In the 6th century BC, many Greek city-states were succumbing to one man rule, which they called tyrants. Today the word conjures images of a ruthless and cruel autocrat, but in that time is simply meant a dictator. The reason for this would be familiar to anyone living today. The elite gained an economic stranglehold on society and used it to subvert the political system. The great inequality in Athenian life meant that the bulk of the citizens were becoming victims of a predatory elite.
In order to avoid what was happening in other city-states, the Athenians decided they had to reform their society, but could not trust the existing elites to do it. Instead, they turned to the wisest man of their age, a man named Solon, who is remembered today as one of the Seven Sages of Greece. He was given temporary dictatorial powers in order to push through economic, political and moral reforms. The goal of these reforms was to address economic equality and restore political stability, in order to avoid tyranny.
If we look around at America today, the similarities are obvious. Instead of rich landowners preying on the populace, it is a handful of megalomaniacs, who rule from atop global corporations and hedge funds. The normal democratic system of governance has broken down, so that the desires of the people are ignored, while the small donor class wields the state as a weapon against the people. Another weapon against the people is a vulgar popular culture, aimed at undermining public dignity and self-respect.
Clearly, reform is needed. Increasingly, people are coming around to the idea that what is needed is a Pinochet, who will fumigate the political class and deal harshly with the moral and economic predators currently atop the system. It’s why calling Trump a dictator has only helped his cause. The people who voted for him are not so sure it would be a bad idea if he assumed dictatorial power. In the spirit of Solon, are there reforms that could be implemented to arrest the decline into tyranny?
The first thing to acknowledge is that “get back to our constitutional roots” is the sort of thing a moron mutters to himself while watching the news. The people saying this really should be rounded up and shipped off the Africa, where they could be eaten by the natives. Similarly, rolling back the laws and legal rulings of the last 150 years is not happening either. Reform is not revolution. The way to prevent a violent end is to push through changes that could be accepted, maybe grudgingly, by the elites.
The first reform would have to be an amendment to the Constitution enshrining free association and private discrimination as a sacred right. The core idea of America was always the idea that it was a big country and people could self-segregate. If it was not working for you in the town in which you were born, you could head off to another town to find a better situation. You can’t have a mobile, self-segregating population when they need permission from the state to associate or disassociate with one another.
The trouble with mobility in a democracy is people can move to a new place and then organize to vote for things against the wishes of the locals. New Hampshire, for example, has been ruined by people from Massachusetts moving there to escape taxes, but then voting for drunken Hibernians as soon as they get a ballot. An amendment to tie voting to your place of birth not only solves this problem, it makes immigration useless as a political weapon. You cannot import new voters. This amendment would be retroactive.
A third amendment would alter who votes in Federal elections. Universal suffrage is every bit as a crazy as open borders. It lowers the intelligence of the electorate and encourages the worst habits of the political class. An amendment fixing the voting age at 35 and assigning one vote per family household solves this problem. That’s right, only the married can vote. Maybe some allowance for homeowners could be considered, but the family is the future and voting is about the future, so you have to be future oriented to vote.
Those are big reforms that would face a lot of resistance from the billionaire predators that prosper from the current corruption. That would necessitate a pruning of the billionaire class. Bluntly, no one is going to care if Tim Cook is stripped of his wealth and thrown in a dungeon. The world will not change if Jeff Bezos drops dead tomorrow. The cemeteries are full of indispensable rich people. Therefore, the advice of Thrasybulus is warranted, which means an orderly trimming of the financial elite will be required.
Some lesser reforms to the political system would also be required. Restoring the Senate as the house of the states, by repealing the 17th Amendment is one reform. Another would be the elimination of tax breaks for charitable giving. Charities have become money laundering operations for political activity. That would also get rid of the vast sea of not-for-profit think tanks that saturate Washington. Some would survive, but only those that do legitimate work on public policy. This would restore some transparency too.
The whole point of democracy is for the elected officials to work a hedge against the rich and powerful exerting control of society. Addressing the money problem in politics is another small reform. In Federal elections, all money must go to candidates and be reported to the public, Further, no candidate could accept money from outside his state or district. The use of front men to evade this rule would come with a draconian punishment, like the stripping of all assets and permanent banishment from the continent.
