The Summer Of Hate

The Drudge Report has, for the most part, become a tabloid outlet for the political cranks and Hollywood degenerates. His page is full of the crazy rantings of media attention whores or stories about entertainment figures. The former is due to Drudge being a parasite on the mass media and the latter is due to his affliction. As a result, it no longer works as a useful portal to get the news of the day. Still, if you want to take the temperature of the Progressive loons in the mass media, Drudge is useful.

Currently, he has a picture of the bug-eyed bug-man Adam Schiff staring out from the page, in his best Charlie Manson face. In bold letters is the headline, “SCHIFF STARES DOWN TRUMP FACES JAIL MEDIA PUSH IMPEACHMENT”  Obviously, the point is to grab your attention. A little below, in the center column, are links to stories from various left-wing crazies describing the looming arrest, impeachment and jailing of President Trump. “There’s a gathering storm…you can feel it” reads one link.

Left-wing sites like the Huffington Post, of course, have been on the pending Trump indictment since 2015, so every day they run at least one post swearing it will happen any minute. Alternatively, they will run a post fantasizing about Trump’s last days. They always imagine him as Hitler in the bunker, because of the usual suspects. Like kids in the week before Christmas, the Left is sure that any day they will wake up and learn that Trump has been hauled out of the White House in chains to face trial for his crimes.

These postings in the media are mostly part of a well orchestrated propaganda campaign orchestrated by the NeverTrump loons. Like a disease, these people have spread from their warrens in so-called conservative media to all of the mass media. In one of life’s ironies, these people are determined to prove everyone right about the nature of subversives.The NeverTrump leaders have apparently decided that Kevin McDonald’s books were how-to manuals. Thus we get this organized subversion of the media.

Putting that aside, the reason these sites are desperate for trashy stories about Trump being hurled into a dungeon is there is an audience for it. Just as steam whistles like Sean Hannity dominate conservative cable, these sites are catering to an audience that wants to hear confirmation. Because all of the media is run by the usual suspects, this segment has always been over-served, but that does not change the fact the audience exists. In America, there are millions who think Trump is the Hitler described in the prophesies.

The question that arises is what happens if nothing happens? What is palpable on the MAGA side of the world is that the people who voted for Trump are becoming dispirited because he has done pretty much nothing in two years. Nothing that matters to a large swath of his voters. Despite efforts to spin it otherwise, Trump won on immigration and what it represents. His failings on the issue have started to convince many of his supporters that it was all just a big con and nothing was ever going to happen.

Of course, as Trump morphs into Jeb Bush, the Washington political elite has no reason to get rid of him. Trump as useful idiot is certainly better than Trump as martyr. The base of the Democratic party may want impeachment, but the people in charge want the status quo, so they are probably trying to figure out how to look busy, while doing nothing, hoping that is enough for their crazies. The trouble is the NeverTrump loons will never quit, so they will be stoking those fires until the oil runs out.

One result of the Obama years was a rise in black violence, peaking with series of BLM murder sprees set off by the White House. From the 2010 election forward, Team Obama had been working to get their voters angry, hoping that would result in good election results in 2012 and 2014. The trouble was those angry blacks thought it was authentic and they expected something to happen. When it did not happen they decided to take matters into their own hands. The result was a summer of BLM murder and mayhem.

Will something like that be in the cards for the summer of 2019? It’s hard to know, but the Democrats take the House in January and they are showing few signs of restraint. They toned it down a bit in the election in order to not scare the remaining whites in their coalition, but they seem to be determined to go full crazy once in power. Maybe it is just a pose. Perhaps they are hoping a well choreographed bit of theater is enough to satiate the howling mobs of their coalition. Maybe they have unleashed forces they cannot control.

On the other hand, Trump has been a cunning political animal, even if he has been all thumbs when it comes to governance. He clearly thinks having Adam Schiff and Nancy Pelosi as foils is good for his re-election campaign. That means he will be doing everything he can to poke that hornet’s nest. The stage is set for a year of NeverTrump loons stoking the impeachment fires, while the steam whistles in conservative talk radio and cable TV blow full blast making sure the red hats are fully engaged in the fight.

The trouble with the future is it is unpredictable, so how all this unfolds cannot be known in advance. Most likely, the Democrats have not yet worked out how to proceed and Team Trump is a circus of confusion. Still, the ingredients are in place for a very ugly year and when the Left gets ugly, it always means bloodshed. Now that those Antifa mobs no longer have Richard Spencer to chase around, they will need to do something. Odds are, it means attacking red hat wearing Trump supporters in the coming summer of hate.

Thoughts On GrifterCon

One of the toughest problems for dissident political movements to navigate is the army of grfters and subversives that are always on the prowl for easy targets. The Tea Party movement is a great example. The people who initially got involved did so for all the right reasons. They were nice, white middle-class people upset about what they saw happening in Washington. It was the sort of spontaneous civic nationalism that many white people still cling to as a solution to our present woes. It’s the good sort of populism.

The trouble is, the movement was quickly swarmed by an army of grifters and opportunists, along with the body-men of the establishment,. These people showed up offering help, organization and in some cases, a famous name to add credibility. Before long the whole thing became a bust-out, with the grifters carrying off what they could, before it collapsed in a heap.  The caravan of hustlers has now moved onto peddling neo-libertarianism as the antidote to both populism and identity politics.

Of course, something similar has happened to the Trump phenomenon. This story in Politico about various clowns and freaks in the MAGA movement is emblematic of what has become of Trumpism. Ali Alexander, one of the organizers, appears to be the spawn of Sammy Davis Jr. and an Easter Island statue. Judging from his postings, he takes a lot of drugs or suffers from psychotic episodes. The Tea Party, at least, drew a decent class of grifter. Trump’s baggage train is just freaks and lunatics.

