Affirming The Alternative

Something everyone outside of conventional politics agrees upon is that the establishment conservatives are no longer useful or relevant. Whatever you want to call the super set of groups making a claim to right-wing politics, but outside of conventional politics, the one thing that ties them together is an antipathy to Conservative Inc. The criticisms vary in tone and specificity, but everyone agrees that the starting place for a new opposition to the Left is replacing the current Right with something new.

In fact, it is the failure of so-called conservatives that has fueled the rise of populism, neo-nationalism and various dissident movements. If you look around at the various tribes milling around the right-wing fringe, all of them are a response to some failure of conventional conservatism. The alt-right grew out of libertarianism, for example. The identitarians and race realist passed through paleo-conservatism. The paleocons, of course, have been around since their purging decades ago.

The absolute failure of conservatism needs to be more than a rallying point for a loose coalition of the dispossessed. This is not an age calling for a longer list of people purged by Conservative Inc. What is required is a replacement for so-called conservatism that will provide a true alternative to what is offered by the Left. This is something many among the dispossessed have suggested. Paul Gottfried, who gets credit for coining the term alternative Right, has been arguing this for years.

While more and more people are flowing into outsider politics, looking for an alternative to conventional conservatism, there is no agreement as what should come next. The paleocons have gone further than anyone, but their imagined replacement is mostly just a reset to the time before the neocons outmaneuvered them in the 70’s and 80’s. It is a conservatism of yore that is free of the baggage train of failure and perfidy that has come to define modern conservatism. It’s what conservatism should have been.

Other groups are far less sober minded. The alt-right never got around to thinking up a new metaphysics. They spent their time recreating an aesthetic from a bygone age that was intended to shock, rather than celebrate a new ideological movement. The closest they came to imagining an alternative Right was borrowing the idea of an ethnostate from fringe Russian thinkers. Otherwise, the alt-right was just a collection of complaints decorated with some racist and fascist language and imagery.

Other groups among the dispossessed are even less coherent in what they want than the alt-right. The neo-reactionaries want to return to the age of kings, but with the modern material items produced by liberalism. The neo-nationalists and populists, like the paleocons, mostly want to return to a convenient starting point in the past. Theirs is not a critique of liberal democracy, but of its constant companion radicalism. Like Marxists, they argue that real liberal democracy has not been tried yet.

The truth is, none of these approaches can get very far, because at their core they accept the base assumptions of liberal democracy. That means they embrace the core principles of the Left. Those being egalitarianism and the blank slate. They may place some qualifiers on these, but ultimately, they start with the assumption that there is a universally preferable form of human organization. That form of human organization assumes people are all the same with the same human potential.

In this regard, this age is not calling for an alternative Right. There’s no need to rally the guerrilla forces, aged and withered, having hidden out in the ideological and political jungles for generations, in order to reclaim the high ground of liberal democracy. Even if they were able to fight, that fight has been long over. The reason the Left holds the high ground, controls the institutions, is they won the moral argument. They now get to control the moral paradigm, altering it in order to win each fight.

When thinking about what replaces conventional conservatism, the starting point must be this dynamic. The Left controls the moral framework. This allows them to alter every political battlefield by manipulating the shared reality that is the public space. Since democracy is about persuasion, rather than truth, they can easily tilt the battle field to make their job easy. They win because the Right keeps charging up the hill to attack the institutions controlled by the Left, who always enjoy the moral high ground.

For there to be an alternative to conservatism, it must therefore be a genuine alternative to the Left. In other words, what is needed is not so much an alternative Right, but an alternative Left. What’s needed is a new radicalism that starts first with the understanding that we are entering a new age. The ideologies and moralities of the past age, the Industrial Age, are not relevant to the technological age and they are impotent and impractical for the demographic age.

The reactionary and violent multiculturalism on the Left is, in part, a response to this looming reality. The prevailing orthodoxy of today, is the result of the radicalism in later-stage liberal democracy that reached its peak in the last century. Peak liberal democracy, was also peak industrial society. The so-called radicals of today, are just the established order, kitted out in the outfits of yesteryear’s avant-garde. There is nothing radical about the modern Left. They are all reactionaries now.

The anger expressed by the Left toward various challenges, real and imagined, is like a child throwing a tantrum, frustrated at a toy. Their anger starts from the secret sense that their moral framework is no longer relevant. They are unable to quantify or even comprehend it. They just sense it, like an ill wind. Like primitives confronted with some natural mystery, the men and women defending the established order are in a defensive panic at the shadow of change falling on the West.

The new alternative must start where all radicals start, as a rejection of the founding principles of the prevailing order. There is no universally preferable form of human organization, morally, ethically or practically. Human beings are not all the same, born with the same stock of natural talent. Further, humans are not infinitely malleable, able to be shaped into whatever society designs.  These values may have had utility in the prior age, but in this age, they are a liability that must be abandoned.

Whether one chooses to call what comes next an alternative Right or something else, it must be a genuine alternative. The main reason conventional conservatism failed in its opposition to the Left is that it was not an alternative to liberalism. It was a slightly different implementation of it. What replaces conservatism cannot start from the same error, but must be a radical departure from both Left and Right, as commonly understood. It must be a radical alternative to the prevailing morality.

For sites like this to exist, it requires people like you chipping in a few bucks a month to keep the lights on and the people fed. It turns out that you can’t live on clicks and compliments. Five bucks a month is not a lot to ask. If you don’t want to commit to a subscription, make a one time donation. Or, you can send money to: Z Media LLC P.O. Box 432 Cockeysville, MD 21030-0432. You can also use PayPal to send a few bucks, rather than have that latte at Starbucks. Thank you for your support!

187 thoughts on “Affirming The Alternative

  1. > to return to the age of kings, but with the modern material items produced by liberalism

    Dude, liberalism didn’t produce those items. Come on, use your head. Liberals just happened to be in power at the time. Technological progress doesn’t stop; it did not even stop in the USSR, despite their valiant attempts to destroy it.

    The only “incoherent” thought here is mistaking technological progress for social progress, a self-serving idea invented by progressives and for which you can find almost no historical analogue in pre-20th century literature.

  2. At the risk of being at the end of a dead thread, I hope Ursula and RFF hear this loud and clear: Your testimony, and life now and future, IS the gift to the world around you. That can be a powerful legacy.
    My wife and I had this conversation just this morning..the legacy we are leaving. We homeschool and consider all aspects of that effort carefully. What are setting our kids up for? The funnel into college is not it, because it’s designed on a demonstrably false future.
    For now, we resolve to build character, toughness, manners, relational / physical / spiritual health.
    As for shared ideology. I think distributed attitude and efforts win the day for now. I have opined for community, tribes we could join, etc. but the risk / reward of seeking them out now seem to land on foolish. So we focus inward, build durability everywhere we can, and take each day as it comes.
    For now, just this online community gives me tremendous hope and joy.

  3. Giuliani is a champ for coming forward and fighting for the president and our country on cable news shows the last few days. He verbally, conversationally, battles to get out his points that no one else in the media will report. Many of us hear and see him, wherever we can, when media hosts are not interrupting or shutting them down. He and our president are against impossible odds and I wish there was a way we could tell them that we understand and are with them. God bless you, POTUS and Rudy Giuliani! Don’t get on any small planes.

  4. OT Hillary is running. That SNL skit by pal Lorne Michaels was the opening shot. Meanwhile Pelosi is running up trial balloons in SFgate that she will be President.

    • Clintons are demons. They set out to destroy this country 50 years ago, and if she runs, she will push us to the brink of it. How titanic that 1992 presidential election now looks.

  5. The neo-reactionaries do not embrace the principles of egalitarianism and the blank slate. While they debate amongst themselves about what the preferable government should be, they uniformly dismiss egalitarianism.

  6. Interest in the ethnostate was not limited to ‘fringe Russian thinkers’ (I’m assuming Alexander Dugin is implicated in this description). Wilmot Robertson published ‘The Ethnostate’ in 1993. Because race realism and racial separatism is both conceptually sound and follows what people already do, race realism is the way forward. The thing is to not get distracted by other issues or ‘down-the-road’ questions. A sizable number of White people (enough to alter political outcomes) do not have to be ‘sold’ on racial solidarity, they already know it’s ‘true’. What they need to feel is that is OK to feel they way they do and the only way that is going to happen is keep pounding away at race realist/ universal ethno-genetic nationalist ‘talking points’. Greg Johnson’s ‘The White Nationalist Manifesto’ is a good compendium of ‘talking points’ for responsible race realists and racial separatists.

    • Yeah. Does Dugin even have anything to do with ethno-nationalism?

      His job is to rationalize Russian imperialism, isn’t it? Which is a kind of civ-nat.

      So I don’t know what that line from the original essay was in reference to.

      Anyway, the White ethnostate is obviously just an updated / semi-santized / intellectualized concept from WN 1.0.

      That’s not necessarily a bad thing though, it’s something that a fair amount of people naturally end up wanting when they reach a certain point in their understanding of the world.

  7. Would someone please explain in detail, or refer me to sources, what are the “founding principles of the prevailing order,” and how these principles manifest themselves in our lives, and what is the “radical alternative to the prevailing morality.” I would like to understand.
    Right now it is pretty hazy.
    “There is no universally preferable form of human organization, morally, ethically or practically. Human beings are not all the same, born with the same stock of natural talent. Further, humans are not infinitely malleable, able to be shaped into whatever society designs.”
    What specifically are these alternatives?What would the new world look like?
    I would like to be able to explain the old and the new that should replace it.

  8. I’ve never found Gotfried’s claim to have coined the term Alternative Right very convincing. If you go read the article where he claims he came up with it, guess what, it doesn’t appear in the article at all.

    In fact, here is the only use of the word “alternative” in that article, in Taki’s mag:
    (and here’s the link).

    “And the dream of living outside of the state in a society of self-actualizing individuals, opening themselves up to being physically displaced by the entire Third World, if its population chooses to settle on this continent, is not a rightist alternative to anything. It is a failed leftist utopia.”

    Gottfried is a fine writer and thinker. But the only use of the term Alternative Right is in the title. The editor of Taki’s mag, at the time, was Richard Spencer and as anyone who has written for magazines knows the editors jealously guard their little sport of naming the articles others write.