There are plenty of other small reforms that would go a long way toward restoring stability and trust in public institutions. Presumably, if the big items are passed, the new political class that would emerge could address those smaller items. That is, of course, is why these sorts of reforms could never pass. Political reform in a democracy is about altering the political class. The only alteration they could tolerate is that which entrenches their position as front men for the cosmopolitan global elite.
I’ll just note that Solon was able to get his reforms implemented and once they were in place he gave up power and left the country. The Athenians swore to abide by them for ten years. Within four years, the old social rifts re-appeared, along with new ones created by Solon’s reforms. It quickly became clear that the reforms could only last as long as Solon was around to lend his moral authority to them, as well as work out the new problems he created. The Greeks were right back where they started.
Eventually, someone named Peisistratos, a relative of Solon, rose up to become the tyrant and impose order on the Greeks. Solon accused the Athenians of stupidity and cowardice for allowing this to happen. He was right about the first part, but completely wrong about the second. The Greeks were being practical in the face of an impossible problem. In time, democracy returned, drawing from the reforms of Solon and the lessons from the period of reform and tyranny, suggesting democracy is a result, not a process.
Pingback: CSG Sends - World Top Business Systems With Premium Bonuses
An upper-age limit on voting and public life is also a good idea. Maybe 80 years old? People tend to get a little irresponsible in the face of their own mortality, not to mention problems with senility. And we don’t need ancient politicians and judges making decisions for the public and taking spots that belong to the next generation.
More generally, if you are a ward of the state — and most elderly people are— you shouldn’t be making the important decisions.
“The whole point of democracy is for the elected officials to work a hedge against the rich and powerful exerting control of society.”
Democracy is a pathetic belief in the collective wisdom of individual ignorance.
So saith Mencken.
All the suggestions sound sooo good. Except for one problem — most of what is suggested are burdens placed on the populace and not the politician. Its akin to having gun laws that the unlawful ignore totally, and generally provide the same outcome.
Here’s DrDog’s reforms —
* Only landowners can vote. Its called Freedman’s laws and we used to have them in the colonies. They worked after a fashion.
* Anyone who is to work for The State must pass a written and oral exam of both the State and Federal constitutions. In this day and age hair dressers, accountants, lawyers, interior designers must pass certification exams yet we do not demand the same of politicians? As a consequence we end up with people like Cortez in Congress.
* Donations for elections. Once concluded all monies remaining after an election, if there are any, become property of the people and are to be utilized to pay down the national debt. Each new election cycle is a zero sum process.
* During a primary, a candidate called ‘no confidence’ shall be on the ballot. Any candidate that receives total votes lower than no confidence is eliminated. A special election is then called for a new slate.
* Recalls are to be operable nationwide for all positions, elected or not, local, state, federal.
* If 5% of the population in any given jurisdiction acquire the necessary signatures a Grand Jury shall be convened to investigate the suspected wrong doing. The prosecutor and presiding judge shall be individuals outside of the jurisdiction for which the GJ operates. The prosecutorial authority is mandated to act on the bill/ no bill decision.
* All voting must be on a single day. No absentee or mail in voting. Vote totals must be announced before the certification of the vote begins. ‘Found’ votes are not tallied after the vote totals are posted.
Lets put the burden back where it belongs — the politicians.
How many of you guys in this blog have self-experimented with senolytics or plan to do so in the near future?
I’m a native and lifelong NH resident. Liberal Massachusetts residence that moved here are turning NH into a liberal shithole (we are fighting back though). But I have some real problems with the voting suggestions in this article. I agree the age of voting should be raised, maybe to 25, definitely not 18 or 35. But I think tying the vote to one member of a household or only homeowners is tyranny in itself. We all have a right to vote and have a voice. I prefer a civil war where we can just culled the liberal herd myself.
I would flat out ban corporations and the capacity to own/buy shares in one.
One man owns the company and takes financial and social responsibility for its outcomes, up to and including the death penalty for egregious breach of the public trust.
A lot of this makes sense. However, I object strongly to this one, “That’s right, only the married can vote.”. Rather than basing the franchise on being married, I prefer to base it on productivity. One those who are net tax payers and/or business owners (e.g. file “schedule C”) would have the franchise. Social structures such as marriage mean nothing to me. Only productive accomplishment means anything to me.