In fairness to Trump and the millions of people who voted for him and still support him, they can’t do much about these freak shows. The media loves to promote old weirdos like Roger Stone, because it makes Trump look bad. He provides easy copy and he is willing to be their Sambo, dancing at the end of whatever string they offer. People like Loomer, Molyneux and Cernovich show up because they sniff a few dollars. They are performers and they go where they can find an audience willing to pay them to perform.

The fact that the place was empty suggests politically active whites are staring to wise up to this stuff. Last year’s C-PAC also experienced a drop in attendance. Maybe people are starting to figure out that these events are just a way to keep them busy while their pockets are picked. Maybe white people are rethinking their politics. The utter disappointment of the Trump presidency thus far has probably been the worst thing to happen to this sort of political racketeering. It’s smartened up the chumps.

Still, there is a pattern here. The Reagan years birthed Conservative Inc., which hoovered tens of millions out of the pockets of middle-class white people into various projects that never accomplished a thing. The Contract With America institutionalize the system into a permanent political-industrial complex. The Tea Party, of course, was a complete bust and now Trumpism is becoming an embarrassing freak show. Any resistance is either co-opted or turned into something embarrassing.

The thing that all of these failed movements have in common is they accepted the premise of liberal democracy. From Reagan to Trump, all efforts to reform or challenge the system did so within the context of liberal democracy. They also assumed that the fight must take place on the platforms of the Progressive media. Inevitably, the media picks the most embarrassing members of the alternative to come up on stage. This happened with Reagan, Gingrich and even Bush. We see the same thing happening in the Trump era.

This suggests two rules for dissident politics. One is a variation of the oldest bit of political advice. Never been seen with crazy people or wearing funny hats. Professional pols have people who make sure they are never in the same shot as a crank or weirdo. Smart pols also avoid putting themselves in situation where they can look silly, like driving a tank wearing an over-sized helmet or getting goosed by a farm animal. For dissidents, it means staying clear of attention whores and people with heads full of nutty ideas.

More important, it means staying as far away from Progressive media as possible. This has been a topic for a long time on the Dissident Right, but the side in favor of engagement has always won. Their argument was that it was the best way to get the attention of the public. Today, that’s not the case. Mass media is the worst way to get the attention of the public, because it is all click-bait, agit-prop and tabloid nonsense. The fragmentation also means a much lower ROI. There are better ways to get the public’s attention.

Maybe that’s a bit of white pill to take away from the failure of GrifterCon to attract much of audience this weekend. Maybe people now associate being in the news with being mentally unstable or being an unreliable degenerate. While a story about Roger Stone may get eyeballs on a news site, the people viewing it do so for the same reason people look at pictures of a snake trying to swallow a goat. The freak show has reached a point where it is self-discrediting. That would be a great development for dissidents if true.

The Lincoln Option

After two years in office, Donald Trump finds his presidency at a crossroads. His mode of operation as president has been a continuation of his style as candidate. He says a lot of flippant things about the establishment, many of which are true, but the response is mockery or possibly some pearl clutching. Otherwise, from a policy perspective, the Trump era looks like the Jeb Bush era. The donor class got tax cuts and regulatory reform, while the voters have thus far gotten nothing, other than more of the same.

He can continue down the same path he has been on, reacting to the machinations of his enemies, like a hyper-active version of Richard Nixon, but that promises he will be a one-term president. While the political class ignores him on policy, the Mueller investigation operates like an anaconda wrapped around his administration. It is squeezing the life out of his agenda, by filling the media with salacious nonsense stories and reactions to them, while scaring off serious people interested in joining the administration.

A strange result thus far is that Trump is bad at the thing he was elected to do. That is confront the political class. From the beginning, he has allowed them to push him around and bluff him into bad policy. For example, the Mueller fiasco could have easily been avoided by refusing to appoint the guy. Was the GOP House really going to start impeachment hearings? Would the media be worse on him for not signing off of this ridiculous idea? At every turn, Trump has taken the advice of his enemies.

The conspiratorially minded think the “deep state” has something on him so he is being forced to go along with their agenda. That’s an entertaining theory, but the so-called deep-state has shown itself to be all thumbs when trying to pull off the simplest of capers. The real reason behind his failure thus far is Trump, at heart, still believes in old America, a system of laws and rules where eventually the truth rises to the surface. Trump’s “assault” on the swamp is actually a defense of that old dead American ideal.

After two years of learning that the rule-based system of politics is a myth and what happens in Washington makes New York City real state look innocent, Trump needs to accept the reality of his situation. He can let the Mueller investigation go on forever, as his opponents so desperately desire, or he can end it. If he chooses the former, he is a one-term president whose name will be forgotten. The victors may even have Trump and his family imprisoned, as a warning to others, who dare challenge the establishment.

The other option is to learn a lesson from Lincoln. When you scrape away the slobbering praise from the eventual victors, Lincoln faced a simple dilemma. He could try to preserve the old order, fail and be remembered as a blood thirsty tyrant, who tried to upend the Constitutional order as created by the Founders. Alternatively, he could be the tyrant and overthrow the system, win the war and create a new order. The reason Lincoln is not remembered as the American Sulla is his side won and wrote all of the history books.

That’s the dilemma Trump now faces. He can keep trying to win within the rules being imposed upon him by the establishment, or he can reject those rules entirely. After all, he is in the White House because he did exactly that in the campaign. His primary run was an example of outsider genius to outflank his opponents. His use of novel metrics to create new votes in the general was mostly due to necessity. It is a great reminder that necessity is the mother of invention – and revolutions.

Trump needs to accept that things have a reached the breaking point. It is no longer possible for him to strike a compromise with the establishment. They must be brought to heel and reform must be imposed upon them. They know this, which is why they are endlessly bluffing on what they are doing. Trump needs to call their bluff and fire Mueller, end his investigation and begin the process of investigating the rampant corruption in the intelligence services. More important, he has to be done with flourish.