    It’s a small thing, but it’s still important. Is this yet another case of Jewish intellectual misappropriation of European property? It seems most likely to me.

    And in any case there is no debate that the term would likely have died had not Spencer latched onto it and created the Alternative Right web site a few months later. And certainly the more popular term Alt-RIght was created there, and is clearly a Spencerism.

    I realize we are all in our “hate Spencer” phase, and I’m good with that. He fucked off what little piece of something he had title to, and it’s hurt a lot of people. But I still must object to writing him out of history, or attributing his creations to others.

    In any case, the term is dead now. Let the dead rest in peace, I guess.

  9. Completely OT: I don’t participate in social media, but I do occasionally check in. Hats off to our guys and gals for routing some of the Grifters today. Bless ’em.

  10. For Pete’s sake, please avoid creating or forming any sort of party or identifiable organisation. It will immediately become a target for prosecutions, lawsuits, doxxing, firebombs and who knows what else. The enemy still controls pretty much everything at this stage. I think we should keep doing what we’ve been doing, i.e. gradually but inexorably injecting small doses of venom until their immune system collapses.

    • This, right here, as King Tut says. You can’t fight a vastly superior and dug in adversary with conventional frontal attacks. Miners and sappers are the order of the day.

      • Let the tax cattle be the ones, like you, Dutch, and many other successful men here. I do not blame at all men who, even though they see the sociopathic perversions of modern America, continue to make a good living and keep collecting pay for things that really are not helping anyone or anything other than our oppressors. Or raising your children to be successful among the snakes and lizards of our modern sociopathic society. There really is no choice. So, gents, keep raking it in until you cannot any more. Until then, thank you for holding steady and sharing your thoughts with us.

        I made a choice a few years ago to no longer serve the beast but I’m just a woman and didn’t pursue work to the degree that, for example, Range Front Fault did. RFF is a most excellent woman and the rare bird. I have to be honest seeing that I did not have the desire to carry forth as she did. Now, after re-learning all I have to this point, I see I should have been a farmer’s wife and mother to his children. Instead, I followed the miserable teaching of our jewish academia and popular culture and have no husband, no children, no future and, apparently, no past. Gave my life to corporate jobs. That is the reality for modern white American women.

        All those conservative women having babies — God bless you, and please have many more! Use me as an example of what not to be. Warn your daughters and girlfriends that they will sorely regret it if they do not marry and have children. There is nothing else to achieve as a woman than to marry a good man and bear his children. That is everything, the miraculous beauty of life!

        • As long as you are alive you have a future Dear Lady…Spread your message far and wide and always keep your chin up…. Blessings be upon you and even if your time has passed to have children you can still find a good man that your evening years might be shared…

        • Ursula……you’re not just a woman….you’re Ursula! You’re a thinker. Your post is remarkable, reflective. You and many women are coming awake to realize you sailed down the river trusting the direction only to find you didn’t make it out of the eddy, and time has moved on not to be recaptured.

          I know you’re sad, hon. It’s a terribly difficult lesson to learn: when you set off heading North, you can’t go South-East-and West at the same time. You make a decision, you go in that direction, and you take the consequences of that decision. If that doesn’t suit you, then change direction and head South, but again you can’t go North-East-West at the same time, and you give up the gains of heading North. Each decision you make, you may get something, but you always give up what you would have gained if you had made a different decision.

          The fallacy is we were told we could do it all. The feminists and the culture fooled us into thinking we could reap the benefits of going North-South-East-West all at the same time. It was a lie and goes against nature. Women have been brainwashed.

          I have regrets too. I don’t have any grandchildren. Plus my daughter is the end of the line. Kaput! Off the planet. So be it! I couldn’t control that outcome. We all have our cross to bear..and that’s what it means to be human.

          So we pick ourselves up, dust ourselves off and start all over again. Now you get to craft a new life, as you make thought-full good decisions to fulfill yourself. You’re making Ursula’s world!

          Hope to meet you some day….Best to you, dear.

          PS: Don’t forget to enjoy life like a little kid. Big smiles! No Eeyore here. Since I don’t have grandkids, I’m my own grandkid! Find the magic all around. It’s the little butterflies in life that make us squeal with delight! Basic Husband trimmed the apple trees and threw the branches over the fence into the field. Along came a doe to find the leaves and she just snarfled and burfled face down happily stuffing herself. Sweet!

          • You had multiple children and not a single one gave birth to children? Are they past the child-bearing age now?

            Goodness, America is effed.

          • UFO….we are effed. My folks were Commies. They were only children. I am an only child. I had 1 child. This is your upsidedown pyramid of the Left. My girl had endless miscarriages. Life is relentless.

        • Read your post to my daughters. Thanks for sharing that. You’re welcome on my farm any day, and I expect within 24 hrs my girls would be calling you Auntie. Don’t underestimate the power of your testimony.

  11. “The closest they came to imagining an alternative Right was borrowing the idea of an ethnostate from fringe Russian thinkers.”

    I see French thinkers and Americans saying such things, but am not familiar with Russians espousing this?

  12. Our “first past the post” voting system guarantees that we will always be a two-party country. That means any viable “Right” party will always have to be a mongrel coalition spanning the spectrum of squishy cucks, libertarians, neo-reactionaries, white identitarians, and what-have-yous.

    Having a pure and consistent positive ideology is both unnecessary and unrealistic. In fact, I don’t always know what I am for, but I know what I am against — and that’s the anti-Western, anti-American, anti-White, “woke” cultural-Marxism of the Left.

    A common front against this existential threat is fine with me. If the Right is ever lucky enough to prevail in this fight, it can start arguing about who has the most-correct conservative ideology.

  13. Short term our best option is to take over Conservatism, Inc., which is what Trump has accomplished to some degree. The America First agenda (reduced immigration, trade reform, staying out of ME wars) appeals to the majority of Republican voters. We need to re-elect Trump and work hard for candidates like Kris Kobach (great article today at who could continue Trumpism.

    Long term our best option is partition. The changing demographics rule out long term success. If we could ever divide the country into 4 or 5 countries, 2 or 3 would be hospitable to small government, Christian values and traditional America.

    • How do we get the followers of Conserv Inc. to abandon egalitarianism and blank slatism, which is fundamental to their worldview? If a normie conservative knows one impressive minority then he assumes that a race-blind, conservative country is achievable.

      Conservatives are entirely blind to the primal tribal nature of non-whites.

      • Normies will abandon blank slate egalitarianism when they are forced to make a choice. Furthermore, there will not be any partition, save for a walled off city here and there on the West Coast or in New England. Just take a look at the electoral map by county, from the 2016 election. Partition, not takeover by the red side, is an unnecessary giveaway. Desperate times call for nailing your colors to the mast, as Capt S put it above. Followed by floggings. Make sure our side holds the whip.

        • Dutch – I’ve been talking eventual partition as well. Is it unnecessary? – probably no need to debate that just yet. Long term though I don’t see a realistic scenario that regains large swaths of the country to our side, particularly the coastal areas and New England, the putrid blue tail that wags the red dog. Included in those red-voting counties are a lot of people who may be anti-gay or pro-gun, but they also want the federal gravy train to keep on rollin’. Can we pick enough of them off to hold together the disparities of 50 states? I don’t think so. Pluralism, power-sharing, and coexistence are difficult things to overcome in a nation state of ONE ethnicity, let alone our dogs breakfast of imported cultures. When we started importing the globe the writing was on the wall for partition, whether via giveaway or conflict.

    • I agree with the long-term partition. Short term though our answer has to be something other than a better representative via the ballot box, unless you’re talking county/town government where’s there’s a potential for our side to influence things. The America First agenda is a dead-end agenda – no amount of grass roots optimism is going to make it happen. This is 4GW stuff – low intensity but purposefully instigated conflict, complete with incessant propaganda – you don’t win a conflict like this via the ballot box. Can’t recommend this enough … read back through the thread from last week, “Too Corrupt to Fail.”

      • Beyond a few irredeemable blue burgs, the red side prevails. The answer for the blues imbedded in the red areas (almost all of the country) is stifle it or emigrate away. Seriously, if you take out the recent (last 30 years or so) immigrant hordes along the southern border and in the west, there is almost no majority blue presence anywhere in the country. We need to think in terms of winning, not accommodating or partitioning. Losers seek accommodations, winners seek to prevail. The west has forgotten how to win, and our side certainly has as well. I am flummoxed on how to transition our side from an invisible presence to an organized, structured entity. But once we gain momentum, there is no reason not to push ahead and go as far as we can. Give no quarter.

        • Not looking to negotiate anything away at this time. Absolutely agree for the need of many to emigrate out of blue counties/states. But worst case scenario – say this were to go into armed conflict , hot war. How do most hot wars end? Not unconditional surrender but cease-fires and peace talks. And the way those negotiations go? Usually partition. I’m thinking long, long term here – partition is probably the end result either way, it’s just a matter of whether we get there through bloodshed or more peaceful means.

          What’s concerning to me about the potential for state-by-state partition is that our side would lose just about all access to the oceans. Retreating to the interior is good for the dissident but bad long-term geopolitics. E.g – We can’t write off CA, but we CAN write off San Francisco. In other words, I’m not talking of ceding large, regional territory but creating “reservations” on which the progressives can form their own nations.

  14. A radical alternative to the prevailing morality will come about when somebody with clout and charisma appears and states it, probably without explanation. The people ( or “sheeple” if you will) will clamor to show their support.

    It will happen, but I’m not optimistic about the new boss being any better than the old; modern man isn’t particularly moral nor is he strong in discernment. The new morality may just usher in a new predatory elite.

    But you never know, can’t be much worse.

    • A strongman naturally follows the breakdown we are seeing. Make sure the strongman is one representing our preferences, not theirs.

      • Amen Dutch and a strongman only arises out of a group if we have no group/organization then the strongman will not be ours…I still haven’t figured out why people that want to keep grey or be a lone wolf haven’t thought that through…

          • Battle lines come about from organizations not from individuals because alone everyone has a different line so nothing gets done and then your facing the hordes by yourself…

  15. The problem is not that we need a new morality or ideology.

    It is that we hate what “the gods of the copybook headings” say we must do.

    Knowledge is easy, so we are coasting on the intellect, but Virtue is hard.

    If you want an alternative morality to the current one producing the leftist nightmare dystopia it will produce merely an alternate nightmare dystopia.

