few companies to legally ignore both AA and diversity quotas. Don’t expect every company to suddenly ditch Diversity as soon as AA is overturned, but some will; it will be a long slow transition to purely merit based hiring practices.
Carlsdad, here is where we part ways. Your faith in the power of the proverbial but totally theoretical ” free market” is utterly misplaced. “Let the dollars make the decision. Because they WILL.”
Not that I’ve noticed for the last half century.
If there’s a second Trump term one delicious possibility would be a Trump DOJ initiaive to investigate and prosecute major corporations for racial etc. discrimination violations under the Civil Rights Act based on corporate Diversity initiatives. I’m highly confident the surge of support for that from the quietly seething corporate masses would be huge. The suppressed hatred of normal people in corporations for their Diversity overlords can hardly be overestimated.
The guy who won’t even issue an executive order to protect his supporters’ free speech rights is supposed to do this?
I may be making the mistake this post is about by saying that there is one issue where I cant really stomach Farage and that topic is Tommy Robinson + islam.
For those, probably mostly in the US, who dont know who Tommy Robinson is, he is quite simply the most politically persecuted man in modern British, and perhaps European, history. He’s an islam critic. What the Brit state has done to him is absolutely incredible, deliberately locking him up w violent muslim gangs, no-knock police visits at his home in the early morning, cops openly harrashing him on the street, bogus criminal charges…the list goes on. If you dont know this story you probably wont believe it at first.
He’s a man the British state has almost openly tried tried to outsource the assassination of to violent muslims. Washing your hands of such a man, especially as a public persona, may indeed be ‘smart political salesmanship’ but it sure as hell stinks. So either Farage is entirely ignorant outside EU and small-to-medium business issues. Or stone-cold cynical. And maybe you have to be the latter to get anywhere in politics. But I cant entirely forget that he threw TR under the bus.
Another reason I distrust Farage. Robinson isn’t Richard Spencer throwing up Roman salutes or Enoch pining for the Fourth Reich. Farage’s pragmatism is a little too pragmatic for my tastes. I understand the need to balance principles and practicality. Farage is useful to a point but as a standard bearer I read him like a British Newt Gingrich.
TR is definitely no Richard Spencer. I actually share friends w him, the dissident environment is not very big. And I admit difficulty keeping ‘analytical distance’ when talking about what he’s been put through. Disowning him for political expediency is where I have to draw the line; it’s not enough to do tactics, you also have to know why you’re fighting. And you also need some level of loyalty to ppl who are risking far more in the same fight. W/o some levels of cohesion and loyaty, we ll stay atomized idiots forever. TR is not ‘expendable’ to me.
Enoch has labeled TR a gatekeeper similar to Robert Spencer (racism vs. Muslims is “alt-lite” approved b/c muh philo-Semitism). That said, you can’t deny TR has paid a helluva price for his beliefs, which suggests to me that he’s genuine, regardless of differences of opinion we might have on Israel & the Euro diaspora. Skin in the game always appeals to me. Nigel, like Newt, seems more about saving his own skin. Z’s overall point is sound, but Farage’s lack of personal cred makes the argument suffer.
TR is legit. He is not heavily into HBD, he actually has a significant non-white following in the UK. He probably has some moderate tendencies to civ nat and such but admittedly I also have traces of that. His single issue is islam. And that’s where he’s 100 genuine.
Maybe that could get in the way of Brexit, that’s actually possible. I can understand that argument. Farage’s strong attacks on TR were unnecessary I think. They were also ‘punching right’ and probably split dissident circles in many places. Was that what it took to make enough civ nats vote Brexit? Maybe, I dont know. But the man just sided w the stealth police state against its leading victim.
But what about Robinson’s responsibility here? He’s an activist and provocateur, not a politician. He does not belong on the ballot. He should know that. When guys like him intrude into other areas, they make it hard for the people in those areas. Why does he get a free pass for trying to screw up what Farage is doing, but Farage gets dinged for doing what it takes to succeed?
Im not saying Robinson would make a good politician. But why does he ‘not belong on the ballot’?? No one thought Trump belonged on the ballot in 2015.
He wasnt trying to obstruct Farrage.
That’s not his role. His job is to do what is necessary to raise public awareness, even if it means making himself look bad. By being a polarizing figure, he brings attention, positive and negative, to everything he touches. That’s a hard job few can do well, so he needs to do that job and leave running for office to people good at that job.
As for Trump, he is one of the best natural politicians I’ve seen. Clinton was probably the best, maybe Reagan, but Trump is in that class.
I think he’s still figuring out his role. The UK government has a different idea of what his role should be; to push up daisies. Besides, he ran after Farage distanced himself from him.
I dont trust Farage and I dont think you d like his views on a lot of things outside EU/Brexit and maybe some deregulation for small business stuff.
Judging by Trump’s performance, again respectfully disagree. Trump is a natural candidate/celebrity, not a natural politician. He thrived in the campaign environment. He’s a worse train wreck at actually doing the job than I expected (not that we had any viable alternative, FWIW).
For a guy who ran an organization of tens of thousands, Trump seems to have little sense that personnel is policy. His pattern of following the lead of the last guy to have his ear isn’t entirely “fake news.” Clinton implemented an agenda, as did Reagan. Trump got elected. I’m skeptical as to whether he can repeat that performance and his last few months of “low energy” public performances suggest he may be skeptical as well.
When I speak of political skill in a democracy, it is only within the context of campaigning and winning elections.
Robinson has allowed himself to be the universal bogeyman for the British establishment. He’s made the same mistake as David Duke and Richard Spencer. It’s not all his fault, but that’s not what matters. Again, electoral politics is about closing sales and anything that is bad for business has to be jettisoned. It’s just a cold fact of life that many cannot accept. Robinson does not belong in electoral politics, anymore than Farage should be a street activist.