I would add a few more amendments. First is medical freedom (which the founders actually considered) which would abolish regulation and licensure in the practice of medicine. Second would be what can be called mandatory proceduralism. This is where you have a set standard of regulation, say FAA approval process for new airliners or FDA approval process for new medical therapies (e.g. gene or stem cell therapy). If you new plane or medical treatment meets the regulatory specification, which is made public and transparent, approval is automatic and mandatory. The purpose of this amendment is to eliminate both politics involved in as well as selective enforcement power of the authorities. The third amendment would be to make automatically unconstitutional any proposed law or regulation that is not considered enforceable by standard due process. The purpose of both the second and third amendments is to reduce and hopefully eliminate the possibility of SELECTIVE enforcement of any law or regulation which, by definition, gives politicians and bureaucrats unaccountable power over others.
I think the “alt-right” is going the right direction on stuff, especially when compared to the left. However, The biggest flaw in the alt-right is its emphasis on social structure as a value of its own instead of dynamic productive accomplishment. I am far more interested in the latter and view the former as a means to accomplish the latter. It is the latter that will develop the technologies (radical life extension, advanced manufacturing, space development) that will open up the new frontiers that will lead to true self-empowerment which, in turn, can lead to an open, expansive future of radical abundance. This kind of open future allows for all the various factions of humanity to go their separate ways. As a minority, dissident movement, the alt-right should be keenly driven to create this kind of future as it is only this kind of future that will allow it freedom to even exist.
A reform which would eliminate seats of Leftist power would be to limit the vote to those who live outside of urban areas. If a square mile has more than 640 dwellings, counting apartments, no one living in it gets to vote. Combine that with your other suggestions.
Really good ideas. And they are not possible under the current global order (yes, it is a global hegemony) because the essence of them is restoring the nation. And nations are no longer permitted under the terms of the global order. So, to effect this change requires all nations to throw off globalism, which is very difficult to imagine, short of a total systemic collapse. Maybe that is what we should put on our Christmas wish lists.
I hate the fact that I could only vote in a small suburb of Chicago, where my father attended grad school and had his first child. I haven’t lived there since I was six months old, but I have lived here for twenty years since shortly after I got out of the Navy. On the other hand, I wouldn’t be able to vote in federal elections either because my marriage didn’t work out so as an educated and responsible male who has never collected social welfare payments I would have no voice at any level. On the gripping hand though, if I thought the reforms would happen and make a difference, I’d accept the restrictions.
How about requiring that you live somewhere for some length of time before being eligible to vote in their elections? That way you couldn’t move somewhere and immediately start changing things, you’d have to hang out for a while and get to know the area and the people.
I like repealing the 17th, always have.
I like eliminating charitable deductions.
I used to like online disclosure of election contributions and spending, then people started getting fired or attacked for donating to causes that their employers didn’t like (Brendan Eich). I am in favor of full free association, but that has to cut both ways so these two would really have to go together. You can be fired for any reason but you also can’t be prosecuted fro not associating with the correct people. There should also be prosecutions for harassing others because of their political views. Freedom of speech is great but screaming at someone at a restaurant should be considered assault. Where is the line and how do you define it?
Tying voting to place of birth would prevent millions of legal citizens of the rights granted them when they became citizens.
What about US citizens born overseas?
We moved from a liberal shithole to a deep red zone. Does that mean I have to go back there to vote in person, even though I don’t live there or pay taxes there?
All of this is too complicated and impossible to enforce.
What if we limited voting to those who pay taxes? Simply having to show a valid I.D. would go a long way to correcting our broken system. The simple ideas are the easiest to get adopted.
Correct. You vote where you were born. That means foreigners don’t vote. That strips away the only reason the Left wants to import new citizens.
So, as someone born to an American mother overseas, I basically cannot vote?
Or, if I was born in Maine and moved to California, I wouldn’t be able to vote in California?
Ain’t ever going to work as to get a law like this passed, we’ll have to vote on it, right?
We should be focusing instead on denying citizenship to millions of people already here illegally. Remove welfare benefits for anyone not born a U.S. citizen, maybe. At the very least require a valid I.D. to vote.
“The first thing to acknowledge is that “get back to our constitutional roots” is the sort of thing a moron mutters to himself while watching the news. The people saying this really should be rounded up and shipped off the Africa, where they could be eaten by the natives. ”
Come on Z-Man, a message centered around the Constitution, free markets, tax cuts, regulation cuts, and “bootstraps” is totally effective at inspiring economically disaffected whites to throw themselves into revolt, facing doxxing, imprisonment, death, etc. without flinching. American Conservatism, the Gipper, the Chamber of Commerce, et al have the answers. The salt of the earth bourgeois Christian American Conservative man has taken us this far, he’ll surely take us all the way.