Imagine news breaks one Friday that the Secret Service has raided the offices and homes of the Mueller team. Their computers, phones and materials were seized and their access to those materials revoked. All of them fired on the spot. Imagine the media hysteria over that move. Now imagine Trump addressing the nation that night, telling the country he has fired Team Mueller and is instructing his new AG to appoint a new special counsel to get to the bottom of the Mueller cover up of the FBI corruption.

That would turn Washington on its ear. When it is further learned that all of the material in the Mueller probe is under 24-hour armed guard and off-limits to everyone until the second investigation is commenced, the game is on. That means the new prosecutor can and will prosecute leaking information in those files. Bob Mueller goes from being the grand inquisitor to a person of interest. His flunkies suddenly become a liability to him and the rest of the conspirators. The rules of the game are suddenly very different.

Would the House Democrats commence impeachment proceedings? Probably. Even if they went forward, would the GOP senate convict? Maybe. There are plenty duplicitous cowards in the Republican Party. A craven loser like Mitt Romney comes to mind. Regardless of how it goes, Trump suddenly becomes an inflection point in the nation’s history. If they remove him from office, exactly no one will believe American democracy is anything but a sham to protect a corrupt ruling elite. The system will be discredited.

That’s where Trump is right now. In a very different context, he is in the same place Lincoln was at when he assumed office. Lincoln could only fail by maintaining the old order, so he had to end the republic. Trump can only fail if he tries to restore the old civic order he fondly remembers from the 1980’s. His choice is to fail or overthrow the current order. The former is a slow death of his administration. They latter does not guarantee success, but it means the end of the old order, for which he will be remembered.

President Echo

Over the last two plus years, the prevailing assumption has been that the Trump phenomenon is part of a greater populist backlash against the corrosive effects of cosmopolitan globalism. Trump’s alleged populism is linked to nationalist movements in Europe, where natives are rebelling against the migrant invasions. Despite the superficial similarities, what’s happening in America may not be analogous to what’s happening in Europe. Instead, the Trump phenomena may be the last echo of old stock America.

If you look at what Trump has actually done in office, versus what he has said, his presidency has been rather conventional. He has cut a lot of regulations, which is pretty standard Republican stuff. He got a tax overhaul passed, which is also standard issue Republicanism. His judges are all right out of the Federalist society. Otherwise, the Trump administration has been what we would have got from Jeb bush, except the marketing of it has been much more entertaining than what you get from standard issue conservatives.

What Trump’s presidency looks like is an echo of the Reagan presidency. Reagan ran on a platform to roll back the cultural revolution of the 60’s and 70’s. He did not explicitly say it, but that’s what everyone assumed. He talked about shrinking government, reforming taxes, rolling back the cultural excesses like abortion and affirmative action. He also talked about economics and foreign policy, but the people who voted for him were looking at the domestic items. People really believed the Reagan revolution was a rollback.

That last bit has been understandably forgotten by the current ruling class. They don’t even talk about the Reagan Democrat phenomenon. That was the great re-alignment in the 1980’s that carried into the 1990’s. Working class whites, who had always voted Democrat, changed parties over the culture issues. Things like taxes and regulation were nice, but what got them to change parties was the culture war. They voted for Reagan because they believed he would fix everything broken in the 60’s and 70’s.

Instead, Reagan delivered a huge military buildup, massive deficits, bigger government and a debt fueled economic boom. All the talk of entitlement reform ended, for example, when it threatened the military buildup. Despite the enormous support from social conservatives, Reagan delivered nothing on that front. Of course, the currency reforms in the Reagan years made today’s debt boom possible. Then there was immigration reform, which is turning out to be the Gipper’s most important policy achievement.

Reagan was the Baby Boomer’s ideal president, in that he delivered to middle-class boomers exactly what they wanted. They were in their prime work years, so they got low taxes, a roaring economy and booming investment climate. Their parents were getting old, so they got assurance the government would pay for all the entitlements. Of course, the boomer kids were in school, so we got a boom in education spending. Boomers have always been socially liberal, so nothing was ever done to address the cultural stuff.

The way to look at the 1980’s is as an echo of Eisenhower’s America. Watch movies from the period, like Star Wars or Indiana Jones, and what you see are remakes of the wholesome action films middle-class boomers grew up on as kids. Even the foreign policy stuff had a whiff of Eisenhower’s era. Instead of kids hiding under their desks at school, kids watched movies like Red Dawn or The Day After to get good and scared about the the Soviets. The 1980’s were a Spielberg remake of the 1950’s.

Trump won election as a remake of the Reagan election. It’s not a perfect analogy, but people forget that the Gipper talked pretty tough on the campaign trail. The tone police followed him around too. As much as Trump gets cast as the white nationalist’s president, he’s pretty much just standard middle American white guy, in terms of his politics and delivery. Like Reagan, the white working class voted for him thinking he would roll back the last three decades of excess. Just as with Reagan, none of that is going to happen.

Instead, he is delivering what the middle-class boomers want. They are heading into retirement, so keeping the stock market humming and making sure inflation is in check is their top priority. Of course, entitlements cannot be touched. As for immigration, nothing is going to change, because this is not important to them. They live in nice safe suburbs and rely on the little brown guys to mow the lawn. Maybe the visiting nurse is from Trinidad or perhaps the grand kids nanny is a nice Guatemalan woman who is teaching them Mam.

The trouble, of course, is that middle-class boomers are a shrinking block. The invasion plus the actuarial tables are making them less of a factor. The remnants of the old Reagan coalition came out of mothballs to shock the pollsters and the political elite in 2016, but they are not making that mistake again. As we saw in the midterms, they can manufacture all the foreign votes they need to win the 2020 election. This echo of old heritage America, is going to be weaker and shorter than the Reagan echo. It will be the last.

Voluntary Suicide

In debates about monetary policy, there is an old saying about the fundamental flaw in hard money arguments. “If your government is so corrupt you need a gold standard to keep it under control, your government is corrupt enough to find a way around the gold standard.“ It is an observation that is fundamentally true about the reality of ruling classes, regardless of the political system. It also speaks to the way liberal democracy warps the way the intellectual classes think about the relationship between ruler and ruled.