I cant accept that, not w TR. What’s happened to him is an outrage. I’ve heard directly from Paul Weston’s mouth that TR told him, in person, that he, Robinson, had told by prison guards that ‘the (British) government had ORDERED that he be imprisoned with violent muslims.’
If Farage throws him under the bus, knowing he may be killed any day, w the tacit consent of the British government, Farage is dining w the devil. I think there is such a thing as being too politically tactical.
I’m not 100% up to speed, but yes, this is correct. Kind of like Sargon. The guy has 10000 inflammatory statements in his past of youtube stuff, then throw rape on the bonfire, I mean wtf is going on?? He literally handed the enemy the rope and walked up to the scaffold.
Carl Benjamin is an MI5 asset.
Robinson unfortunately did play the role in the Brit Left’s minstrel show, but there’s a lot of middle ground between his sincere yet damaging street activism and Nigel’s Gingrich-like triangulation and serial Ciceronian reboots of his image and platform.
Robinson is a Mossad agent at this point.
I agree that what has happened to TR is outrageous, but agree that Nigel could not have run with him. I was out last weekend with some upper working class London Gen-X lads. Friends of a friend and I’d not met them before. They honestly thought that a vote for Brexit was a vote against ‘people darker than me’, and a vote for Remain was proof that you weren’t a racist. It amazed me that was their view. They thought the recent violence against TR was justified due to him being ‘a racist’. Nigel F simply had to distance himself from TR et al in order to keep the argument to one of ‘take back control’. Running with some open borders loons also helps in this manner.
I think the macro tactic of one issue at a time has to be the way forward for now, and I view that as simply buying time. On the micro level it is showing people – in whatever way we can – that we are being constantly lied to by our mainstream media, and that narratives no matter how untrue are constantly being reinforced. If you can create an element of doubt in an NPC, one which they really start to think about then the path is open and they can pass through a ‘gateway’. That’s also why I’m not against the Alt-lite. No-one is going to go from doubtful, straight to full on stormfront/stormer. But they will listen to Molyneux or watch Borderless.
On another note, we don’t even have to talk about ‘our thing’ to create doubt in what we are fed. Robert Fisk recently wrote an article that OPCW suppressed a report (now leaked) that the supposed chlorine containers dropped in Douma (by Assad) were likely placed there (false flag). That means OPCW lied about a report, which was then used retrospectively to justify the UK/French bombing of Syria. There’s a red pill right there. Converting NPCs is about creating real doubt in their programming. That’s where our establishment is running scared. Red pills don’t cross over to blue pill – it’s a one way street.
Farage gets things done, Robinson set himself up for martyrdom and got it. Being martyred is not the way to get things done.
After you’ve won, then you venerate your martyrs.
Farage gets things done
Does he? Im happy to learn that Britain is actually out of the EU.
You re not going to have much of a following if your crowd thinks you will be the first to AWOL the minute one of them gets in real trouble.
Certainly the assembling and success of the Brexit party was getting something done.
Here we go again: he didn’t get everything I want done the minute he showed up so let’s reject him and bellyache some more.
Certainly the assembling and success of the Brexit party was getting something done.
Do you have ANY idea how ridiculously unimportant the European Parliament is?? It’s like expecting novel surprises at the Soviet Communist Party Congress. It’s a rubber stamp clown show.
A delivered Brexit, that would have been ‘something’. A few dissident voices in a cuck ‘parliament’ far away not so much.
Yes I do know how useless the EU parliament is. It proves the sham nature of citizen control over Brussels. That’s why Brits voted to get out of the EU.
Farage could not deliver Brexit. That was up to Theresa May and her useless party and they failed utterly.
What Farage did was rally the Brexiters and show the waffling Tories that there is still strong public support for getting out of the EU. He at least kept the proverbial ball in play.
Which is more useful than standing on the sidelines accomplishing nothing more than squawking about immigrants.
You re still not getting it. That a subsection of the comments section here has become a ‘Farage vs Tommy Robinson’ is because Farage created that schism. He didnt need to attack Robinson.
The fact that he did contains, I suspect, insights into his character and views on immigration. Views that make him as dangerous to Britain’s longterm survival as the EU is.
Robinson contributed nothing to Brexit but a chance for the media and Remainer classes to tar the party with a charge of racism.
And Farage’s focus is getting out of the EU.
Farage is a Tory Safety Valve.
This is a fantastic article of realpolitik. Farage is the PERFECT pitchman for Brexit. Look at what this one man has done. Conversely, it’s what drives me nuts about the spergs on our side. Folks, you do realize that EVERYONE and EVERYTHING is against Trump and has been since he announced in 2015. The fact that he is where he is, is frigging amazing. OUR SIDE was literally going to give it away for good re the Gang of 8. It’s why Coulter drives me nuts. Good to keep his feet to the fire, but give the guy a break here and there.
I voted for Trump to 1) control the border. 2) control the border and 3) control the border. Ann Coulter is one of the few people who hold his feet to the fire on that particular issue.
Just days ago, Trump talking to the press said that E-Verify, if implemented would hurt farmers. So just what was won? Maybe a few judges. Maybe a couple approved pipelines. At least a hot first lady and not some dowdy shrew. He broke that tradition. So very little.
To ice the cake he’s surrounded by intellectually hollow war mongers. He’s a one termer who didn’t have what it takes, just some women with fake boobs running around the white house.
If Trump doesn’t win in 2016, the 2nd amendment would be gone. Instead of Gorsuch and Kavanaugh, we would have two new RBGs, plus two more to soon replace the actual RBG and Breyer. So, 6-3 extreme liberal Supreme Court for 20-40 years. Most types of firearms would be regulated out of existence, and the onerous new registration requirements would not be worth it for most people.