    We can rewind to Christendom and Western Civilization and try to perfect its moral codes. But we neither want to become virtuous enough to live there (John Adams said the constition was written only for a Moral people), and even if we did would be have the stomach to purge the heretical infection? Especially if it requires the equivalent of chemo and amputaton.

    It is fine if you don’t actually want to do that, but you will end up somewhere else likely as bad (with the pretense that is really is better, isn’t it?) including a multi-dystopia.

    If you say it is not possible because people are now not virtuous, you miss the point. An obese basement dweller can exercise and diet so he gets lean and strong. The ignorant can learn. And the dissolute can reform, and the coward become brave. We have free will.

    And that is why there is hope, but it is a positive feedback loop – the more virtue, the more hope, and the more hope the more virtue. Why bother with courage and temperance if there is no hope? But if there is hope, then the series of small things to make the hope turn to faith and then to become real.

    It may require a revival, or 3rd Great Awakening, but I see that as not merely possible but easy, though it probably will happen only after some kind of crash when people need hope as the alternative is death, or despair that makes suicide the most reasonable action. And I do believe in God and that we can have a move of the Holy Spirit. But it will also require a Crusade and possibly an Inquisition.

    And in that it will require a split. A partitioning along red and blue lines which we see forming now. The blues refuse to coexist, they must dominate. The blues refuse to tolerate, they must purge and suppress. The reds can coexist and tolerate, but it has to be clear that it is not acceptance or allowing subversion.

  16. Further, humans are not infinitely malleable, able to be shaped into whatever society designs.

    I agree with the limitations of this, but it is not completely true. Unthinking people are very easily manipulated and molded into the shape of the majority culture. A majority culture of Western Christianity has a salvific effect on the general, unthinking populace that just follow the herd. Laws have a similar effect.

    However, they are easily swayed by a newer, stronger group… and ascertaining the difference between a sheeple and a new revolutionary group can be discovered too late to reverse course.

    IF we are talking about re-shaping politics for future consumption, universal franchise in a democracy (if that’s what we end up with) has to be one of the number one things on the chopping block. I’d even advocate permanently preventing immigrants and their descendants from making decisions in the process. “No taxation without representation” may have made sense to a bunch of heritage Englishmen being locked out of decisions, but fake americans making choices for heritage americans has been disastrous.

  17. “Since democracy is about persuasion, not truth, they can easily tilt the battle field to make their job easy”. Persuasion, not truth. Let that sink in. We argue for the truths we live with. We need to persuade instead. Understand that the left are now the reactionaries, the conservatives, trying to conserve blank slate egalitarianism from the crazies that take it to boys in girl’s sports, non-binary genders, and Antifa blocking grandmas with walkers. Laugh at them, mock them, point and giggle. They can’t defend anything. We can argue the truths amongst ourselves. Out there in the world, point and laugh. Nobody wants to be associated with the object of the justified pointing and giggling. Human nature says that which is successfully mocked will be abandoned in time. Go for it. We are the new tearer-downers, and it is a target rich environment. Revel in your new found freedom. As Polly says, in “Peaky Blinders” (I highly recommend), once you are dead it is liberating. The Right is dead, we are liberated. Go for it.

    • Dead on. If this is war, and I think it is, we need to become students of people that we’ve been taught not to like – of course there’s Sun Tzu and Clausewitz, but then there’s Mao, Ho Chi Minh, and heck – even Alinsky. You know what these guys have in common? They’re winners. I won’t cede reason and logic in order to be a winner, but I certainly won’t thump on reason/logic if the mass-man isn’t interested in those things. That’s where your argument for persuasion (also known as propaganda) comes in. Mockery and shame are also in the arsenal. Again, if we’re considered subversives in the cold civil war, then it’s probably time we start thinking/acting like it.

  18. Z says that the Alt-Right/Idents failed due to an insufficient theoretical foundation. No, we were shut down by the police, the legal system, the web hosting companies, and the payment processors.

    Z, “they accept the base assumptions of liberal democracy.” No,we were shut down because we want a society built upon race and sex differences but discussing those today will make you unemployable. Our theoretical framework, which can always be improved, is fine.

    At this time we must build real life communities and look for new opportunities and weaknesses in our enemy.

    • Somewhat agree, but the Alt-Right didn’t primarily collapse because of enemy action. Only minimal pressure was applied, most people were untouched, other, more successful movements could have survived that.

      It collapsed because of infighting and an effective divide and conquer campaign (AmNat) , which grabbed the majority of people (who were just edgy paleo-cons or republicans) and took them back towards establishment politics.

      This position was quickly discredited by events (Trump’s policies and subservience to Israel got worse soon after) but by then it was too late, the trust had been lost and people wanted to do their own thing separately from each other.

      I am skeptical of people promising a “better theoretical foundation”, but whatever comes next needs to at the very least be in agreement on the objective of separation from the current system, likely through balkanization into multiple different successor states.

      Otherwise some AmNat type thing will happen again.

      • I don’t think that becoming unemployable and possibly expelled by your family and friends is “Only minimal pressure.”

        • Keep in mind, only a small percentage of the Alt-Right was actually subjected to those tactics; most AmNats who wanted to retreat into conventional politics were still safely anonymous.

          And yes, that pressure was minimal compared to the hardship that successful national liberation movements of that past have had to endure.

          (see Nationalism in the Balkans under the Ottaman empire & what happened after each of the many failed revolts).

          And yes, that pressure was minimal compared to the pressure that the system will deploy in the future.

          The Alt-Right was vulnerable to divide and conquer tactics because many were just flirting with a lot of those beliefs; they hadn’t strongly internalized them as fundamental parts of their worldview that they would be willing to endure hardship over.

          And so, the idea of forgetting about the whole thing and just sitting back and hoping Trump would fix it looked like a very appealing alternative.

        • I certainly agree with that. That’s why we should be encouraging and mentoring a younger generation toward skills and trades that don’t require as much credentialing, licensing, or corporate backing. I know young tradesman that have fled states with overbearing regulation … in my area they buy a truck, put a sign on the side, and go to work. The good ones are inundated with work in 2-3 months after just handing out 100 business cards. There’s still freedom to be had but it means carefully choosing your trade and location.

          As for friends/family that expel us … F@@k em. Sorry, I don’t know a better way to express that.

          • I would say Capt to encourage them to a trade that requires a journeyman ticket which is gave by their peers who have had it passed on to them…My career field is wide open right now and there is a ton of money to made which can be turned right around and put into tangibles…

          • I had a good shipmate buddy who tried to talk one of my sons into your trade … just wasn’t his thing though. But I have two other sons that are intrigued by the opportunities for linemen. I agree that the trades are the ticket … and the tangibles is where true wealth is.

          • Well if they need any advice or motivation let me know and I will help…Most people don’t realize how much they can make along with superb insurance and other benefits…

  19. “The so-called radicals of today, are just the established order, kitted out in the outfits of yesteryear’s avant-garde. There is nothing radical about the modern Left. They are all reactionaries now.”

    Yes. The anti-establishmentarians of the 60s are now the establishment. Problem is their ideology is anti-establishment by nature so they cannot accept or even admit that it is true, or they lose the fascination of the adolescents and adolescent-minded. They must continuously attack under the premise that they are bringing down the old order, but the old order disappeared 50 years ago.

    Screeching for more transgendered washrooms in public schools isn’t cutting it.

    In the absence of a genuine alternative to the new establishment the best opponents can do is bring home the fact that the far-left IS the establishment, and at the very minimum expose the hypocrisy and incoherence of the far-left.

    They are vulnerable insofar as they can be accused of being rich, fat, decadent, corrupt, and contemptuous of a public that they sequester themselves from.

  20. Pat Buchanan was talking about the forces of “the old order 23 years ago.” As he says in this clip (“mount up and ride to the sound of the guns”) — we no longer have the element of surprise. Never has this been more true than today.

    Whatever comes out of this, it is going to forged in the pressure of these times, which perhaps is the only way it could ever have come about.

    To quote Mao: “It is good if we are attacked by the enemy, since it proves that we have drawn a clear dividing line between the enemy and ourselves. It is still better if the enemy attacks us wildly and paints us as utterly black and without a single virtue; it demonstrates that we have not only drawn a clear dividing line between the enemy and ourselves but have achieved spectacular successes in our work.”

    I’m probably going to take a beating for putting that on here…

    • “I’m probably going to take a beating for putting that on here…”

      Not from me – you (and Mao) were exactly right. This was Mao’s genius, and this is how we have to learn to fight. We don’t have to agree w/ the politics of the sociopaths, but they wielded guerilla tools that we need to hone and wield. This fight will not be won with logic and reason.

      I often think about the Pat Buchanan of 2-3 decades ago. He’s a supreme gentleman, because it must be tempting to say “I told you so” a million times over.

      • He probably felt like Kassandra at times Brother…I sometimes feel that way myself on the Building Community being the way we can save civilization…

      • I was with Pat in ’92 in NH and Houston, and then in ’96 in NH again. The night he beat Dole was one to remember.

        He never had a chance at the nomination, of course — he was immediately boxed in by the Strom Thurmond machine in South Carolina. All to give Bob Dole the nomination as a parting gift.

        If you’ve been around the GOP and Conservatism, Inc. as long as I have, the long-term dedication to failure and futile gestures is unmatched.

        Pat is very much the gentleman. As far as I know, he’s never talked in public about his troubles with Trump in 2000 and Trump’s “anti-semitic” crack at him. Or Trump’s wholesale rhetorical adoption of Buchanan’s themes in 2016 without any attribution.

        If Trump had any class he would give Pat the Medal of Freedom sometime soon. He won’t be with us forever.

  21. It all starts with biology. Our species started out in an environment of routine hardship and existential threat which lasted for a couple of hundred thousand years. That evolutionary gauntlet made us hard and tough and versatile, and we rose to the top of the food pyramid. Then along came extreme affluence and we started getting soft and lazy and hive-minded. And now a large cohort of our species (known as Progressives) are morphing into human parasites. That problem will not going to be solved with rhetoric.

  22. Z-Man what is your opinion of the propertarianism ideas of a guy called John Mark floating around? Seems reasonable?

    • Curt Doolittle is the guy who came up with Propertarianism. John Mark appeared a few months ago and is aggressively pushing the concept.