In all forms of government prior to the Enlightenment, the defects of the state were assigned to the people in charge of the state. In a tyranny, problems in one of the provinces meant the tyrant replaced the local governor. In a monarchy, bad policy coming from the crown meant the king was the problem. If he was enough of a problem, he would have a hunting accident and there would be a new king. In all forms of personal rule, the assumption is the problems arise from the person doing the ruling, not the system.

Since the Enlightenment, in contrast, whenever problems in governance are discussed, it is assumed that the system is the issue and not the people. This is true within various forms of socialism or liberal democracy. The one obvious exception is Chinese communism, where changing the people is still the rule. Thar’s mostly due to the fact that China was always Chinese first, communist second. Otherwise, the debate about government is about systems rather than the sorts of people who should rule.

All forms of communism start from the assumption that property arrangements, and relationships between property holders, is the basis of human society. This was certainly true of feudalism, but communists picked up where Rousseau left off and assumed property is the fork in the road of human societies. The communist solution is to get rid of property. This allows the scientific socialist to create new social arrangements that are beneficial to all of society. It’s a property solution to the human condition.

Similarly, libertarians start from the assumption that property is the basis of human relations and human society. Contrary to the communist, libertarians see the violation of property rights as the source of human misery. Their solution is to sanctify private property, by re-establishing it as the basis of human relations. That’s the thing about libertarianism. When you strip away the window dressing, it is simply a system property relations. Like communism, it is a property solution to the human condition.

Democratic systems are an effort to address the natural inequality of society by harnessing the will of the majority in the political system. The notion of “one man, one vote” acknowledges that all men may not be equal in wealth and status, but they have an equal stake in society, so they get an equal vote. The flaw is that what is good for the individual is often bad for society. If everyone votes their interests, or what they think of as their interests, you may end up invading Sicily and losing the Peloponnesian War.

Even if democracy does not result in a catastrophic failure, as with the Greeks, the system we call liberal democracy produces unfavorable results. A long observed problem with democracy is something called the Condorcet paradox, where the results swing between two fixed extremes. We see this in American democracy. We get one party in charge for a few elections, then for some reason, the results of the next election go the other way. The last two elections are pretty good example of cyclical results.

That’s the motivation behind schemes like quadratic voting, which seek to tie economic interest to the weight of the vote. The very short version is that everyone gets so much vote capital to spend on the issues they think are important. The greater the interest in an issue, the more voting stock you invest in it. Presumably this means people with no interest in some topic, will not vote on that topic. It is an interesting theory that is not based in reality and could never work in the real world. It’s a fun exercise for the bored.

Again, what you see here, and quadratic voting is a good example, is an effort to arrive at a system solution to the human condition. We know some people are not very smart and are not going to make rational choices when voting. We know there are evil people who will exploit dumb people. Democracy allows for no way to address this, as the starting assumption is all votes are equal, because everyone has the same stake in the outcome of elections. Quadratic voting is a clever attempt at vote-stripping that will fool no one.

The central defect of all political and economic systems since the Enlightenment is they assume there is a rational system that can address the human condition. Whether it was socialists trying to solve the problems that arise from material inequality or the humanists, who seek to address the biological reality of man, the assumption is there is a system that once in place, people will voluntarily support, thus making authority unnecessary. At the heart of all western political philosophy is the dream of voluntarism.

The funny thing is there is never much speculation into why it is or how it is that men voluntarily cooperate. The fascists, to their credit, looked at the brotherhood of trench socialism, as a model for voluntarism. In times of crisis and great danger, men of all classes and interests will join together in the struggle. Marxists came to rely upon perpetual revolution as a way to maintain discipline, but that hardly qualifies as a voluntarist solution to human cooperation. It’s an excuse for state terror.

French conservatives, writing in the later years of the Revolution, probably came the closest to understanding this problem. Joseph de Maistre looked at society as an organic thing, where the parts were defined by their relationship with one another. Individually, they could not exists, because their form and purpose was defined entirely within the state and in relation to the other parts of society. The members of society voluntarily participated in their role, because it is what defined them as human beings.

The fact that the old aristocratic order, that conservatives came to represent, collapsed in the face of Enlightenment radicalism, suggests it either had different defects or never addressed the problem of human cooperation. The long experiment that followed the French Revolution, all the murder and mayhem that defined it, has arrived at the same point as the old aristocratic order. The question is what will come along to push over the liberal democratic order, promising to solve the problem of human cooperation.

Perhaps it is just voluntary, cooperative suicide.

Kritocracy Then Chaos

Imagine if in some local courthouse, we discover that the judges are giving accused child pornographers a free pass. The accused come into the system, get booked and then a judge finds some reason to either let them free on their own recognizance or simply drops the charges. After a while, someone notices that this sleepy little courthouse has a rather high number of people arrested for kiddie porn, but that all of them get set free on some technicality by one of the judges. The public would want some answers.

Upon further inquiry, it is learned that the head judge belongs to some weird club that thinks the age of consent is immoral, that adults should be free to have sex with children and consume child pornography. Once installed at the court house, he hired other judges from his club, as well as clerks and secretaries. The whole courthouse was full of these people. Further, the child porn people heard about it so they would travel to this jurisdiction to indulge in their fetish, knowing the local court would give them a free pass.

Needless to say, such a thing would be the scandal of the century. Now, instead of something abhorrent like kiddie porn, let’s say the secret club is composed of people loyal to some strange religion or bizarre ideology. They think the laws of the country are immoral and seek to overturn the entire legal system. Instead of operating in a local courthouse, they are targeting the Federal system. In other words, it is the same sort of conspiracy, but the motivation is ideological and the target is national.

That’s what we have happening in the Federal court system. The system is riddled with judges who belong to a bizarre political cult. They are members of a legal sub-cult that does not accept the rule of law. Instead, they think the law and the enforcement of the law should always be in support of their cult’s radical agenda. As such, they no longer abide by the law as written and refuse to obey the authority that issues the law. That is what we are seeing on a daily basis, as Federal judges revolt against the legal system.