Before Trump, over half the GOP were amnesty pussies. Yes, the invasion is worse now, as the Left digs in and fights ferociously, but the Overton window has shifted. We may lose anyway, but at least there is a chance.
The intelligence deep state and leftist media have been exposed as worse than anyone could have imagined. Maybe nothing changes, but at least we know what they are capable of. Never talk to the FBI, have your taxes in order, and fu#k social media.
So three pretty big things. Plus Trump is damn funny, and loves to fight. If it’s too little too late, at least we are getting a fireworks show at the end.
Do you know how anti gun the hispanic culture is (which is now the majority in my state)? They vote like they did in their home country. Mexico has ONE legal gun store, that requires so much paperwork that you can’t buy a gun. As they murder each other left and right with illegal firearms. Legal ownership of firearms is A CULTURAL ISSUE. So goes the culture, so goes the judges.
What’s that again about the perfect being the enemy of the good?
The perfect would be adhering to a rigid platform of 1000 issues. All I want is to stop the deliberate replacement of the population with docile (to the political establishment) peasants. It’s the single issue of our times. I did NOT vote for more H1Bs, more refugees, more everything. I especially didn’t vote for a border to be policed in Afghanistan while ours is wide open. There was a candidate, an orange blob, who campaigned on all of this. I voted for him. It was all cheap talk (although I thought there was a 20-30% chance that he meant it).
He got rolled by the open borders RINOs to take on taxes, health insurance and military spending, and then they would focus on immigration. He is to blame for this too, as well as for offering too much amnesty to get too little enforcement. But there was no one available who was more hawkish on immigration. If there was, I would have voted for him.
I tend to agree that if there is not some visual shot of the wall going up, Trump could be in trouble. Barring that, 2020 will be interesting to say the least…
“They are like rats gnawing at the support cables of the status quo, knowing that one day the cables will snap.” —More like cancer that eventually kills the patient and the cancer.
109 different patients and it was never the cancer’s fault!
Anticancerism is not who we are!
Unfortunately, we’re running out of time and white babies. I hope there’s enough time left over here to put Zman’s ideas into effect.
We’re running out of time (actually, ran out of time) to save the society that once was the United States. We have to stop thinking in those terms. That country is terminally ill. What we’re trying to do is carve a place for our people whatever new society comes next. That’s very doable.
Europe is in a correction right now and will be getting Whiter faster. They may not have a huge fertility increase but that isn’t really an issue as its a crowded land.
Hungary has managed a fertility increase though it hasn’t gone into growth and as that nation is crowded and urban, its proven to be quite expensive
Oh well. You want babies and cities? You have to pay lots for them.
In the US what we are out if is will to power and willingness to take risks . There are more than enough people angry at the system to smash it on the Right and probably the Left for that matter but Conservatives lack the will to power and won’t/can’t organize
This is because they are both heavily influenced by classical liberalism /leave me alone which is an ideology that is no longer useful at the current time and because they can’t see enough gains.
Ignoring race for a second, the US was built on a foundation of sand and had no historical identity to preserve anyway. People in Europe have older china plates than the oldest Americans
heck the mass immigration wave of White people were mostly carpetbaggers, economic migrants and people who failed at home not stalwart colonists
A nation made of sharpers isn’t going to last.
So yes, the Know Nothings were Right
As for Patriarchy, it collapsed so fast and easily simply because in modernity the proverbial juice is not worth the squeeze for Joe Normal
Now if you can find some way in a modern high tech city for being a patriarch to be economically manageable and high status, people will seek that and will fight for it.
That goal is not compatible with a high tech economy though as our economic liberals won’t allow the needed regulation which is draconian nor will our culture be able to redistribute enough wealth. We can’t even do roads
The Bomb Vest Capitalists and Ayn Rand Jihad will wreck the system first anyway
best case scenario would be essentially Bosnia, if you are brown, best leave town and just let the US fall part with the higher cooperation areas doing better
Good luck getting Joe Normal on that train
And so people just opt out, its a suck society but you can’t fix it and it is what it is. Clown World.
I like what I read was the Algerians’ statement to White colonists in the 1960s and have adopted it as my own slogan re White America versus all others (including purported model minority aliens): Suitcase or coffin. That says it all for me. Clown world indeed. Oh come oh come asteroid, maunder minimum, or whatever it takes.
It takes you and people like you to decide on what they want and be willing to sacrifice everything for it. Nothing more, nothing less.
Some of our guys say Farage is a MAGA-level cuck, but watch this amazing, and apparently impromptu, remark on Enoch Powell, and you’ll see that Nigel /knows/ what we know.
More pertinent to this article is the magnet analogy he gives, pulling people ahead little by little.
In my own (mis)adventures in redpilling, I’ve discovered that a “next step” approach works best. A lot of normies are not ready for the leap to the Full Right, but they’re ready for that next step in their deprogramming.
Surely practical policy is similar. The Zman is right, a real, hard Brexit is a step in our direction, and it’s on us to keep people and policy moving in our direction.
You are exactly correct! It’s about pacing folks. Did the left fire out of the gate with tranny demons reading to little children?? No, they talked about free love and don’t judge promiscuous HETEROSEXUAL sex. In the early part of the twentieth century did a certain group openly attack Christianity?? No, they just said the State wasn’t inclusive of their religion and thus Jesus had to be banned too. It’s called a “long march” for a damn reason.
Yep. I’ve found that normies respond extremely well to my saying that all groups should be treated equally and not demonized – including whites. Use their own beliefs as a wedge.
Just using the word “anti-white” can be helpful because it 1) wakes people up to the fact that whites are a group and 2) that whites can be discriminated against. The same for “It’s OK to be white.”