    • Until all “alt” content producers are shut down, there’s practically an embarrassment of riches for every taste. Which is why I disagree with the previous poster who said abandon social media. It may be the one conduit for fellowship and encouragement. I won’t deny that to anyone.

    • I’ve listened to a fair amount of the propertarianism ideas and as a proposal that’s genuinely an alternative to liberal egalitarianism/progressivism it isn’t bad. I think there’s some flaws in the concept that are likely to emerge in execution for which I have not yet heard sufficient mitigation proposals.
      The over-reliance on judicial action to protect “property” that has a much broader and more nebulous definition than our present legal definition sets the stage for emergence of an onerous kritarchy. The propertarian concept as I understand it necessitates abandonment of the full-franchise democracy concept; a goal with which I fully agree and yet remain convinced cannot happen without widespread violence passing through dictatorship.

      • I agree. Propertarianism obsesses over legality and procedure to avoid the real issue of the people who interpret and enforce the rules. Get the people right and the legality will mostly take care of itself.

        The only use for propertarianism is as a bridge for constitutional conservatives, who must have a document to focus on, to our side.

      • Propertarianism is fine as a political idea but it is a political idea. Politics is downstream from culture, and culture is downstream from biology.

  23. If a new movement puts race realism as its foundation, then severe immigration restriction has to be a fundamental pillar. I’ve always thought that if you could skilfully maneuver past the shrieking mobs and their accusations of hate, you can appeal to both left and right.

    1. Immigration restriction as a pro-environmental cause. This should be articulated to the left constantly. Relate it to climate change, urban sprawl, loss of habitat to wildlife, etc. They have no counter-argument. It also appeals to rugged outdoorsmen among the right. The GDP-worshiping right, not so much, but screw them.

    2. Immigration as it relates to its effect on the poor, where you explain laws of supply and demand, competition for jobs, housing, downward pressure on wages etc. That’s going to be a tougher sell to the left, since their comprehension of business fundamentals gets easily overtaken by raw emotion.

    3. Immigration and its effect on countries suffering from brain drain. Sell the damage mass immigration has on countries losing their brightest, such as India. You would think this message would have appeal to the left, but given their hypocrisy, maybe not.

    4. Immigration and race. Of course, selling biological realities of race is the toughest sell, especially to the left. We have to appeal to the left’s supposed “love of science,” by hammering home the evolution and natural selection explanations for race differences.
    We can’t back down on this, like the right always does, and substitute culture for race. People are getting real life examples every day as multiracialism grows and enters places where they live, already weakening the lies and indoctrination everyone has been fed their whole lives. Logical and accurate explanations for what they’re seeing with their own eyes helps to crumble the rickety official equality fable we’re supposed to believe.

    • You cannot argue with the Left using logical, accurate, factual explanations. You cannot argue rationally with the Left. You cannot argue with the Left at all.

      The left is entirely a puppet of the Jews: dumb goyisch Goodwhites infected with Jewish mind-worms, negro shock troops and rape armies, and invading mystery meat which is all merely a biological weapon, all working to destroy Whites on behalf of the Jews.

      The long-term Jewish goal, the Jewish Prime Directive, is to exterminate Whites and annihilate Christianity. In the past century alone, the Jews have:
      — seized control of the currency and the money supply,
      — seized control of the entire banking system,
      — seized total control of newspapers, publishing, radio, TV, cinema, and the Internet, ALL of which were invented by Whites,
      — seized control of all the major (White-founded) colleges and universities,
      — seized control of the entire judicial system,
      — seized control of all three branches of government, not only indirectly through lobbying, extortion, and bribery, but also directly through electoral manipulation and pressure (4 of 9 Supremes are Jews?!? Look up how many members of Congress hold dual-Israeli citizenship, and that’s just the tip. Trump is ruled by President Kushner)
      — seized control of the unelected bureaucracy, the legal and intelligence agencies, and the NGOs,
      — formed a massive tax-free extralegal power base in the form of orbs like ADL and SPLC and literally six thousand others, all of them working hand in glove with government, Big Tech and industry to shape policy towards Jewish ends — and all of it paid for by the U.S. taxpayer: Jewish power infrastructure is “charitable” and tax free
      — seized control of morality itself, using the Holocaust sob-story and the “Nazi” mythos as a moral cudgel to beat anyone into submission who questions the Jewish game plan.

      All of these are weapons, and all of them are pointed directly at Whites.

      The Left is merely the sum of these Jewish weapons. My ou cannot argue with the Left, just as you cannot argue with a tapeworm, or with a rope around your throat.

      • “The Left” encompasses many different types of people. I like to think I could have a rational good-faith discussion with someone like, say…Tulsi Gabbard. One of those purple hair, tatted up, nose ring persons, probably not. A lot of Democrats, especially whites, are still stuck in Walter Mondale-tier leftism. The ones who still think Dems are for the working man and that everyone on the right is a big fan of the Koch Brothers and wants to bomb the Middle East. I sometimes fall into the trap of thinking every Dem is insane. That’s what you get by spending too much time online and watching the nuts running for the Dem nomination, and not enough time in real life, where you’ll find normal people who are just misguided and misinformed.

      • Among the bloviating reflected in many of the ‘comments’ to this Zman post, you have actually hit the nail on the head. Pick any new political paradigm you may dream up, implement it, and it will be infected by the chosen virus over time as it has infected every Western society throughout history.

        So the only final solution will be … the final solution.

  24. All movements are shuffled along by events. Thousands of events big and small. Like waking up this morning to see a video of an old woman attempting to cross the street with her walker as Antifa blocks her. Another small marble in the jar of an eventual counter reaction against these people.

    The right wing and left wing are two different mindsets. Left wingers poke and prod because they’re crazy, miserable people who need an audience. Right wingers react after being poked and prodded, like some animal that wants to be left alone and then goes haywire when the stress level gets too high. When the reaction happens, labels won’t matter.

  25. Beyond some fundamental positive and negative archeo covenants we don’t need to do much defining. It will give our enemies a target they can ill define and use to their advantage. The replacement of our people in our native lands and in the lands we’ve built should be our main focus until we again control our own fate.

    We have not only the right, but the moral duty to protect and defend our civilization by any means necessary. That duty doesn’t need to be justified. If it’s anti-white in white lands it needs to be obliterated.

    • OK, I agree we don’t need to justify ourselves. But we do need a rallying cry. Call it The Manifesto of the Dispossessed. We need a banner to unfurl and call our own.

      And here’s another thing – there are a lot of our people trapped in the Democratic party, relics of the FDR-to-JFK age. Similarly, some of ours are trapped in the GOP, relics of Reagan. These are potential allies to be cultivated. Forget the progressives – forget the Buckleyites – all lost causes. But this alternative path that Z-man is encouraging will require alliances and new coalitions with people not currently on our team. But they CAN be picked off.

      I’m no lefty, but when I hear the Progressive critique of Conservative Inc, they’ve got a lot of things correct. Ditto with the Hannity-esque crowd’s critique of the Left. So many native citizens will agree with our diagnosis of gangsterocracy … we need a manifesto that lists the myriad of federal abuses against the Republic – something much more robust than the Tea Party BS. Much of it has already been written by Z-man and other posters, but the message needs distilling.

      You know, Marx was a jacked-up psychopath but that manifesto was a public relations coup. That’s exactly what we need. What if we had a 10-point list of non-negotiables; e.g. 1) The family is the preeminent building block of civilization, made up of man wedded to woman of like ethnicity, language, and culture, protected and preserved by secure borders. Onward to bullet point 2, etc etc.

      Back in the old days of sail, when a Captain nailed his colors to the mast it was a signal to the crew that there would be no negotiation, no surrender. We need to nail OUR colors to the mast. For what are we willing to bleed?

      • I agree Capt. S. There’s a lot of low-hanging fruit that we can pick. Many are lost, not seeing any alternative, and have never heard our arguments. That’s why the powers that be came up with “The Intellectual Dark Web” (Jordan P, Little Ben, et al) to satisfy the longing many have for something not conventionally “Left/Right.”

      • I agree with you. “Archeo positive and negative covenants” is what I meant by what you’ve described.

        But what we need to avoid are useless debates about sperg-level differences. We were and have always been a highly internally diverse civilization. I assume we’ll still be that on the far side of this thing…minus a few bio-cultural absolutes.

  26. The Left never won the moral argument. They did it by capturing the institutions over many decades including the MSM and judicial branch that allowed them issue a multitude of fiats enforced at gun point.

    For example no sane person can argue that teaching kids about trannies or mainstreaming their lifestyle is a result of Lefty moral superiority. Or forcing bakers to make products they don’t want or face prison and loss of their livelihood. It’s just a function of the Left’s control of the legal system and just a variation of the SLAPP lawsuits that crooked developers used to shut up opponents.

    The same with gun control. The Left claims that it has the superior moral position but it’s a dead issue except among upper class whites and minorities who want to see whites disarmed and disposed of.

    Even here in CA, you aren’t going to find many people supporting gay marriage or traanies(the Mexicans and Blacks will beat and kill them in many cases). Support for them is only found among upper class whites and Zoloft popping white females.

    In regards to the DR, it really doesn’t exist at this point in time. Basically a joke.

  27. Hasn’t the new moral framework been outlined, though, by Bronze Age Pervert, Wrath of GNON, Heartiste, and all the rest who argue that the traditional forms, which reject the entire Enlightenment, have been correct this whole time? That’s the alternative, even though it is simply a return to the very old ways.

    But it can’t work because, as Z points out, the other team controls the moral battle space. Therefore, the centralizing, globalizing, leveling, homogenizing, forces need to be stopped in some other way.

  28. I know you say you make your main point in the final paragraph, but this sentence from a previous paragraph is what I’m dwelling on: “In other words, what is needed is not so much an alternative Right, but an alternative Left.” What scares the amorphous left is not heartless Republicans like they pretend (the democrats are heartless and no one on the left cares), but someone who made Trump’s claims or had the appeal of his claims, without being full of crap, or a Jimmy Hoffa without the corruption. I’ve heard that the retcon job on the “Kingfish” Huey Long obscures the real story, so maybe someone along those lines would be a good start. I’ve actually heard leftists talk like this, even in public; Paul Krugman had a piece recently saying, “We need to be thankful Trump was full of it about infrastructure because it was a good idea.” Chomsky used to always say he felt relieved when a preacher was found to be corrupt and wanted nothing more than some Cadillacs and his parishioners’ wives. I get that a single politician or man is not our solution, and that our meta solution needs to happen outside of politics as it exists in the West, but what’s sometimes forgotten or not said is that extra-political and meta-political solutions can come from ostensible political solutions within the existing system. No, I don’t worship the Fascists or the NSDAP but they do prove you can elect someone democratically who, if they’re smart enough, can dismantle democracy. I mean, that’s already happened, but it’s just happened for our enemies and on a global scale. We need a global counter movement, that functions also on the local scale.