And that, my friends, is why Joachim won’t do two shows a night. Bravo!
One suggestion: Only allow parents who don’t work for the government or receive welfare to vote. They are the only class that has an interest in a better future.
Allow government workers and people on welfare to pay back what was given if they want to vote.
Chucky and Nancy meet an untimely demise. The president shurgs his shoulders and continues on. More and more enemies of the state have unfortunate accidents .
The message is sent. The democrats and their financiers have proven they have no use for the Constitution .Things won’t change until they get a taste of thier own medicine.
Hypothetically speaking of course for any of our government friends listening in.
Instead of trying to find things the elites would grudgingly accept, and sending “get back to the Constitution” to Africa, send the elites to Liberia until it is fixed (and require them to accept ebola immigrants).
If the elites resist, they can be placed on some spiked fence (e.g. the White House) after being – well I was thinking of guillotine-ing but I think slowly burning the body starting at the extremeties slowly until only the head is not cremated would serve justice – social and natural law – more.
This reform stuff is all dandy, but it’s really just a sugary parfait of intellectualizing and wishful thinking.
Like the old joke goes…
“First, They came for the blacks; but I didn’t speak out, because I wasn’t black.
Next, They came for the Shapiros; but I didn’t speak out, because I wasn’t a Shapiro.
Then, They came for… actually, once they got rid of the blacks and the Shapiros, all the really big problems pretty much sorted themselves out on their own, so They stopped coming for anybody else, and things went back to normal.
Thank heavens I didn’t speak out.”
A joke, of course, or maybe a Zen koan. But to put a gloss on Stalin…
It doesn’t matter who casts the votes, and it doesn’t even matter who counts the votes. What matters is who pays for the votes.
I too have toyed w the idea of ‘one household, one vote’. I think there is something to this idea. I also believe Pinochet was a hero, not a villain (I think this may also be, partially, true of Franco). Some pretty interesting ideas here
Z, we really need to stop giving traffic to those who hate our existence. No more wikipedia links, please! Infogalactic is pretty much just as good, and isn’t SJW infested. Here is the link to Thrasybulus on their site: https://infogalactic.com/info/Thrasybulus
This kind of talk gets me excited about martial law and increased police state activity. Directed by the Good Guys, of course, as a massive backlash against the corrupt stew of excrement DC is.
We need a real Crisis – a true Alinsky-bomb to go off and startle the populace into accepting the reforms suggested by Z Man. A little peace and quiet would sure be nice around this country. Even if it was only temporary and ended up like the Greeks.
The first Democrat to advocate for breaking up Comcast, will be the Democrat who beats Trump in 2020.
The Republicans are the problem. Democrats are just being Democrats. Even rank and file Republicans believe that “the free market” is interchangeable with “oligarchy” or even monopoly. Libertarians love to talk about “natural monopolies” as a good thing. Bezos is king of the jungle because he just ran a better company with better ideas. He deserves to OWN an entire marketplace. Such is his reward.
Then you have dime-a-dozen cranks like Paul Ryan who would sell their mothers to any Fortune 500 Company. Big companies do big things, and they’re highly necessary, but as with anything else in American society we’ve taken a good thing and ruined it through excess and ideology “Trumping” the human element. If you don’t believe me, order a KFC Double Down. We’re even driving chicken sandwiches to the logical extreme.
“The first thing to acknowledge is that “get back to our constitutional roots” is the sort of thing a moron mutters to himself while watching the news. The people saying this really should be rounded up and shipped off the Africa, where they could be eaten by the natives.”
You write such a violent defamation, then go on to propose Constitutional amendments, and even a repeal of the 17th Amendment?
If you mean to throw the Constitution out, then advocate it. If you mean to only reform it, then stop defaming those of us who wish to return to it.
By the way, NOT a moron.
As Dutch said yesterday, we were born at the right time. We lived in an era of abundance, promise, and miracles, more than any other.
We were at the party, and the world can kiss my ass.
From Zerohedge:
Since 2014, the Chinese nomenklatura has rolled out NeuroCap “…in factories, public transport, state-owned companies, and the military to increase the competitiveness of its manufacturing industry and to maintain social stability,…
Emotion surveillance.