A group of 3 white NewYorkCity school employees filed a $90million lawsuit today, against the Chancellor of the Dept of Education (Richard Carranza). They were upper level executives (not classroom teachers); they claim that Carranza’s crusade against “toxic” whiteness at the Dep’t of Education created an “Us vs. Them’’ culture that saw the longtime officials demoted in favor of less-qualified persons of color.
Pushback is coming …
My first brush with Dissident Politics came from a crank who said that my people were pure evil and all powerful.
I didn’t like that.
Generally speaking, the foot soldiers of any political movement tend to be people with nothing better to do. The mentally imbalanced with serious life issues. The advantage of the Dissident Right is that it’s a genuine grassroots, organic movement. People are popping out of the earth, not being groomed by a machine. But the machine has some things right, like polishing its leaders and giving them political training. The people talking for the Dissident Right tend to be either normal, fed up people (acceptable, could be worse), or these loons who talk about their power fantasies and what will happen come the revolution.
What’s worse is that a lot of these dissident leaders are celebrities. Media types. Former youtubers. There’s nothing as toxic to getting stuff done as celebrities. They’re attention whores. I don’t think the future comes from them. I think the future will come as Dissident Ideas spread covertly among young elites of the professional class, and then they will devour their parents. By the time the French Revolution came, every cool noble was liberal. The Russian Revolution didn’t come until every openminded noble was red. The Soviet Union only fell because its masters no longer believed. The top-bottom alliance works, whereas the pitch NRx and libertarians make to primarily middle class audiences doesn’t. You need this presence, but they’ve got to stay leashed. The Left has let their media off its leash, and it has turned lots of otherwise sympathetic people away just to pump up a crowd of radical ideologues.
By my people, I mean cloud people. Sorry for double posting.
Most certainly a good fraction of the left are unrealistic dreamers. (Look at Alexandra Ocasio Cortez for example. Let’s ban cars!) And as for “win every fight”, no, they don’t, at least not over the short term. They do tend to win in the long term.
The left wins in demccracy for several strategic reasons.
First, they control all the high ground (in democracy) of the propaganda organs of the state: the schools, higher education, the press, and Hollywood. They can always push their narrative in almost all venues that matter, including “expert” opinion, and “scientists”. The right still has some churches. And I guess now we have frog-twitter, or at least Gab. This is weaksauce by comparison.
Second, due to their control of the propaganda, they also bring along the center.
The loonies on the left like AOC are useful to the movement, but it is the centrists — the amoral power seekers — who provide the vast bulk of the actual politicians and other functionaries who create new policy. These people, to the extent that they are smart enough to dope out the trend (that every generation is educated further left), will always position themselves just left of center. Think of Hillary Clinton. She was center left in 1990, and 2008, and 2016 — even as the center moved left. She was against all sorts of things before she was for them.
Finally, because they control the state and the media, the left can use violence and we can’t. We saw this in Charlottesville, Berkeley, and many other small flashpoints. When they do it, it’s righteous protest, if perhaps a tiny bit regrettably too enthusiastic. When we do, it’s neo-nazi terror hateful terroristic hatred.
“First, they control all the high ground (in democracy) of the propaganda organs of the state: the schools, higher education, the press, and Hollywood.”
To Zman’s point, they won those by street fighting 24/7/365 and doing the tedious work of infiltrating, subverting and taking over these organs. They are religious zealots who will never quit or rest. This is exhausting to normal people, so the left always controls more ground than their numbers would indicate.
This is why I constantly say: REMOVE THEM.
What I mean by that is: Remove the schools from government control. Remove Federal funding of education. Cut the Federal government apart with a chainsaw and get rid of entire agencies. Get rid of things like the income tax.
Remove the organs that the left constantly takes over – and you’ve eliminated the larger portion of the problem. You’re also being consistent with the way this country was setup in the first place.
Yes – you are correct. The left will fight 24/7/365 to TAKE OVER organs of power. So REMOVE THEM. Given that fighting this kind of ideological fervor is exhausting to normal people – I don’t see any other way of preventing leftoid takeover.
The left controls more ground than their numbers would indicate – because they roll power up to the top – and then they control the top. This is NOT the way the Federal structure in the US was supposed to work.
Part of the reason has absolutely lost their minds about Trump – is because they’ve been rolling power up to the Executive office for decades – if not a century or more. This aggregation of power has enabled a lot of their efforts at furthering their agenda. They always thought they’d be able to control the office.
Along comes Trump – and suddenly the levers of power they worked so hard to put all in place – are being man-handled by a Nazi.
I’ve been telling my dumbass lefty friends for a couple of decades :
” You know you guys are stupid right? You keep putting more and more power into the Federal government – and sooner or later American Hitler is going to take all that shit over and he’s going to have all the laws he needs to send your asses off to the camps”
As a white man I don’t need a power center lording over me on a daily basis. I’m perfectly capable of living a moral and productive life and fostering a civil society – without having somebody direct me how to take a shit properly.
The increase in governmental power – neatly tracks with the increase in “diversity” – as well as things like voting rights for females and affirmative action.
I’m perfectly fine with conflating living in a high trust society with relatively high degrees of liberty , with a severely limited government at all levels – as well as severely constrained (or completely missing) “rights” for certain people who have a long historically demonstrated lack of ability to function in that kind of society.
If that makes for a “society” where only white people can function – then so be it. As pointed out here numerous times – blacks have a whole continent they can go back to – and whole societies that they constantly celebrate – that they should be perfectly happy to go back and re-join.
The same applies to the rest of the POC.
How? What is this metaphorical chain saw of which you speak?
Libertarian systems, minimal state, minarchy and Nightwatchman States are all bullshit and not only don’t work but no one other than a tiny number of Anglo Saxons is crazy enough to think its a good idea.
You cannot run society without government. Instead that vacuum will create a legitimacy crises and you’ll get Roosevelt 2.0 if you are lucky, Stalin if you are not.