  29. And there it is:

    “For there to be an alternative to conservatism, it must therefore be a genuine alternative to the Left. In other words, what is needed is not so much an alternative Right, but an alternative Left. What’s needed is a new radicalism that starts first with the understanding that we are entering a new age. The ideologies and moralities of the past age, the Industrial Age, are not relevant to the technological age and they are impotent and impractical for the demographic age. ”

    I knew I smelled the stench of lefties coming from these pages.

    Like I said before:

    What is really going on here is a bunch of lefties who are pissed that the darkies are piling on to their free shit party.

    The left in this country has been trending commie since at least the 1930s. What kept it at bay was that there was at least some semblence of recognition among a large enough portion of the population that those foundational values of the country had some value. So the commie left start working on undermining that. That’s why you see right wingers talk so often about the Frankfurt School. Since getting all the whiteys to buy into their left wing Commie bullshit started taking way too long – they decided to just import some new useful idiots. Now we’ve apparently reached the stage of the game where the previous majority white useful idiots – are getting peeved off that the imported darkie useful idiots are banging their war drums too loud and threatening to take over.

    The left needs to be destroyed – all of it.

    The right needs to pull it’s head out of it’s ass and not go thru a reprise of their era of neocon dick sucking.

    • That wooshing sound you heard was the point of the blog post flying over your head. That smell you detect is your on self (unaware, like a smoker, of the odor they drag with them) . This seems to be a pattern, Calsdad.

      Let me state it as simply as possible:
      *Contemporary conservatism is part of the Left.* They are the not-as-far Left. EVERY respectable able-to-go-on-network/cable-teevee organization or human is part of the Left, from Trigglypuff to milquetoast GOP drone to Sean Hannity.

      This is the near-end state of liberalism, where all respectable politics is an ever-increasing purity spiral in a cattle drive toward Utiopia, unfettered by any limiting principles. Trans-gendered mystery-meat grievance-studies professors are on point. Various sorts like the MSM, think tanks, anti-fa etc. are the flank & swing riders. The two main parties form the bulk of the herd. David French and his wife’s daughter ride drag next to Benny “Small-Hat” Shapiro. There is no Right. All is Left in the Great Cattle Drive to Tomorrow-Tikkun-Olam Land.

      Now, read this again:
      ZMan wrote, “For there to be an alternative to conservatism, it must therefore be a genuine alternative to the Left. In other words, what is needed is not so much an alternative Right, but an alternative Left. What’s needed is a new radicalism…”

      Conservatism is Leftistism. The alternative will be a radical departure from the assumptions of Leftism.

      ZMan wrote, “The ideologies and moralities of the past age, the Industrial Age, are not relevant to the technological age and they are impotent and impractical for the demographic age.”

      What replaces Liberalism/Conservatism/Leftism will be as orthogonal to them as Liberalism was to Feudalism and as Feudalism was to the pre-Roman contact tribalism of the German peoples.

      • I can mostly agree with you except the move of conservatism as defined by the owners and writers of NRO gradually moved it left as the normie masses so wanting to be seen as “nice people” followed the progressive Pied Piper leftwards. It was a move born of PR and trying to capture a larger audience. It was and is a mistake. Things are today as they are because a majority of people in the past up through the present supported all the gradual moves left.

        It should be noted that most of those rank and file who identify as conservative still hold to the older, moderate right version. You know, the people who could be persuaded over but the DR and AltR bloggers/commenters routinely drive away with howls of “cuckservatives”, “boomercons” and the like.

        Further if I may ask, as the failures of conservatism are well documented and true, what successes has the dissident or alt right achieved? Have the funny memes barred men in sundresses from the lady’s restrooms yet? Maybe the DR should hold off on crowing over the downfall of conservatism until they put up at least one credible win.

        Finally your last paragraph is pure gnostic magical thinking based on Marxian material dialectics where some, unimaginable new thesis will be formed from the conflicts between the previous thesis and antithesis.

        Things happen because people who lead movements with agendas and goals that gather a critical mass of followers make things happen according to their plans. Not from a group of cloistered dissident monks in their isolated abbeys bemoaning the decadence of society and debating how many antifa can dance on the head of a pin.

        • Conservatism as we know of it is a post-WWII phenomenon and was always part of the liberal, and thus left-wing, tradition. As with other left-wing movements, it purity-spiraled its way through the second half of the 20th century so it could stay in the shadow of the hard/far-leftists. Taft, the John Birch Society, the paleo-cons, southern patriots, etc.–all were slung into the void on a tangent as the conservative purity spiral kept spirallin’ tighter & tighter.

          We can go even back to The Founders. What’s the term the libertarians use for them? “Classical Liberals.” One more way of saying, “men of the Left.”

          DC wrote:
          “Finally your last paragraph is pure gnostic magical thinking based on Marxian material dialectics where some, unimaginable new thesis will be formed from the conflicts between the previous thesis and antithesis.”

          Yeah, not so much. I claim no secret or spiritual knowledge. I predict no thesis/antithesis clash resulting in a synthesis.

          Accusations of empiricism, on the other hand, would be valid, as I am wont to pattern-match after reading history and observing contemporary trends. To quote Robert Allen Zimmerman, “You don’t need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows.” {sticks head out the window for a moment} The wind is blowing toward particularism and against universalism. No hidden knowledge there. There will be no synthesis between particularism & universalism, as they are mutually exclusive. One will be shattered, as the other is ascendant.

  30. Excellent article as always.

    1. Oswald Mosley raised a point about fascism. Since fascism is based on nationalism. The specific implementation will differ according to the national character of the people involved.

    2. We need to reclaim the moral high ground. Short, punchy slogans are best. “They have to go back.” “It’s okay to be white.” My personal favorite, “Anti-racist is anti-white.” That last is powerful for 2 reasons. 1st, the most vocal anti-racists are almost always openly hostile to whites. 2nd, the enemy is dealing with a counterattack on their own terms. Arguing against it gives it legitimacy. Admitting to it is what we want.

  31. So… A western version of Industrialized Eastern Despotism? Xi is quite popular over there. Given western man’s demand for individual autonomy, I imagine it would look a bit different, but if ‘going back’ isn’t an option, what is?

  32. Of the legs of the old “Fusionist” stool, the moral/traditional conservatives provided votes, got little or nothing in return, and had all their intellectuals purged. The Cold Warriors morphed into Neocons after the collapse of the Soviet Union, ensuring the forever wars in the Middle East in defense of our Greatest Ally. The Right Libertarians have dominated domestic policy: limited government, “free” trade, open borders, reduced regulations, etc.

    The Neocons and Right Libertarians either took the cultural and moral framework of the country as a given, simply didn’t care about it, or actively worked for its demise. The dissident “right” (I think dissident “nationalists” is a more accurate description) is made up of people from across the political spectrum who decry the destruction of traditional America. What’s left of Conservative, Inc., consists of those who can insulate themselves from this destruction, either through their wealth or their geographic isolation.

  33. “This allows them to alter every political battlefield by manipulating the shared reality that is the public space.”

    Let’s not make our enemies into something they’re not. The days of us going barking after the stick that Leftie throws for us, and then getting beat over the head with it – are long over. For all their vaunted and entrenched institutionalized defences… Hillary Clinton still lost the election to Pepe The Frog. The kind of conservatives that take crap off of cunned stunts like her are dying off at exponential rates these days.

    We need to identify what we can all agree on going forward: I would suggest that we keep it simple to start. The first and foremost thing is to drive Lefty out of our failing institutions. Say what you want about Jordan Peterson – he took more lefty scalps than fags like Milo, Vox Day and Cerno combined – and he did it right inside the centre of a leftwing citadel. We need more and better agent provocateurs deep in enemy territory.

    Let us start with that. Let’s just get Lefty out of the driver’s seat. Beyond that… do little things. If you are on Facebook or Twitter, cancel your account. DO something. If you can undermine an SJW at work and get away with it – go for it! It doesn’t matter how small or insignificant your act of rebellion is – death by a thousand cuts will eventually do the job. Be smart and sensible when you win or prevail.

    There is no magic to real or dissident politics IMHO: it’s based on pure, unadulterated common sense. That doesn’t mean there aren’t controversial subjects that we will disagree on, it just means we won’t do something fuggin stupid to address those issues as the left does every day.

    When we rebuild the institutions, if we start with simple common sense… the nuts and bolts will take care of themselves.

  34. The falling apart of the GOP sounds similar to the disintegration of the Whig Party before the Civil War. Hmm. Interesting times.

  35. The paleo cons didn’t get outmaneuvered in the 70’s and 80s’ – they got outmaneuvered back in the 30’s when the pseudo-Commie FDR administration came into power.

  36. Both the Left and Conservatives are devout members of the Church of Equality. This is core belief that we must challenge, but it must be an affirmative (positive) challenge, not a negative challenge, one that people can get behind.

    Here’s my positive alternative: Family matters. My children are a part of me and are not interchangeable with your children. Whites are an extended family, as are all the Earth’s various peoples. We should love, preserve and celebrate our children, our family and our people.

    • This is a critical insight as to What Comes Next, indeed a foundational one. And as luck would have it, this important idea has an ancient, profound, and benevolent visual symbol to illustrate it (and no, I don’t mean the useless swastika).

      Westerners rarely think about the I Ching, and when they do, they usually imagine it as a zany mystical witchy book of cryptic useless oracles, sort of on the level of Tarot or dream-catchers made of patchouli or something.

      It’s not. It is one of the oldest, sanest, and most coherent works of political philosophy to be found in any civilization. It is the foundation-stone of genuine Confucian thought, and as such it is a vastly more useful index of genuine “conservative” or “rightist” ideas than any piffle by Edmund Burke (WHY does the NRO crowd keep citing an irrelevance like Burke?).