This is not a new thing. The legendary ninth circuit out west has been a dumping ground for lunatics appointed to the federal bench by their coreligionists. Rulings come out of the ninth circuit, only to be struck down on appeal. The reason the ninth existed, was that everyone acknowledged the existence of this cult, but instead of exterminating it and its members, the idea was to keep them bottled up in specific circuits. It was like a quarantine around an infected zone. Rather than kill the afflicted, they would be isolated.

To continue the metaphor, the virus has jumped the quarantine and now the entire system is showing signs of infection. For two years the Trump administration has been plagued with federal judges who just make up rulings out of thin air. In many cases they are ruling on behalf of plaintiffs who have no standing in the court. In other cases, they are simply making up legal theories so bizarre they would get a first year law student dismissed from school on mental health grounds. The Federal bench is in revolt against the rule of law.

In this particular case, the law is clear. It’s not just US law, but international law. There is a legal process for applying for asylum. No country is required to accept anyone who does not follow the procedures. US law is crystal clear on the issue, yet this judge is making up law that is direct conflict with black letter law. This is no less deranged than if the judge stood up, stripped off his clothes and declared he is an invisible chicken and that everyone in the court must cluck in worship to him. This judge is not mentally fit.

Yet, this judge is not an exception. He is now the rule. The Federal system is full of his fellow cultists, trained in a bizarre legal theory that insists there is no law, just an unwritten ideology that is the rejection of the very basis of western civilization. The boys at FTN jokingly call it the kritarchy , but it is not a bad way to think of it. Instead of the judge being a neutral interpreter of law, as is the western tradition, the judge in this cult is a shaman, charged with reaching justice, as understood by the teachings of his cult.

Kritocracy is a system associated with pre-modern societies, in which there was no central rule making authority. Instead of a legal tradition upon which judges relied, they looked to local custom. This works well enough, it’s better than anarchy, as long as the people within the community adhere to the same customs and beliefs. The idea is to reach a peaceful result, not a legally consistent one. In a modern, rule based society, this form of legal theory is as alien as human sacrifice. It is an assault on civil order.

The thing is, the outcomes are not important here. Even if this lunatic is overruled and the law is enforced, the damage that is being done to civil order is incalculable. Every time one of these cult members gets on the bench and starts making these bizarre rulings, public trust in the legal system is eroded. We are very close to the point where a majority of people no longer think we have a legal system at all. Instead, it is arbitrary rule by robed shamans. Therefore, the law is irrelevant and the system for writing laws is illegitimate.

We now live in an age in which the Federal court says the White House cannot decide who gets a press pass, but it is perfectly OK for the banks to collude to shut you out of the financial system, because they don’t like how you voted. The law says a business can fire an employee, because he does not accept the company values, but the same business must hire a mentally unstable man in a sundress and let him watch the female employees undress. This is a revolt against rationality and reason and it can end only one way.

Getting back to where we started, the remedy for that courthouse overrun by perverts is to clear out the perverts. That’s a simple answer to a small, isolated problem. What American faces is the near total takeover of the institutions by a secular cult that is evolving into a suicidal mystery cult. Removing the believers from positions of authority will not be peaceful. Allowing their madness to run its course will not be peaceful either, as the overthrow of order can only lead to anarchy. Either way, what comes next is chaos.

Prog Taqiyya

According to Islamic scholars, taqiyya is “is a precautionary dissimulation or denial of religious belief and practice in the face of persecution.” Muslims are forbidden to deny their faith, but there are exceptions and one of them is when the Muslim is living in a place where persecution of Islam is common. In order for Islam to spread, the adherents have to be alive, so allowing for this exception makes sense. The implication here is that the faithful Muslim works like a fifth columnist, recruiting in the shadows, while hiding his faith.

Of course, this doctrine is open to interpretation, so some sects have interpreted it to mean that all lying is acceptable, if it can be argued that the lie is in service to Islam. If the faithful Muslim can use deception to help the faith, then lying is not only acceptable, it is admirable. The effect is Islam can easily become an ends justifies the means political and cultural movement. This is what we see with Islam in the West, where Imams preach against their Western hosts in the mosque, but go on television and say the opposite.

This habit of mind is something we see with modern Progressives whose hive mindedness has evolved to the point where lying to outsiders is not only acceptable, but a goal in itself. Every election, Progressives fill the airwaves with things they know are lies. In fact, they tell lies that they know everyone else knows is are lies. The practice of lying in the election process has become something like a religious practice for them. The point of the lying is not to conceal or deceive, but to demonstrate their worthiness to the cause.

The academic quality to the lying turns up in all of the Progressive fads. We saw that in the madness of the Kavanaugh hearings. The definition of sexual assault, a nonsense term in itself, has been stretched to mean just about anything, by people who seem to take pride in making the language meaningless. When you see a young feminist loon howling about being assaulted, the look on her face usually suggests she is proud to have found some way to stretch the meaning of the terms to include some new nonsense.

The thing is, the sheer volume of lying has had the effect of concealing in plain site the fact that the Progressives never speak the truth about anything. In fact, speaking the truth has become a crime of sorts. Professor Amy Wax is thinking about suing her school, because they accused her of making up what is a plainly obvious fact. If the school is correct about what she said, they could release the data and show that she is wrong. Instead, they lie, refuse to produce the data and then accuse her of lying about the data.

It used to be that the Left either exaggerated to make their points or used clever euphemism to obscure the truth. For example, the illegal immigrant was an undocumented worker. This sort of soft, fuzzy language was the result of modern managerialism, where garbage men became sanitation engineers and janitors became facility management specialists. Applying the same sort of rhetoric to political discourse was natural, but at least there was some connection to reality, even if it was tenuous.