Instead your guys must be the State and perform the just duties of those organizations. You don’t want Leftists running the EPA than you make sure the air, water and land are clean and rivers aren’t on fire.
Also privatizing schools is fine and good, hell home school if you like but be prepared for nasty consequences. Same when you get rid of Social Security. get used to a smaller economy, a poorer nation and constant bank crashes.
There is a reason everyone went Keynesian. It works damned well.
Also as for getting rid of the POC , a lot of them have been here hundreds of years they aren’t going anywhere voluntarily and are perfectly capable of shooting back.
If you want them gone, you need State to do that. Big bad government and lots of that
This is an excellent post and I need to ponder the analogies to U.S. politics.
What’s the easiest victory that the alt-right can achieve, today?
How do you reverse all the bullshit that our culture is cluttered with? What’s the first brick off of the pile? Is it all intersectional or is it not?
After 60 seconds of thinking, I’m leaning towards ending birthright citizenship. I think that’s our single-issue Brexit and I think it’s one issue – on it’s own without any other baggage attached – that could get through Congress and upheld by the courts. Heck, you might even get 34 states to pass a constitutional amendment for it.
Simply say we interpret the 14th Amendment to mean, “You must be here legally for your offspring to have citizenship” Nothing else. No other conditions.
If we can do that, then it would cut down- at least partly – the incentive for families to sneak in. Men who want to work would still come, but why bring your pregnant mamacita if little Juanito will no longer be an anchor baby?
Then that might open the possibility of – if needed – a real regulated guest worker program as opposed to “get in and you’re safe forever”.
Then that might actually make building the wall less of lightning rod and more generally pragmatic and acceptable. Then Dems don’t want a wall right now because all of those anchor babies (and maybe their parents if they’re lucky) are future Dem voters.
So then if we are no longer importing an underclass and future Dem voters, we could start talking about real welfare reform and social security and tax reform. Which might be easier because the economy and wages would be stronger for all Americans.
And the reforms we make would be less divisive for the same reason social security is more or less untouchable: because everybody’s in the same boat. We’re all native born Americans.
And then if we recognize again that we are all native born Americans, maybe we start – culturally – encouraging things like family and religion and we don’t celebrate and encourage all kinds of sexual perversions and deviancy.
I think Farage is on to something.
This would still have been a good strategy for the US ten years ago. Europe has the luxury of being able to pursue a piecemeal strategy, we don’t.
They are in a much better demographic position than we are; they have actual nationalist parties to rally around whether they are more direct like Salvino’s Lega or indirect like Farage’s Brexit.
We have an election coming up in 2020. We also have the decennial census occurring.
Many “white” Hispanics and “white North Africans” and fellow “whites” and others will keep the number of whites at over 50%. What ever number they come up with will be BS.
Add to this the not insignificant percentage of whites who will never ever take our side, no matter what the circumstances – there are whites living in squatter camps in South Africa who still believe in racial universalism.
My point is that we are a structural minority already and that’s going to continue getting worse.
Fighting a million small battles to win the big one is a smart strategy for the Europeans. Traditional politics isn’t an option for us because we’ve already lost the demographic game.
Political disruption with the goal being separation seems to me to be our only realistic option.
The other advantage European countries have is the multiparty system. If we had four or five major parties splitting the spoils it would be difficult for a winner-take-all scenario. It would be nice if you could break up the duopoly, but that would be like asking Coke and Pepsi to voluntarily split themselves up into several smaller companies.
Heh. Anti-Trust law used against political parties.
Yves Vannes Well said.
Don’t worry, despite the post above, I do think dissolution is ultimately the solution to all of this.
The piecemeal strategy – and ending birthright citizenship – might have worked back in 1980. It is far, far too late now. We are about 56% Christian European White and dropping fast.
We can add to this another problem with traditional politics: 29 states passed a ban on gay marriage, what’s the law-of-the-land today carried out by fiat?
Many Whites aren’t especially religious and aren’t interested in the older moral structure as demonstrated by pervasive porn ,highly variant sexual practices and drug use
It reminds be of something Pat Buchanan was talking about years ago, to paraphrase a lot of the younger people (Gen X at the time) considered homosexuality no more significant than being Left handed
Its pretty hard to “roll it back to 1920” or something when you can’t get anyone upset enough to want it. And this includes a lot of Dissident Right people too
A more close to home example, California has no gendered restrooms in many cases and the public response is had been “whatever” I think it worked great and the general and slightly justified fear of perverts is easily met by having a parent protect younger kids.
This kind of leads back to our hosts point about the perfect and the good
There are enough people of every ethnic group who want to stop more immigration, maybe starting there getting enough a voice to shout down the Chamber of Commerce is a good start
If those voices are ethically diverse this also diffuses the Democrats as well , you can’t migrate in a new electorate if they vote you out
This means supporting nearly any vetted anti immigration not too anti gun candidate till its done and not worrying about the rest
They key to doing this though is marketing , a bit of money and a consistent single message “No more illegal immigration, much less legal immigration”
Anyone proposing any dilution of message gets kicked out, They may mean well or they may be trying to Tea Party the organization and subvert it
This doesn’t matter as the effect if the same . Any changes, any excess radicalism, out you go
if it doesn’t work you still have the Bosnia X Rwanda option
Whether ending birthright citizenship is the precise answer or not, I’m more and more coming to believe that victory can only lie in multiple state and local measures to sponsor constitutional amendments, local laws, gubernatorial proclamations (yes, I know they are hot air), etc… That is, we must lay the groundwork ultimately, for secession or partition. I just saw below that this is pretty much what Yves Vannes is proposing. He calls it “political disruption with the goal being separation.”
Occidental Observer had a piece last week (“Ministry of Liberty”) discussing how 3 open borders zealots formerly of the “Revolutionary Communist Party” are riding Nigel’s coattails as members of his current party. The post contrasts this with Farage’s pro-Brexit “Breaking Point” poster which says “We must break free of the EU and take back our borders.”