      I Ching does not read like a conventional book, it takes a bit of effort and study (not a lot) to learn how to read it properly, but once you get the knack it is WELL worth reading.

      Anyway, a very neat and concise encapsulation of the thought expressed above by “Citizen of a…” is Hexagram 37: People in the Home. Many scholars consider this to be the heart of the philosophy. Look it up, have a look.

      The great thing about I Ching is that each of the 64 hexagrams, each one embodying a specific philosophical, political, or spiritual idea, has a visual hexagram associated with it — the visual emblem of the idea, worked out visibly according to the logic of the book. If you understand how to read the lines and trigrams, the hexagram is a literal “picture” of the idea in question.

      Hexagram 37 would make an ideal symbol for the movement: it’s mild and non-confrontational, (unlike all those horrid sharp-angled swastika derivatives), it’s ancient and revered, it isn’t associated with racism or violence or horrors of war. Importantly, it’s not even religious in any literal way.

      Plus most people have no idea what it means, so it’s a great conversation-starter. And in the current phase of developments, conversation is, for now, the main way to win people over.

  37. “…they are impotent and impractical for the demographic age.” Z-man – what do you mean by demographic age? Is it just the practical realization that “it is what it is” … that the demographics of the 2020 census is what we have to work with?

    Also I hear you on this line: “There is no universally preferable form of human organization, morally, ethically or practically.” Key word there being universally. I suppose a Churchillian response may be “but some organizations are more preferable than others.” Still, for a movement to ever gain traction it must be able to express a coherent moral ethic, with policy proposals to make that ethic practical. Seems the conservative castaways need a “Convention of Discontents” to hammer away at these things. Because of demographic reality (and even the variety of opinions on this blog) a coalition of the malcontents is going to be a necessity.

  38. We should demand a return to freedom of association. This is what got trampled underfoot in the last century. It is the one thing the left fears more than anything else. If an alternative right emerges, it must have as one of its founding platforms freedom of association. Once normie understands the implications, he’ll join.

    • Free Association is just racism.

      Ok. You’ve just been hit back by those who control the moral battlefield. What do you do?

      1. No, it’s not
      2. Yes it is, but so what?
      3. Something else

      • The whole idea is that we don’t give a tinker’s dam what lefty says. You fill in the blanks. Normie will move to our side once he’s had a nose-full of Trotskyite bullshit. “Freedom of association” means “freedom”.

        • We may not give a damn, but Joe Normie does. We need to recruit as many of normies to our side as possible – even before things get ugly, especially before things get ugly so to built something for people to run to.

      • That’s exactly what they’d say. “You don’t want to live with blacks because you’re a bigot! This isn’t about free association, it’s about you being a racist.”

        Now, we may not care about being called a racist, but normie does. So, at some point, you have to have an answer to “Racist!” that normie can understand and believe in.

        My answer is: “I don’t hate other races, I just love my own. Just as my loving my children more than your children doesn’t mean that I hate your children, my wanting a place for people – and really what is a race but an extended family – doesn’t mean that I hate other groups. I simply want a place where my people can be among their own – if they choose.”

        That won’t stop Lefty from trying to kill me, but it may get into the heads of a few normies.

        • Citizen, my reach is limited, I’ll admit, but it is rare for me to meet a “normie” that has not behaved in a “racist” manner. They just don’t realize it.

          I once was at a meeting held at the University of Chicago. Our host literally sent out a map of the University grounds and surrounding areas which told us where we might walk/travel “safely” and “where they be dragons”! They even outlined the areas in *red*. Oh the irony.

          That’s where I always draw my points with normies, talk awhile about things in common…children, schools, taxes, etc., and you’ll find issues in common. At that point, you can describe how little difference there is between you and them in response/concern. If they come away thinking you are a heinous “racist”, then they will need to overcome more than a little dissonance concerning their behavior.

        • Slogan needs more pithiness. Too many things to unpack for Joe Normal.

          And I discovered, to my dismay, that many folks actually are anti-moral and hate their own extended family. My own younger brother has been so bamboozled that he actually believes it is *more moral* to want to be among people different than you than to be among your own family, and to want your own genetic inheritance to prosper is *evil*.

          • How about this: Everyone’s a racist. It’s just some people have to the balls to admit it.

        • “… So, at some point, you have to have an answer to “Racist!” that normie can understand and believe in. My answer is: “I don’t hate other races, I just love my own.”

          My answer is that everyone is racist. No one ignores race. No one. And further I don’t like all whites. I love my own nation (tribe; extended family, etc)*

          *A nation is a community of people who share a common language, culture, values, traditions, ethnicity, descent, and history.

          Only be returning to living inside your own nation will mankind have any hope of finding peace, freedom, and relative prosperity. The God Damn Empire makes it illegal to only associate with your own if you are white. Blacks do it all the time but that is OK with the Damn overlords.

          • The God Damn Empire makes it illegal to only associate with your own if you are white. Blacks do it all the time but that is OK with the Damn overlords.
            You do know why that is though right???

      • Then you say: “So you’re in favor of abolishing affirmative action and racial preferences? Me too! Let’s meet for coffee sometime.” Happy warriors, friends. Honey v. vinegar and all that.

          • I think we’re conflating bureaucracy vs. real life here. When you’re standing next to some other parent at the swim meet or whatever sport is what I’m talking about. Making friends.

          • We shouldn’t try to answer questions like this or even push freedom of association now.

            There’s enough actual evidence that whites are discriminated against in colleges and jobs and the media. We should just point it out as often as possible. Eventually normie will see his children are treated as second class citizens and want separation.

            We don’t need to sell freedom of association, we need to sell the reasons that lead people to want it.

          • You’re probably right. At the moment, Joe Normie still clings to his believe in treating everyone the same. Before we can push Free Association, we have to show him that equal treatment is no longer the law of the land.

            “How does some poor white kid have White Privilege?”

            “What about Asian Privilege? They do better than whites?”

            “Why should Obama’s rick, connected kids get a leg up over some poor white or Asian kid?”

            Etc. Break Joe Normie’s believe in the system. Then give him an alternative.

          • “We don’t need to sell freedom of association, we need to sell the reasons that lead people to want it.”

            We need to sell both. There are normies with anything from vague unease to anger about the anti-white tone of public life, but that’s as far as they can imagine going. Freedom of association isn’t yet on the table for them.

            But when they are reassured enough that responsible people have already made that leap, and they will not be alone, some will follow. Some is less than ideal, but it’s better than none, and every convert counts in the reckoning.

      • “Hey man, I just wanna be able to afford a majority white gated community too Like (Insert your favorite white progressive i.e. Don Lemon).”

    • Normies proposed adding a “religious exemption” to the case of a Christian baker who refused to bake a cake for a gay wedding. Balogney. Does a Moslem get a “religious exemption” for beating his wife? It’s a matter of freedom of association. If a Christian baker doesn’t want to bake a cake for a gay wedding, that’s his right. If a gay baker doesn’t want to bake a cake for someone for some reason, that’s his right, too.

      As has been pointed out repeatedly on this blog, mainstream conservatives are liberals lite. That’s one reason conservatism has been in retreat for decades. They basically agree with the liberals, just not to the same point at the moment. They will eventually.

        • Fellow grammar nazi! That comes with working for many years at a law firm. I figure that balogna is something we eat and a city in Italy. Didn’t know that Balogney is a village in Ireland. Knowledge is good. Thanks.

  39. Superb analysis. Something markedly different from stale old Left and Right is needed indeed. Love how you equate the Left to a child. It seems that a large portion of Leftism can be summarized as: “F–k you, Dad!”

    • The left is made up of free-shitters. They free shit in the street in places like San Francisco, and the entirety of their reason for existing is to justify thievery and get free shit.

  40. They really believe in egalitarianism and the blank slate? Or are they just pretending to believe in it?

    As a former teacher “behind enemy lines” I hated those hopeful people: “Oh, God, this is so egalitarian!” I wanted to kick their asses. Catholic school teaching was egalitarian: they had parents and students who wanted to do the work; public school parents and kids believed that their chicken shit could become chicken salad.

    Yeah, they’re really producing equality in the government schools. Everyone now, including the Asians who stay in these schools, are equally dumb. Just like the Egalitarians want it to be.

    edit: as for what will emerge, that’s beyond my pay grade. Sometimes the Benedict Option seems good, but they won’t leave anybody alone.

    • I am just an average guy but I do not see a way to get to a new alternative except by a national divorce. The society is getting dumber and less competent by the day. Most people right now would be unable to comprehend anything that Z is talking about in most of his articles.

      As an example we have police officers in most medium to large cities that are less competent than airport workers and janitors in many other countries.

      It does not look to me like we can get to a new right when the vast majority of people are so dumb that you can’t explain the concepts to them. The younger smarter people are going to need their own place to flourish or they will be drowned out by the < 90 IQ club.

      • Indeed. Well said George. It also doesn’t help when those of our talented young people with high IQ’s have milestones tied around their necks in the form of smart phones and social media and subpar education. You can be as smart as you like, but without facts to organized and process you are little more than a useful cog in the “machine”—never able to “catch wise”.

        • Yes Compsci. I try in my small way to reach those I can. But I can see they have been more than brainwashed. It is insidious. Brainwashing combined with electronic manipulation if you will. That’s how I would describe it anyway.

        • The good news is that these smart folks have what smart folks never before have had – access to nearly *all* of both western and eastern canon. I’ve started to build a virtual library of books, both classic and modern, based on recommendations from our blog host and many others. The biggest challenge is getting folks off the dopamine devices (i include myself here). Perhaps there’s a starting point there – a ‘classics book club’… this won’t bring in the normies but it might help make RL connections…

          • Derb’s ‘Considerations’ section has a lot of good and varied books and authors.

            ZMans “Essential Knowledge” is also a good place to go.

            Belloc and Chesterton are giants of the early 20th century English traditionalists. “The Everlasting Man” is one of my favorites.

            Sometimes the best place to start is with a big overview. Arthur Herman’s 2000+ year spanning history “The Cave and the Light” simplifies a lot of the various schools of thought but does a decent job of it, and it makes clear the massive impact that Christianity had on western thought (a history often forgotten by moderns).