Where they are now is that the lie is the point. This became obvious when the Clintons arrived on the scene. They would lie for sport. Even their allies were baffled as to why they would lie when the truth would serve them better. It’s not hard to imagine a person like Hillary Clinton ordering a turkey sandwich for lunch and when it comes to the table, swearing she ordered something else. There’s no purpose in the lie other than to do it and be seen doing it. Clever lying is now an end in itself with the American Left.

This cult of mendacity is not without antecedents. The Frankfurt School was a series a clever intellectual constructions that advanced a political agenda by scrambling the relationship between public policy and observable reality. From it was born the notion that the point of academic activity is to disrupt, overturn and challenge anything that resembles accepted policy. Read through the stuff coming from the multicultural rackets and the whole point of it is to turn being a public nuisance into an academic specialty.

The permanent revolution of Marxist radicalism became a permanent assault on reason by cult-Marx intellectuals. In politics this then became a game of shameless lying to not only advance an agenda, but to increase the status of the liar. The more absurd and ridiculous the fabrication, the greater the applause from the Progressive crowd. In fact, it is no longer possible to identify a Progressive agenda. It is a dadaist performance that is rapidly becoming an anti-agenda. It’s mendacious nonsense as a  public display of piety.

Invasive species are a danger because the ecosystem they invade is not prepared to deal with the foreign threat. The oriental logic of the Frankfurt School may have had the same effect in the liberal tradition of the West as the presence of Burmese pythons has had in the everglades. Instead of being taken over by this alien mode of thought, the Western liberal tradition has been driven mad by it. The result is an intellectual movement that celebrates complex dishonesty and fabrication for no purpose other than for aesthetics.

Open Thread: Voting Day

20:00: The internet tells me the polls are closing and both sides are sure their dreamed of result is coming true. I’m listening to the extremely racist and clearly “not who we are” guys at The Right Stuff cover the results. I may flip over and watch Jean-Francois Gariépy and extremely racist and clearly “not who we are” guests. There’s also a strong possibility that I watch a movie or read a book on Puritans I have in the queue. I’m getting the same vibe I had in 2012 when normal people hoped the polls were wrong.

15:00: Someone asked me what I was doing tonight. By that they meant where I would be watching the election results. The answer is, I probably won’t bother watching much of it and may not watch any of it. Getting a pirate feed from one of the cable channels is a hassle,e specially on a big news night. That and the talking heads they have in the studio are offensively stupid now. It has probably always been this way and it is just more obvious now that I never watch the stuff. I’m just not used to it anymore.

Still, it does feel like the quality of public affairs television has dropped significantly since when I started paying attention in the 1980’s. I recall there being a line about public discourse aiming at a ninth grade level audience. I forget the details, but it was soemthing like that about the intelligence of TV news. Admittedly, I’m not around many ninth graders, but I suspect the target IQ of TV these days is in the 80’s. It’s aimed at the sort of people our rulers think will be running America in the not so distant future.

Anyway, I’m not sure how I will track the results. I have to workout, eat dinner and then work on the podcast for this week. Jean-Francois Gariépy will be hosting a live show with some alt-right people, so maybe I’ll watch some of that tonight. The FTN guys are doing a live show, but I have no idea how they are hosting it or where they are hosting it. If I figure that out I’ll post a link here. I should probably figure out how to do live shows, just for events like this. I do have the NPR guy radio voice. May as well use it.

12:45: A great post by Audacious Epigone on the midterms with some good links and a prediction for the outcome. Since I have not offered a prediction, I’ll go ahead and say the GOP ends up with 55 Senate seats, to 45 for the Democrats. I ignore the fake independents, as that’s just a Prog lie. In the House, I said way back that the result will be much closer than Team Brown has been predicting. I’ll go with the Democrats getting 220 seats to capture a razor thin majority. This will set off a circus like we have never seen.

Something that does not get mentioned is there are a dozen or so Democrats running who promised to vote against Pelosi for Speaker. That means anything other than a brown wave results in an ugly leadership fight. The bet made by the leadership was that they could wish themselves into a big majority and vindicate their decision to stagger on long after the expiry date. Anything less than a 20-seat majority is going to call that bluff and lead some of the young non-whites to demand a bigger slice of the leadership pie.

12:30: Someone suggested I re-post this.

11:40: I was a little late getting out of the office to vote. It’s raining heavy today, so that probably tamps down the enthusiasm. This morning I saw a lot of hens that are typically associated with the pink hat nonsense, but when I went back it was mostly blacks and old white people. If you want to see why I oppose democracy in all of its forms, come stand in line to vote in a Lagos election. It’s not just the people voting. It is the circus atmosphere of the people running the polling stations. They will not survive without us.

The one normal person working the station told me the turnout was very light thus far, so I’m a bit more encouraged about what will happen. There’s no logic to it. I just feel better when I know fewer people are voting. The conventional wisdom has always been that the bad guys need high turnout to rig an election. I’m not sure that applies in a place like Lagos, but I don’t know. There’s nothing happening locally to get the native angried up, so maybe this is just a normal turnout on a raining midterm election day

I voted for the Democrat for governor. I know nothing about him, other than he is black and he sounds remarkably stupid. The sitting governor is a white guy and a Republican, but Lagos deserves a king of their own. That and the current governor is a gun grabber, who signed off on a red-flag law that has already led to one murder by the cops. There’s no chance the Nog King will overturn that law, but sometimes the only thing you can hope to do in the voting booth is send a message. I’ll vote for a black moron over a gun-grabber.

08:40: Maybe it will not be a brown wave, so much as a twat wave. I stopped to vote and the place was jammed with middle-aged hens. It is raining here, so I was not about to stand in the rain to throw my vote away. I don’t recall it being that busy when I voted in 2016, but I would not trust my memory. Come to think of it, I went in the mid-morning last time and stood in line for an hour or more. I’ll go over around ten to see what it is like and that will be a better comparison. Still, seeing all of those hens was ominous.