The NRA doesn’t allow gun-grabbers to run under its aegis. Is it “fanatical” to distrust a guy who either by default or design lets genuine fanatics for open borders make Trotskyist inroads into his party, whose base he motivates by appeals for immigration restriction?
Enoch’s worst takes are his Nazi dead-ender stuff. Mistrusting Farage’s judgment or intentions isn’t one of them. Read that piece then give me a good reason why Nigel shouldn’t own this glaring contradiction.
Comparison are useful when they make sense. This one is nonsense. The point of the NRA is to oppose gun grabbing, so including gun grabbers would be ridiculous. The point of Brexit is to leave the EU, so including communists or gay activists or jugglers is fine, as long as they support leaving the EU.
What seems to be the issue here is the writer for the Occidental Observer does not understand the topic about which he is writing. Instead, he is writing about an imaginary version of Farage and his party, rather than the actual man and his actual party.
Respectully disagree to the extent he’s leveraging immigration restriction as a major reason to support Brexit while his underlings push a 180 degree different agenda. The recent quotes from from the three persons in question aren’t imaginary, nor is their pedigree. We saw this here with the neocons wedging their way into conservatism because not enough of us called BS on them. If these Brit candidates were simply Communists or gay activists, I could accept the Big Tent justification but the analogy to gun-grabbers & the NRA is appropriate where they’re radically opposed to a core value driving Brexiteers to vote for Farage and his party.
You’re doing what ideologues always do, making the perfect the enemy of the good enough. If Farage made immigration an issue, he loses. By focusing on one thing, he wins and sets up the next fight on more favorable terms. That next fight is not over the exact borders of the ethnostate. That next fight is over the next PM. A more hawkish PM means the next fight, over Britain’s relationship with the EU, is on better terms.
The game here is to advance the ball down the field.
“The game here is to advance the ball down the field.”
It worked for the Left in the US.
For that matter, it worked for Conservative Inc.
(Interesting that the two of them didn’t cause much trouble for each other.)
Of course, we thought Conservative Inc. was on our side. Silly us.
That’s because they are allied Leftist groups. Neo Liberal and Neo Conservatove is a distinction without much of a difference
Now the Hard Left and the Paleocons are the actual opposition and often cooperate when they agree on something, usually trade.
My folks were Troyskyites. Yes, he got the pickax to the head. Against Stalin’s stated policies, Trotsky called for a continuing world permanent revolution, criticized and opposed Stalin’s regime, and was eventually expelled from the Communist Party and exiled. You know the rest of the story.
The university academy was and is the earthquake epicenter of the Communist wave propagation. Like a single cell critter dividing into many, Western Marxism spun off and gave birth to the Frankfurt School (Marcuse-Adorno-Horkheimer-Eric Fromm). In the early 30’s, the school was reborn at Columbia University. Its members began to exert their influence on American culture, and Critical Theory was born to criticize every pillar of Western culture, to nihilistically destroy family, freedom of speech, and all the underpinnings of our culture. This movement gave birth to Saul Alinsky (Rules for Radicals) who deeply informed Hillary Clinton and Berry Obama. On and on and on….
The bigger dog commies kept their eye on the long range goal and in spite of endless arguing, bickering and Marxist spinoffs, they kept the goal of destroying the foundations of Western civilisation…..take a look around you today. It worked!
My mother the commie was the cousin of Supreme Court Justice (get rid of the Second Amendment) John Paul Stevens…rotten seeds in the upper crust. Never doubt the depth of the rot. Anyone heard of John Brennan (duh)—voted a number of times for Gus Hall CPUSA. Commies don’t carry a Commie Card. Ha! Never had a Thanksgiving dinner with Cousin Stevens. We were the churchmice because commies are lousy with money, except other peoples money. Mother espoused he was a conservative softie tradtionalist bigot…my, how things change! In the 30’s, a surprising number of the British landed gentry had grown adult children playing entitled Bolshie at the Bolshevik Club eating bad borscht advocating a takeover of the Navy.
Yes, Farage is a one trick political pony, may play out “messy” and should he be successful with Brexit, will probably have political plans that will be challenged or jettisoned. You can only build from 1 block…1 block at a time…at that point you can determine to throw him over…or not.
The Communists love watching us in-fight and drop the seeds of chaos!
The game for those of us on the Great Divide should be to advance the ball down the field against the opposition. 1st down…look at the playing field…then figure out the next play. Life is messy, and then we muddle along.
And this is why I had little interest or success when my intellectual father taught me the rules of chess. I am not a strategist. I understand – and agree – with advancing the ball down the field and building one block at a time, but we really don’t have that time! We are being swamped, outbred, miscegenated, drugged, and immivaded to death. I want the existence of the White race and future for White children!
How many White kids do you have? . No need to answer OPSEC and all that but it its less than three and its physically possible for you to have them , you can’t really complain much about others choices.
I have zero thus I have nothing to say about others deciding to not have kids
Ultimately though its going to come down to having an ideology people will follow and until that happens and you make sure that that ideology is measurably better , its all pointless carping.
Everyone is pissed off but thus far there are no better alternatives and people aren’t pissed off enough to risk Bosnia x Rwanda
I think what is wrong with people like Spencer and Enoch is that they’re trying to equate two systems that are not similar. The US political system is not like the one in the UK or other European nations. In the UK it is possible to have a guy like Farage to move the debate by forming a new party that is few in issues but can keep winning and move the debate towards his end of the court slowly but surely.