Mental health facial tracking.
To watch us with untiring attention and with the training to spot our most fleeting micro-expressions.
The wireless sensors are concealed under a normal uniform hat and constantly monitor brain waves… In addition, a special camera watches their facial expressions and their body temperatures are monitored. Pressure sensors detect all shifts in body language.
Essentially, they’re data mining by reading their brains.”
Great gods. Great gods.
Our grandchildren will never, ever know what we allowed to be done to them.
Forgot this other nugget from ZH:
“The Next Generation Of “America’s Thought Police” Is Being Birthed On Our College Campuses”
They’ll be running things soon.
Have a nice day!
Here’s a JQ-free pocket history of how our modern oligarchy formed;
Oil was the sugar in the petri dish that fueled horizontal expansion.
“How Big Oil Conquered the World”
https://www.corbettreport.com/bigoil/
Longish, but not cluttered; just enough detail to keep the story moving, and move it does.
Well thought, quality diagnosis.
One leetle problem…
The immivaders aren’t invading, they’re invited. There’s a reason most of them are fighting age males, promised pay in privileges, benefits, and women.
Voting While White will be more than a taboo, it’ll be a crime right up there with Speaking.
Read an interesting article about how Pinochet killed far fewer than left-wing South/Central American and Caribbean leaders, like Che Guevara, and left behind a country in much better shape.
It’s just a question of who writes the history books. That’s one area where our guys need to step up, big time.
Voters and politicians must have skin in the game. Citizenship requires paying taxes on income/land above a minimal amount, being over 35 and married. Service in the combat arms while under fire could substitute for land ownership, ie you risked your life for your country. All elected offices have both a minimum age limit and a requirement to have children in wedlock. That way you have a future you are protecting. The Presidency probably needs a requirement to have grandchildren. Also, states must be allowed to have land based senates to balance cities. All voting to be done in person on one day. Other known voters from the same district must vouch that you are a voter. Indelible ink once you have voted. Agree that only money from your district may be used. If you introduce a tax bill everyone in your district must pay that tax forever even if it is defeated. No one who works for any governmental level can vote. Pinochet and helicopter rides may be the best scenario at this point.
There are several aspects of the old Roman Republic that I agree with. Voting publicly and in person is one.
The ghost of my 20-year-old libertarian self just fainted.
Your first reform clashes with your second. If I’m born in State A and move to State B before I’m old enough to vote, I could have decades of voting in a state I don’t live in. How considered and practical would my vote be? (No “skin in the game”, to quote a book I haven’t read.)
You could maybe fix this: you can only vote where you were born, and you have to be living there.
People can’t seem to get it thru their thick heads that all of life should not be determined thru voting. That’s the root of the problem – and it’s one that has been slowly and incrementally introduced by progressivism – to the point where every single thing you do in your life is politicized and therefore subject to “democracy” and “voting”.
One of the things the founders in this county tried to be clear about – was that the Federal government had only certain powers. What this meant was that certain aspects of society (and therefore life) – were simply not the purview of the government in any way, shape , or form.
And there used to be other institutions and power centers within our society to handle those needs. Adoption? Handled for Catholics by the Church. Welfare for farmers? Handled by fraternal organizations. Military service and defense? Handled by militias – which were in effect fraternal organizations and LOCAL.
People have been so corrupted by the progressive world view (and apparently a complete inability to read and comprehend things not in their direct experience) – that everything in our world continues to revolve around “voting” – to the point where we can’t even have a conversation about a world WITHOUT voting.
Nicely put. I currently own a condo in a big old mill. Sometimes I actually attend association meetings just to hear the insane ideas the members have and want to put to a vote.
So true. I am ready to scrap voting all together, at least for now. The same with “muh Constitution.” Just don’t ask me what comes next. We can figure that out later once we excise the cancer.
Z – I disagree with abolishing the 17th amendment. Why not just abolish the senate altogether? Like it seems redundant and also a violation of OMOV
OMOV?
“one man one vote”
One man one vote is a perversion of the Constitution imposed by the Warren Court. The true value is “no taxation without representation”. And also “no representation without taxation”.
So Krusty, you just want mob rule? Senate is based on an equal and independent say in Federal control by States, which were independent countries at first. Popular election of Senate by the mob is a relatively new abomination. OMOV is itself an abomination as it assumes the premise that all men are equally able to understand complex issues of State and will vote for the general good. The Founders did not believe that either. A simple conversation with a random sample of people on the street will show you They were correct.
they already ruled in the 60s that OMOV applied to states so why not apply it to the federal government?