07:00: Every once in a while, I get a request for an open thread on a topic, inviting commentary from the readers. Famous blogs like Star Slate Codex and Steve Sailer do this with some frequency, so it has been suggested I give it a try. According to the people who rule over us, the prophesies have foretold that today is when we are cleansed of our sins by the great brown wave. If this is indeed the end of the honky hegemony, we may as well enjoy it with a bit of running commentary. Perhaps today is the end of the world.

For those looking for some nitty-gritty analysis of the House and Senate races, here is a deep-dive on the former and one on the latter by Ethnark and McFeels at FTN. I have to say, I don’t watch or listen to any mainstream political chat shows these days. I’ll catch clips from Tucker once in a while, but otherwise I skip all of it. I make an exception for the FTN shows, because they do a very good job analyzing the news of the day in a format that is not openly hostile to my existence. I recommend their shows to the curious.

I’ve been puzzled about this midterm for a while. For starters, the Senate is going to swing to the Right this year. No pollster questions this. It is mostly due to so many Democrats up for re-election. In other words, when a Democrat cannot hide in the pack, like in a House race, they are in trouble. That’s why the predictions for a brown wave in the House strikes me as unlikely. A reader pointed out that the one election in modern times to be a split decision was 1970. Usually, both chambers move the same way in a midterm.

The thing about 1970 that makes it salient is the Left back then was going through a spasm of self-destructive lunacy similar to what we see today. They were also sure Nixon was Hitler. The big difference though is the Democrat leadership back then was not insane and the Democrats were in firm control of politics. They were the majority party with control of the House and control of most state houses. They also had 57 seats in the Senate prior to the election. In other words, beyond the superficial, there is no comparison.

Back when this brown wave stuff started in the media, I did a post on the House races, just looking for the number of seats that were legitimately in play this year. The most generous estimate is about 35, with a handful that are new due to redistricting. Incumbents just don’t lose very often and gerrymandering has made 80% of the House seats safe for one party or the other. Can the Dems win the House? Sure, but it is going to be very close and their majority will be very thin. Narrow majorities in the House are unworkable.

The funny thing is Trump will be guaranteed re-election in 2020 if the Democrats take the House, especially if Pelosi is the Speaker again. That ridiculous old bag is a great reminder of why no sane white person should ever vote Democrat. Trump does his best work when he has a foil and the Democrats in the House are a great freak show for him to use as props for the next two years. Given how quickly whites are figuring out the changing demographics, having anti-whites running the House is manna from heaven.

Learning From The Past

Over the weekend, something that kept popping into my mind was that the paleocons have never spent much time thinking about what they did wrong during their long struggle with the neoconservatives. They spend a lot of time rehashing old fights and discussing the things they fought, like the Civil Rights Act or the Reagan amnesty, but they always seem to stop at the water’s edge when analyzing these things. It’s almost as if they agree with the Left that these policies were inevitable, due to the tides of history.

Part of it, of course, is the losing side never wants to spend a lot of time dwelling on their own failures. Even the humbling experience of being hurled into the void is not enough to overcome ego. We see that on our side of the great divide, where some alt-right figures simply cannot come to terms with the fact that they screw up a lot. This reality does not prevent others from being objective about these things. History may be written by the winners, but the great lessons are almost always on the losing side.

One lesson that was more obvious in the past, than in recent days, is that the paleocons always assumed the other side would be bound by an agreed upon set of rules. They were plenty suspicious of Progressives, but they could never bring themselves to think of them as outside the set of rules that decent people applied to themselves. You see this in their willingness to participate in politics by the rules established by the Left. Read old paleo-conservative writing and they never question the basics rules of the game.

The one exception is Sam Francis. In Beautiful Losers he wrote about the difference between what he called the Old Right and the New Right. For him, the former was the conservatism of the 19th century, which was legalistic and theoretical. The latter was the Buckley style conservatism he saw flourish in the Reagan years. This was a conservatism willing to engage in the nuts and bolts of politics. He predicted that their embrace of the liberal rules would eventually lead them to embrace liberal ends.

He was right about the Buckley crowd, but the paleos escaped that fate, only to be hurled into the outer darkness, spending their time either trying to maintain their orbit around the Progressive sun or lamenting their fate. The paleos were not good at building alternative institutions and as a result they were always living like outlaws in a kingdom run by the Left, with so-called allies willing to act as sheriff. It is an inescapable fact that the people hurling paleocons into the void were always their friends on the Right.

That’s one of the more obvious truths about the past failures, but another less obvious mistake remains unexamined. Some time ago I was sent a link to this post by Thomas Fleming, about how to begin the fight again with the Left. It is a well-written post by a great writer, so it is worth reading simply on aesthetic grounds. It has one flaw, however, and that is it repeats the same mistake paleos and others always seem to make when plotting an alternative to the prevailing orthodoxy. That is, the obsession with principles.

A point I have become fond of making, particularly at secret handshake societies, is that principles are the things winners create after they win, to justify their winning. Winners always create an origin story for themselves that suggests their dominance is the product of the moral order. The fetishization of Lincoln, for example, happened after the winners at Gettysburg were firmly in control of the conquered. The spasmodic hooting about unity we hear from the modern Left, is an aspiration they rejected when they were the rebels.

A mistake paleos and others often make is to assume that having a goal requires a well reasoned set of principles, by which they mean morals. Some goals contain within them all the justification they need., For example, Jews want their promised land to be an explicitly Jewish country. Similarly, White Nationalists want a land of their own that is the exclusive domain of whites. In both cases, the goal is the principle and the principle requires no further explanation. To do otherwise suggests the goal is negotiable.

Similarly, paleos were prone to negotiating with themselves. The endless debating over principles is really just an excuse for not moving forward. It may not be intentional, but that is the result. When the conqueror sets out to sack a city, the one thing he never does is wait until he has a detailed administrative plan for managing the city after the siege. The winners of life never lose sight of this truth. Principles are the things you create after the victory to lock in your gains and give the people a reason to celebrate your dominance.