The US is on a different course of history then Europe in a lot of respects, despite our similar ruling classes. European nations, a small sense, can course correct with the right politics and parties. The US is already a dead duck just waiting to fall apart or become more despotic over the years, because two party monopoly can’t really change anything no matter who we vote into office. They maybe can save the whole of the UK, but nothing can save California and Texas from becoming Nuevo Baja California and Argentina (I think you had a post where you said Texas would become similar to Argentina, Z).
This is how the left wins..assemble the coalition, win power, purge the now unneccessary elements.
… and squash any talk — and talkers — that seem even vaguely “counterrevolutionary.” Deplatforming, debanking, de-employing, and general depersoning are no surprise. They’ve been licking their chops over this for years. And this is only the appetizer.
Nigel Farage is single-handedly burying the Cuckservatives in Britain, while some of our people gripe on the sidelines that he is somehow fake because he won’t go full on 1488. Do they not realise that that is how the Cucks keep winning? Or perhaps they do realise it?
You listen to a network that features Eric Striker and have a problem with former revolutionary communists who are presently interested in national sovreignity?
Their “interest” is in open borders. Read my response above. If they weren’t rabid for open borders, I could accept the Big Tent strategy. If your interest is in national sovereignty, what the hell are people like this going to do to advance that ball down the field?
Britain can’t have a talk about borders while it belongs to the EU. So, step you, you have to leave the EU. If you have to include people who are against steps 2, 3, 4 of your agenda to achieve step 1, that’s what you do. Once you achieve step one, the board changes and you’ll work on a coalition that can achieve step 2.
That’s some funny shit right there.
“The NRA doesn’t allow gun grabbers to run under it’s aegis”.
That depends on your viewpoint – which is dependent on your level of cuckery on the subject (in this case firearms).
The NRA has (and rightfully so) – taken quite a bit of heat for it’s virtual gun grabbing cuck ways. In the same vein as the criticism of “conservatism” that I see here – I could also say about the NRA.
It never met a gun control bill it didn’t cuck itself into accepting.
1934 National Firearms Act.
Federal Firearms Act of 1938
Safe Streets Act of 1968
Gun Free School Zones 1990
Brady Handgun Act 1993
Federal Assault Weapons Ban 1994
And then there’s the state by state anti – gun legislation that they’ve never prevented.
The NRA has “prevented” anti-gun legislation at a level probably only minimally better than “conservatives” have prevented the current day leftoid globohomo lunacy.
The NRA is a good example of why you can’t base your trust on the Left’s hatred. It’s also a good counter-example to “Your enemy’s enemy is your friend.” On second thought, maybe the Left prefers the backstabbing, ineffectual NRA as an enemy, so they direct their hate (and Joe Blow’s support) its way.
For some reason, I suddenly want a doughnut….
I too smelled the unmistakable influence of the Doughnut Lobby behind this piece. Pure grift. I think some of you guys need to read up on the DQ.
At one point I used to give talks to factory guys. They’d always walk into the room and joke, “where the donuts?” They’d sit down and keep saying it. Working men never tire of the same wisecracks, so I just took it as part of the repetitive scenery. Then at one factory the plant manager took me aside and said, “You know son, these guys aren’t joking right? You make them sit in a conference room and concentrate for an hour, they expect donuts. Bring the donuts.”
When legal, hunting over bait is always the superior strategy.
By sticking to the one issue – Brexit – Farage has united some really strange bedfellows who agreed to not start bickering about anything else until Brexit is delivered. Hence they romped home in the elections. As you say, many lessons to be drawn from this.
I would imagine it is the same in Britain, but here in the US, most far-right people like being big fish in small ponds. Whenever the pond starts to grow, they look for ways to divide the pond into smaller ponds. Figuring out a way to get past that transition point is the big challenge. I think in the case of Farage, he understand Brexit opens the floor to debating other issues like nationalism and ethnic identity.
If avoiding unnecessary divisiveness is a good thing, then why do you endlessly hate on Liberatarians, Boomers, failed Conservatives, and alternative ringleaders like Peterson and Shapiro? All are human and therefore fallible, but you would be hard pressed to find a successful tyrant among them.
Good question; I would like to see Zman answer it.
The Booby can’t speak for Z, but the conservative-libertarian alliance was a cold war phenomenon. They were both opposed to the ultra-left that was sweeping across “good” society.
It’s curious, the USSR collapsed and everyone believed we won the cold war, and conservatives and libertarians began to drift away from each other.
Ironically, we actually lost the cold war, as the ultra-left took over our campuses, and by extension our bureaucracies, courts, and government.
In the final analysis not even a conservative-libertarian alliance could stop the far left from taking over.
You’re actually pointing out part of the problem.
The left – and I include the ultra left in there – were “taking over” long before the Cold War officially started. The FDR administration was riddled with commies. The same people who pushed the New Deal – pushed for Lend Lease aid to the Soviet Union.
I ask you: would the US have been worse or better off in the longer run if (at the minimum) – the Soviet Union had been overrun by the Germans? Lend Lease aid is likely the crucial push that prevented that from happening.
The left screams about Nazis under every bed in the current day – well they were just as threatened by “fascism” in the 30’s and 40’s as they are now.
Looked at as an ideological war – the US fought on the “left” side – and not the “right” side. We are dealing with the detrius of that now. Fighting in – and then winning WW2 – cemented in place the power structure that has become the globohomo insanity that we’re stuck with today.
As Garet Garrett wrote in 1938 :
There are those who still think they are holding the pass against a revolution that may be coming up the road. But they are gazing in the wrong direction. The revolution is behind them. It went by in the Night of Depression, singing songs to freedom.
There are those who have never ceased to say very earnestly, “Something is going to happen to the American form of government if we don’t watch out.” These were the innocent disarmers. Their trust was in words. They had forgotten their Aristotle. More than 2,000 years ago he wrote of what can happen within the form, when “one thing takes the place of another, so that the ancient laws will remain, while the power will be in the hands of those who have brought about revolution in the state.”