            Also, I recently finished Roger Crowley’s book “Empires of the Sea”, which really needs a Game of Thrones like miniseries to describe the vast changes in the Mediterranean in the 14th and 15th centuries. Popular histories are a great place to start, as they have extensive bibliographies that you can dig in deeper on.

          • Thanks!

            I read “Conquerors” by Crowley. I really enjoyed it, despite perceiving a slight favoured slant towards the Muslims and non-Europeans. Overall still a great read. I am going to read more of his books soon, hopefully. He has one on Constantinople that I’ll probably read next.

      • I too can’t see any alternative other than two separate countries. In fact I think the states are already disaggregating in symbolic ways. This year there was a spate of stories about states adopting new regulations for abortion. Some were wildly licentious (New York) while others created stronger restrictions (Georgia). Regarding the latter, the voices of the Left made their usual threat that nobody would want to work or move to a state with restrictive abortion laws. They never seem to consider the possibility that a law that discourages Leftists from invading your home state is a feature, not a bug.

        It’s hard to see, though, exactly how the breakup would go in practical terms. Lately I’ve been thinking that the U.S. could split into more than two territories, in a multi-step process. For example, California would be a likely state to exit the union early, perhaps along with its fellow coastal states Oregon and Washington, and maybe New Mexico. Correct me if I’m wrong, but were that to happen, the remaining U.S. would be *electorally* much more supportive of the Right; and that eventuality, plus the precedent of secession, might exert pressure on the Left-bastion Northeastern states to leave the union.

        Certainly this account is very incomplete, but as we ponder with Zman the shape of the country’s next moral framework, we can also give thought to the shape of the country itself.

        • Blue states only talk about leaving because Trump is president, but in time they will have their own as POTUS, and then red states will want to leave but they will be forced to stay. History shows this as people who tried to escape were prevented or were killed trying.

        • I can see a breakup into Redstan and Bluestan.

          Redstan would be overwhelmingly White and culturally Christian. Bluestan would host every race, ethnicity, religion, sex and sexual orientation. They have nothing in coming beyond the common pursuit of plunder and hatred of Whites and would tear each apart. I can see a further breakup into a Hispanic southwest, possibly dominated by White Hispanics, and a Black region.

          As for East and South Asians, Moslems and Jews? Who knows?

          At the very least, Whites will continue to flee entire regions and re-congregate in certain areas.

          • Ris, yes, a likely scenario if breakup is allowed. However, it may not work for long. Those areas/States that accept control and populations of majority “diversity” will become “nations” of lower population IQ and that has been shown to affect/correlate with level of GDP—and at low enough levels of IQ—even the ability to form and run functioning democracies. Assuming access to natural resources, White States will become richer, minority States poorer and like with CA today, folks in those nations will attempt to flee to the White ethno-Sates.

          • I thought the same thing. Unless the more intelligent Whites and Asians take control of Bluestan, the country will devolve into a third world craphole. Even if Whites and Asians do, they’ll quarrel among themselves for power.

            Do we take refugees from Bluestan?

            South Africa was a first world country under White rule. South Africa and Zimbabwe were sacrifices to the god of our age, equality. So is the West in general.

          • No voting by refugees, “naturalized” or not, until the third generation, and then only after they pass general knowledge tests at the polling stations, like everyone else.

          • Contrary to the wishful thinking of civnats, America does not have magic dirt that magically transfers any newcomer into an American upon setting foot on American soil. Your suggestion that refugees should not be allowed be allowed to vote, nor their children and only their grandchildren might be allowed to is cautious, but sound.

            People don’t have a “right” to come to the US and I don’t see why we need immigrants, at all. It’s not like we have a labor shortage. The only exception should be spouses who will either be supported by the American sponsor or has a job lined up. Any refugee admitted should also be closely related, genetically and culturally, to Heritage Americans and not be a member of a group that’s prone to make trouble.

            Before 1980, refugees needed sponsors. A former co-worker told me that her father, a refugee from the failed Hungarian revolt of 1956, was sponsored by a Hungarian Church in the US and was warned that if he ever became a public charge, he would be deported back to Hungary and they didn’t care what happened to him.

          • Hi Ris. My opinion…They will Never let us go. We are their cash cow…taxes….production….and land. Nope…won’t let us go without a giant s***storm.

          • I agree with you, but I think that there will be a giant s*** storm. Most likely due to economic collapse or military defeat or both.

          • Can’t run an economy based on government drones providing “services” to each other between visits to Starbucks for lattes

          • You ladies better be in secure spot when it happens being on the run with people wanting your stuff and life will not be a fun experience…

    • The Left’s leadership is mostly power seeking nihilists who believe in nothing(their followers actually believe the BS their leaders are spewing). Notions like “egalitarianism” are nothing more than scaffolding they use to gain more power and wealth. And when it doesn’t work anymore they abandon it.

      And they sure as hell don’t believe in the “Blank slate” behind closed doors. Why in the hell do you think Lefties who have money don’t live anywhere near blacks and Mexicans and they send their kids to all white schools

          • Helping those who genuinely cannot help themselves (the elderly, disabled, and impaired) is our duty. That has been co-opted by border-jumpers and B-factories.

          • Yes, but prior to the “New Deal” charity was considered to begin at home, i.e., a primary function of the church and local community—not the Sate/Fed’s.

            When charity became disconnected from the local community to the extent it is today, it became inefficient and subject to considerable abuse. And even worse, it became a “right”.

            I have no solutions—at least none that has a prayer of implementation.

          • Socialism tends to weaken the sense of personal responsibility to others. I’ve asked people, “Who will take care of so-and-so?” “Let the government.” Socialism replaces the idea of personal responsibility to people in particular with the idea of impersonal responsibility to people in general. Also, people tend to show more consideration for those they know, such as family and friends, than with the big impersonal, apparently infinitely rich government.

            The Mormons run a huge welfare network for members, but the recipient must do something in return. A Mormon friend told me, “If the only thing the person can do is fold towels, then fold towels.” This enables the recipient to keep her dignity (it’s not a handout) and discourages the sense of “I’m entitled” (the recipient must do something in return). A 19th Century idea that works well for everyone concerned.

          • State welfare is a part of human life, the Romans had it and even the medieval period had annuities from the Church you could buy for retirement along with all manner of expected givebacks from the nobles, public feasts and wage/labor regulation

            Laissez faire is a modern thing, its essential Leftist in origin as Right economics are about stability over money,

            And as for local charity, the large scale disaster that was the Great Depression caused that to implode and people to realize that the State was far better suited to the job

            And note until recently the various national health care programs worked acceptable, giving everyone a flat if basic health care

            So long as you don’t have much immigration and the population is OK with it, welfare states work fine

            If you don’t want this you need to tightly control automation since automation reduces the value of labor.

            The more machines, the lower wages, less job stability and the more welfare

            As for the US, we don’t like one another and even if magic comet AH14W made the US uninhabitable to non Whites or there was ethnic cleansing or whatever , we will still end up third world

            We can’t/won’t support a welfare state and our national myth of bootstraps and muh freedom precludes the regulation needed for job stability and marriage stability

            Without those, no society worth a damn.

          • Compsci, it’s even older than Machiavelli. It’s how Pharoah ended up with all the farmable land, and absolute authority, through the agency of Joseph the Vizier. Never let a famine go to waste!

          • Complex orders require a strong leader.

            The low complexity order the Founding Fathers wanted has been unworkable since the invention of the railroad, maybe earlier. It also requires a homogeneous moral Christian population to even try it. We don’t have that.

            Worse modern technology creates even more complexity and that complexity creates State.

            You can reduce state by lowering complexity though.

            To do this you need to basically repatriate a lot of people close borders and much trade than shoot violent and non compliant criminal types scam artists, gangsters and the like.

            After this you have to control the moral rot created by things like drugs, divorce high potency weed , porn and poz.

            if you can do this, and note such a process requires a
            big state to do, after that you can lower the size of the state,

            As it is, the half assed oligarchy we have is a natural outcome of a libertarian drive . Given freedom most people will screw people over and this screwing especially economic causes chaos and disorder

            Chaos and disorder and degeneracy are not Conservative values. Order is. Tradition is. National Wellbeing is.

      • They don’t believe in “man-made climate change”, either. If they really believed that we are all toast in a decade, as their dimwitted leader, Ms. DonkeyChompers McFunbags would have all of us believe, they would be prepping for the Climate Apocalypse like MoFos. Freeze dried food, fresh water, guns, ammo, bunkers…the whole magilla.

        But you see none of this on their side, which in and of itself leads me to believe that either they are so nihilistic now that they merely wish to speed the meteor, or that they KNOW it’s all bullshit.

        My money is on the latter option.

        • Not to mention all the junkets the globe-trotting Davosie manage to squeeze in (on our behalf, of course!) over the year.

        • They believe in nothing but power and the achieving of such. All else are tools or a means to such an end. When they achieve complete authority, then they will decide what ends to put their power to—that is to say, they will then define their principles and moral pursuits.

          Is this not a previous lesson of Z-man in his organizing call to the dissident right?

        • Climate change is the Mcguffin* to absolute power and control. The Left might as well say they need more power so they can find the Maltese falcon or the lost ark, or else we all will perish.

          *An object or device in a movie or a book that serves merely as a trigger for the plot.

  41. This is one of those posts that I struggle with understanding. I do not disagree with the thrust that something new completely must emerge from the mists, but I am at a complete loss as to what that could even be. I am not a Marxist so I don’t have the belief that history marches forever upward and onward, but I also acknowledge that it would be near impossible to have a true reactionary outcome like a return to Feudalism or something like that.
    The thing that’s hardest to deal with is the lack of a direction, a “this is what we’re gonna do” approach. I like sending silly memes to nitwits like Dan Rather as much as the next guy, but I also understand that’s not going to improve the world for my kids. We need to think about the day-to-day tactics that will move us in the right direction, without limiting our freedom of movement or exposing us to retribution from the Antifa Woke-opolii.

    • For me I’ve just accepted a truism that I learned when I was very young, the oppressed will become the oppressors and every identity group in the US thinks they’re being oppressed by white people so I am preparing mentally and spiritually for the time when I will need to defend my people’s right to exist. And I also understand that life’s not fair, you can be born into good times and you can be born into bad times. Technically these are the good times. We are living in an age of abundance and my life is as close to perfect as it’s ever been so maybe I will make it through this life without the bad times coming. Beyond that, I can’t see anything to do right now besides teach your children the truth even if they have to hide it from the outside world. Children like to be part of secret worlds might be time to start giving them one.