Another thing that all forms of conservatism in the democratic era have struggled to understand is the role of the pseudo-intellectual trimmer. These are the sorts of people who attach themselves to right-wing movements, and immediately begin working to turn them into useful losers. A good recent example of this is Ross Douthat, who thinks the goal of his tribe is to infiltrate populist movements and then purge them of anything useful, turning them into a uniform that poseurs like himself can wear in the morality play.

This is exactly what happened with the Tea Party. What started out as an authentic white middle-class revolt was quickly hijacked by charlatans. In fact, the grifters arrived so quickly it looked like the Normandy invasion. These types of people operate in the same way English pirates operated in the age of sail. That is, the people in charge give them a free pass, as long as they meddle in the affairs of dissidents. The Right has never figured out how to defend itself from this attack or even tried to understand it.

Finally, the thing that got many paleos in trouble is they could never figure out how to keep the lunatics out of their thing. I’m talking about the people who cannot control themselves and say nutty things in public. The Buckelyites just purged anyone they saw as bad for their racket. In fact, it is what defines them. Paleos hated this about the Buckleyites and the neocons, but they never found an alternative. As a result, they were often put in the position of defending people who maybe should have been reprimanded instead.

The alt-right is a good recent example of this. What started as an edgy internet movement was plagued by old school nutters from the white nationalist subculture, as well as by loons who simply lack self-control. As a result, they became defined by guys like Chris Cantwell, instead of people like Mike Enoch. An outsider movement can only be successful if it offers a respectable face to the skeptical public. Policing the ranks for lunatics and subversives is a requirement, but one past movements never mastered.

Mencken 2018 Diary

Last year was my first time at the Mencken Club event, which is held every year here in Lagos. I knew about it for years, as John Derbyshire has been a regular there since the beginning and he has written about it every year. Not being an intellectual or an academic, I just assumed it was not for me. A few years ago, a famous person in dissident politics suggested I give these events a try, as I might enjoy it. Nothing ventured, nothing gained, so I attended Mencken and AmRen last year, as well as some other lesser known events.

The Mencken Club conference is organized like an academic conference and it is populated with smart people, many of whom are intellectuals and academics. There are plenty of normal people there as well. Academics and intellectuals like to socialize as much as normal people, so even if you don’t play in that space, you can still enjoy fraternizing with these folks over drinks. The social element is what makes these things worthwhile. That’s why our enemies try so hard to shut them down…

This year the event went off without incident and it was a good crowd. Mencken is a smaller event than American Renaissance, mostly because it unabashedly appeals to an academically oriented crowd. Paul Gottfried, the man responsible for it, has written a dozen or so books on politics and political theory. The speakers are all big brained people, who read and write about big brained topics. It’s also an older crowd. I scanned the room and maybe a dozen people were younger than me and I’m no spring chicken.

Last year, I noted that there was a strange nostalgia in the room. It was what I imagined it was like when Confederate soldiers got together after the war, to reminisce about their experiences and the what might have been. There was a lot of talk about old lost battles and old lost friends. There was some of that this year, as it is just part of the deal with an older crowd. There was also a new embrace of the new fight and the new battlefield on which it will be fought. I heard a lot of alt-right-ish stuff from people this year…

It occurred to me that one reason the sober side of the Dissident right is becoming more radicalized is the fact the Left is now otherizing them. When CNN demanded the White House hurl Darren Beattie into the void, it was a Fort Sumter moment for a lot of the paleocons and their fellow travelers. They could live with being purged by the Buckley Conservatives, because they could still live and work in the above ground intellectual economy. The Left is now demanding that end and I think that was a wake up call…

I met a famous legal scholar on Saturday. I’ll not name her, just to be safe, but she is a dedicated reader! In fact, she told me she recommended one of my podcasts to her students, which was quite flattering. It is another benefit, at least for me, of attending these events. To be around members of our intellectual elite is quite humbling and a good reminder that I can always get better. There were people in that room, like the legal scholar, who have forgotten more about these topics than most of us will ever know…

I got to sit next to the great John Derbyshire at lunch. I don’t have to worry about naming him as he has not only been hurled into the void, he is now the pit master. He gave a talk on how the future was most likely going to resemble Brave New World and most people would be happy with it. This rankled more than a few people in the room. A woman from Tennessee stood up during the Q&A and said something to the effect that her people would fight to the last man to prevent such a future. I love mountain culture.

I think John’s talk rankled, because he was mostly right. Look around and you see the signs of the looming World State. People are never vexed by a distopia they know is a fantasy, but they do get upset about a distopia that is possible. I pointed out to John, however, that his vision has one flaw. Utopia always implies genocide, as no perfect world can include the full range of humanity. Marxist relished this truth, but our rulers, like libertarians, lack the guts to face this reality. Therefore, they will lack the will to impose it…

On Friday, I met someone who is in government. He heard I was at the event and came to meet me. I can’t say any more about him, but let’s just say he works for a famous politician. We had arranged to meet in advance, so his name would not be associated with the event. This is not the first time this has happened. I get e-mails form “our people” who work in the system, trying to undermine the enemy from within. I jokingly call it the secret handshake society, but that’s the way it is and it is what I find most encouraging.

You see, people in power don’t waste time and resources hunting down the harmless or harassing the easily frightened. They target the people, groups and ideas they see as threat to them. That has the strange effect of making heresy more appealing to the sorts of people who oppose the prevailing order. The Left’s paranoia is not unjustified, but it is probably our greatest asset. Their lashing out at heretics is making heresy cool. It is the new counter culture and that alone draws support to our banner…

Finally, I sat at Paul Gottfried’s table at dinner on Friday. I have had very little interaction with him to that point, so it was a great treat to finally get to spend quality time with him. He is a wonderful person and exactly what one would expect a college professor to be like, in that he is willing to indulge those striving to learn, but willing to correct in order to facilitate the process. He’s also got a great sense of humor too. Like everyone at the conference, I am grateful that he has created a place for subversives to meet and socialize….