Worse outwitted were those who kept trying to make sense of the New Deal from the point of view of all that was implicit in the American scheme, charging it therefore with contradiction, fallacy, economic ignorance, and general incompetence to govern.
But it could not be so embarrassed, and all that line was wasted, because, in the first place, it never intended to make that kind of sense, and secondly, it took off from nothing that was implicit in the American scheme.
It took off from a revolutionary base. The design was European. Regarded from the point of view of revolutionary technique, it made perfect sense. Its meaning was revolutionary and it had no other. For what it meant to do, it was from the beginning consistent in principle, resourceful, intelligent, masterly in workmanship, and it made not one mistake.
The test came in the first one hundred days.
No matter how carefully a revolution may have been planned there is bound to be a crucial time. That comes when the actual seizure of power is taking place. In this case certain steps were necessary. They were difficult and daring steps. But more than that, they had to be taken in a certain sequence, with forethought and precision of timing. One out of place might have been fatal. What happened was that one followed another in exactly the right order, not one out of time or out of place.
Having passed this crisis, the New Deal went on from one problem to another, taking them in the proper order, according to revolutionary technique; and if the handling of one was inconsistent with the handling of another, even to the point of nullity, that was blunder in reverse. The effect was to keep people excited about one thing at a time, and divided, while steadily through all the uproar of outrage and confusion a certain end, held constantly in view, was pursued by main intention.
The end held constantly in view was power.
In a revolutionary situation, mistakes and failures are not what they seem. They are scaffolding. Error is not repealed. It is compounded by a longer law, by more decrees and regulations, by further extensions of the administrative hand. As deLawd said in The Green Pastures, that when you have passed a miracle you have to pass another one to take care of it, so it was with the New Deal. Every miracle it passed, whether it went right or wrong, had one result. Executive power over the social and economic life of the nation was increased. Draw a curve to represent the rise of executive power and look there for the mistakes. You will not find them. The curve is consistent.
At the end of the first year, in his annual message to the Congress, January 4, 1934, President Roosevelt said, “It is to the eternal credit of the American people that this tremendous readjustment of our national life is being accomplished peacefully.”
Peacefully if possible — of course.
The roots of the problem we have in this country go back further than just the Cold War.
As Garrett wrote: ” it took off from nothing that was implicit in the American scheme”
The Republic was subverted much longer ago than just the cold war. I see people commenting here with crap like ” our problems started in 1965!”. This is laughable. It’s like saying ” I only agreed it was ok to stick the tip in – how did I get this Coke bottle stuck up my ass ? “
Carlsdad – excellent comment and brilliant quote from Garrett. As you note, so many others are laughably ignorant. When I read that someone first questioned racial equality with the OJ trial, or even worse the “Hands up don’t shoot” thing, I realize I’m dealing with someone stuck in his dissident intellectual infancy.
Leftism is part and parcel with modernity. The reason is somewhat philosophical and somewhat economic.
The philosophical basis is basically the ideas of suffrage, widespread franchise and individual liberty being more important than anything else are inherently Left Wing Rightist societies are more group and class driven, monarchies typically, family, throne and altar stuff . Right only exist for the greater good , tradition and as part of obligations among social classes
We value Leftist ideals as a society.
On an economic basis, Marx basically understood the problem space. People in modernity especially urbanites are worse off than serfs as they have no protection from the vagaries of the market
The sudden implosion of an economy is worse than a famine since in most cases, a few bad harvests just means the land is rested and you’ll go back
A few bad production years or a change in preference and you get Detroit and that is gone for good.
Given the widespread privation of the Great Depression its no wonder people turned to the State. There was no other place to turn that had the resources to solve the problem. Corporations and modernity destroyed the church , private charities were overwhelmed and subject to the same pressures and companies while they can be charitable are not charities
Money and production economies are unstable in fundamental ways that land based ones are not and as such the State grows to force stability into the human system
As neither State run societies (Communism) nor after a certain level of development and urbanization, purely capitalist ones work so we return to form, regulated economies with a mix of the State
Those regulated economies were historically the norm for the West having existed any time there was any social order and before.
They aren’t going away.
We can build a sane social matrix and deal out cultural Marxism which is the biggest problem though which is another post
A few bad production years or a change in preference and you get Detroit and that is gone for good.
Detroit wasn’t caused by a few bad production years.
Perhaps not but a lack of demand for film, a few bad at Kodak years reeked havoc all over Upstate New York
Now in Detroit Coleman Young and the corruption was certainly part of the problem but it wasn’t just him.
The cultural/ethic issues are huge but they magnify existing problems not create them. Short sighted management and the American way creates the problem .
We only do amazing when our markets were closed or we were the mains sourced of goods not as much otherwise
Also look at the American car industry, it exists to make overpowered sports cars people are not skilled enough to drive and trucks that clog up the road for the most part
In useful vehicle terms here in California its almost all foreign cars.
And sure they are often made in the United State, in factories managed by some other country to another set of standards
Our upper class and our managerial class suck and this suck is magnified by the race/cultural issue not caused by it.
Can’t speak for Z man either, but wrt Lil’ Benny, it is the outright dishonesty and opportunism that ruins him for me. His never-Trump until it was convenient; border walls for me (Israel) but not for thee (US); as well as the typical neocon war positions. He strikes me as quite clever, but not wise.
However, from what I can tell, he does seem sincere about being anti-abortion, so I give him that.
This is correct. I admire Farage’s iron discipline when it comes to the Brexit issue and the other members of the Brexit Party who toed that line and that line only. It was and will remain a winning strategy. It was a joy to observe the loser Tories spluttering and harumphing about a ” lack of policies” while the electoral blood drains from their bodies. Conservative Party delenda est.
The Tories have been worthless since they torpedoed Thatcher.