      • @Whitney
        “oppressed will become the oppressors ”

        I came across a quote somewhere that I’ve never been able to find again:
        The slave doesn’t want freedom, he wants to hold the whip.

        • I’m not sure if it was a quote or just a repeating pattern of History. It’s something I learned in high school and I went to public school so I did not get a great education but it was in the 80s so it was better than it is now. I recall some teacher pointing out the pattern and from that point on I always noted it when I came across it in subsequent readings and education

    • We need to think about the day-to-day tactics that will move us in the right direction, without limiting our freedom of movement or exposing us to retribution from the Antifa Woke-opolii.

      But what if we’re already doing the right thing, sending memes to Dan Rather and whatnot? As Uncle Adolf said, during his Years of Struggle: “as long as we’re gaining adherents, confrontation is not in our interest.”

      If we prematurely start to organize, either intellectually or in meatspace, we give them targets, as you say, and we give ourselves fuel for internal squabbles, drama and fractions. First order of business is to destroy the old order of business and for that, “We Want To Stop Mass Migration”, is program enough for me. Zman can rag on the AR all day long, but they achieved a string of spectacular victories before they went live and made themselves a target.

      Keep up the shitposting, comrades! It’s working like a charm!

    • You can poke and prod and organism without reaction untill you reach the required threshold of awareness. Then the reaction is instinctive.

      Conditions will trigger instinct, and the response will be given to you by your nature.

    • Whatever Z is saying (or eluding to) is incompatible with the present-day United States. This is a call to break up the country along cultural-ethnic-racial lines. The Euros do their thing here; the Africans there; the Hispanics over there.

      • There’s a place in this world for a Vienna, a Monrovia, a San Paolo and a Shanghai…but not a place where they can share a peaceful border.

      • There will be no break up until there is greater awareness.

        For that, T must be re-elected.

        All these swamp critters love life in the swamp. Why not? They all become wealthy there. They don’t want the gravy train to stop.

        “We mustn’t let T derail the train. All the dead bodies must remain hidden, whatever it takes, even if it means tying some ppl to the tracks”

    • Serious question: why would feudalism fail to work now? Because smart phones?

      I genuinely think we should have a discussion about feudalism: what it was designed to solve, what caused it to pass away, what it delivered, what it failed to deliver. Right now, it seems to serve as a catch-all phrase for stuff that can’t work because Monty Python made fun of it. But if you begin with the idea that the inability of the central government to project power created the need for locals to do so, that can begin a useful analysis, it seems to me.

      Perhaps it’s useful to think on the Visigoths in Spain, who took over from an ineffective central government while keeping all its outward forms – the titles, the theoretical submission to the Roman Emperor, all the rest. Where does that line of inquiry get us?

      • Its a good question, but I have a hard time seeing the “lower orders” voluntarily submitting themselves to a vassal as it stands now. Perhaps if there’s an external threat you’ll have groups self-organizing (and those groups will have a leader by nature) which might lead to a more modern form of feudalism.

        Who knows, but until then you can call me Dennis.

      • We tried feudalism—of a sort—it was called federalism. States foolishly gave it up. One is tempted to call for a return to “State’s rights” and such, however again that is a political solution within the current system which is not amenable to change. Power goes one way, to the top, never peacefully in the other direction.

        • To be fair, mass immigration upset that particular apple-cart long ago. The same dynamic was in play then. The only difference was that there was a “farther out” to move to and still work and raise a family and have community.

        • Federalism only worked before mass immigration was sufficiently easy either at the Federal or State level with a few exceptions there was a kind of moral consensus, i.e everyone was Christian and almost everyone Northern and Western European and we were pre industrial

          As it is mass culture basically destroyed the value of States

          That said if a return to such was wanted, the franchise would have to be strictly limited (live in area 10 years, 21 over, own property, married and maybe have children) and States would have to reassert the desire for self rule

          This might prove to be problematic in a nation with multiple moral ideologies and governance preferences . Progressivism cannot coexist with muscular Christianity nor for that matter can States be allowed to create a regulatory race to the bottom for economic gains since it harms all.

          Truth is our Constitution is dire need of replacement, it was written in a time with more in common with the Middle Ages than Modernity and we need to have policies that deal with tech if we are to kep that tech

          Alas our social system makes this impossible and I suspect we’ll just implode over time into a full bore 3rd world craphole, baring a revolution or collapse of course

        • It can if you have an economic collapse and a President who allows power to diffuse locally rather than seizing it.

      • We used to have that, it was called federalism, the idea that the several states were individually sovereign except with very explicit, limited and delineated powers ceded to Washington. That all ended thanks to Lincoln of course (and all of America’s utterly retarded response to solving the slabery problem). We went from pretending to genuflect to Rome, to being flat on our backs, with Rome’s boot on our throats 24/7.

        • Lincoln wasn’t trying to solve the slavery problem. That was a pretext to keep extracting wealth from the South.

          Slavery did matter to some moralists but not to Lincoln or many of the elite up north

          The previous civil war was easy North vs South , a battle of customs with reasonably clear goals

          A second one would be far more confusing since the Actual Right is so divided.

          Thus, fixing the mess can’t be done until someone has an idea of what they are trying to create in place of Clown World.

          And note actual goals have to be a thing. Declaring exterminatus on the elite even if you win, you lose. Political nature abhors a vacuum , so your boots on necks for a time or their on yours for all time.

          • The next civil war will be the first. The prior one was a second war of independence in which the side seeking freedom from centralized control lost. This true first civil war will not be neatly geographically segregated, which creates a host of issues. There may be a somewhat urban/rural divide, but many ostensibly blue urban centers in the South are barely so – maybe a 55/45 split at best, several within just a few percentage points. Not sure how things are up North, but my impression is the urban split is more pronounced. It will be messy.

      • @BTP
        I’d expect modern feudalism to be a corporate style feudalism in the sense thst your housing etc will be a condition of employment. This already exists to some extent in the military and in property management. An economic hiccup could spread this throughout the economy. Corporate serfdom.

        • I don’t think this is likely. Feeding and housing people is far more expensive than paying the lowest wages possible . It’s also less flexible than often having the ability to arbitrage them down further

          Also automation increasingly makes labor superfluous. In the short run this is good for the bottom line but in the long run, a few mistakes and you end up going out of business . C.F Toys R US

          Modern business requires low wages and constant population growth for long term profits. This is impossible in an urban society as we’ve seen with 50 years of low fertility in the industrialized world

          Instead they end up subsidized by the state, usually with borrowed money directly like say GM or indirectly by welfare and with the consumer based propped up by immigration

          This is not sustainable and it’s already unraveling. Long term, most multinational companies will not exist either being eliminated by nationalists as a threat or having died from lack of demand or too much chaos unmitigated by States to do effective business

          If Nationalist are smart and many are not very tight controls over large capital and trade will be common so they won’t reform for a while

          And note long periods of European history prohibited anything like stock companies as a public risk . Such regulations are soundenough and a network of small businesses checked by the State and Unions/Guilds so long as corruption is kept within limits can make for a wealthy nation . Trade is often not even required

      • Feudalism failed because it was rotten to the core. It is still failing. The countries who killed their feudal s have more common sense now . There is no mass immigration or other madness in the white countries who killed their feudal s properly, like Russia or Eastern Europe. And there are lot madness in the countries where feudal s were not killed like Sweden or UK or where the job was unfinished like in France or Austria. Self appointed isolated inbreed filth is why the Europe fell in the first place. Feudalism also doomed Hitler. Even Goebbels understood in the end of war that Hitler`s worst mistake was appointing those von generals who did not knew what the word “war” actually means. When the Soviet Union fell and and the German generals memoirs flooded all the bookshops, I and other wannabe Nazis were shocked by those peoples stupidity. Feudalism and intellectualism are the two worst mistakes every society can do.

        • It’s lack of exposure to jewish media and academia that made all the difference in the eastern European states not descending into secular degeneracy. The USA and western and northern Europe have been shaped by jewish media and academy, with the resulting destruction.

        • Feudalism was a system of order than at least for the lower classes manited stability for centuries even with slow population growth

          It was even flexible enough to handle a vast decline in population and lasted for centuries after that in some areas.

          Industrialism killed it but we won’t have that for much longer.

          On the other side Democracy and Republican systems of governance at least in modernity can make no such claims of longevity and all seem to be on the verge of failing or have had to be imposed by the US , a nation which will soon no longer be capable of such things

      • Would the distinctive European cultures evolved to the extent they did if it weren’t for feudalism?

    • Your “struggle to understand” will end shortly. The President is going to be impeached and removed from office by a Deep State coup. The issue has been decided. Your country is dead. Gone. Kaput. The “New Culture” doesn’t include you. You are the new nigger.

      What comes next is a global, totalitarian technocrat state never seen before(and scarcely imagined) in history. Welcome to the Brave New World Plus.

    • There is a reason you are not seeing “it”, because “it” is hard. Read Peter Thiel’s “Zero to One”. While focused on innovation and invention, the analogy holds that most of what passes for innovation is merely incremental improvements on or re-ordering of what exists. Few entrepreneurs create truly new things. When they do, it’s revolutionary–think airplanes, or electrification of factories, or the transistor. I think the same holds for political philosophy–way to much baggage is sitting in the lizard brain to make it easy to white sheet a completely new solution. So switching to a different analogy, the muscle memory has to be built from scratch, think moving from the “straddle” high jump to the Fosbury Flop. But it has to be done as a social exercise–experimenting on each other–sort of like the political clubs of old.

    • I don’t see a moral high ground anymore. It doesn’t take much active listening to realize that people know what they should or shouldn’t say, and that’s about it. I detect little fervor. It is like people in 300 A.D. understanding that they had to pretend that the Roman Emperor was a god. To my mind, the progs now occupy failing institutions mostly through inertia.. We have a few Antifa types on one side, a few rightists on the other side, and a vast number of people in the middle scurrying past them. I don’t know what comes next but I suspect our people are caught in a feedback loop which will go on until there is some sort of reset. It is pretty clear the system is brittle and can’t respond to shocks very well.

Comments are closed.