Only one reform needed for the House and Senate. Pull congressmen from the general voting age public, similar to jury duty. No campaigns or money involved. No pensions or lucrative lobbying gigs after your service is over. Bribery laws would be strictly enforced. As WF Buckley wisely said, “I would rather be governed by the first 2000 people in the Boston telephone directory than by the 2000 people on the faculty of Harvard University.”
One seemingly eternal source of ever-spreading elite disfunction, IMHO, is that their spawn tend to revert to the mean in character, intelligence and drive. So, driven by elite females, elite parents ‘need’ to find elite-level sinecures that fund elite-level lifestyles for their merely average (at best) descendants, using their political power. Obviously it is ‘better’ (in their eyes) for the polity to supply these extra funds than it is for the elite to reduce their own conspicuous consumption, e.g. through promoting elite austerity as an ethos, as did Solon. Absent reform or overthrow* this process continues down through a few generations in an ever expanding geometric progression, generating ever more useless aristocratic ‘eaters’**, progressively impoverishing the producers. Then revolt (or conquest) happens.***
The more the state is under external threat, as was Athens,**** the more important it was that this destructive tendency be nipped off before there is dangerous imbalance > upheaval. The question, then and now, is how to do it.
As Z May says, reform is by far the best way for all concerned, *if it can be done*. The essential point is to restore balance between between (the apparently unavoidable) elite consumers of productive wealth and the always-necessary producers of same by redressing the political, economic and social relationships
So, my vote for reform is to cut down to size the NGO’s that the Cloud use for the funding and multiplication of useless elite we see today. Go Henry VIII on Big U (confiscate the monasteries), Require all NGO’s to make taxable distributions at rates significantly in excess of the returns available on their many investments, say at 15%. This makes compounding into the polity’s friend, winding them up gradually. Reinstate/upgrade the ‘law against perpetuities’ requiring complete wind up of any tax-exempt foundation at the end of the statistical lifetime of any living first generation dependent of the founder at the time of founding. Make NGO > NGO distributions completely taxable at ordinary income tax rates.
Z Man’s proposal to remove the tax exemption of all charitable donations would also be a good move along this line. Christians would give anyway, as shown by today’s stats.
___________________________________
* Either internal elite overthrow via revolt or external via foreign conquest. The essential point is that the cash flow is cut off from most or all of the current elite incumbents, and consequently, from their now largely useless spawn. Historically, the process inevitably begins anew every time the elite turns over.
** Augmented by the usual degeneracy that comes with too much money and nothing much important to do: You know, the old ‘Hard men make good times. Good times make soft men. Soft men make bad times. Bad times make hard men.’ historical cycle.
***This seems to describe the actual situation in France today. The amazing thing is that it only took 60 years to apparently replicate the situation of 1789_! The gratuitous addition of hostile foreign parasites, no doubt, accelerated the rot. See: https://quodverum.com/2018/12/344/france-understanding-the-gilets-jaunes-uprising.html
**** No free farmers = no phalanx. No phalanx = the elite (and everybody else) becomes, effectively (even if not literally), slaves to whoever conquers.
I vote aye:
“there are approximately 1.75 million nonprofits in the United states that annually generate nearly 2 trillion dollars, which is 9 percent of the U.S. GDP.”
Not “tax the rich”, but tax their money laundering, tax evasion, and virtue signaling. The poz shouldn’t be a cost-free benefit.
The only semi-plausible move is for us to adopt the Arkansas Suicide strategy:
If somebody with power makes a decision that harms our interests, he may accidentally shoot himself three times in the back of the head in his sleep.
Let that happen often enough, and the others will be suitably encouraged.
But again, who bells the cat? Nobody on our side has the will and ability to take any meaningful action. If they did, they would. I certainly won’t, and neither will you, and anybody who tries to talk you into it is working for the FBI.
Remember also that while it’s “impossible” to find out who killed Seth Rich, that’s only because of who wanted him dead. There won’t be any ”nothing to see here, conspiritard” if Bezos gets it. Violence is a viable tactic for the left only because the state sees them as allies.
Some Marxist reporter a few years ago wished for the same thing: the dictatorial powers of China “just long enough” to push through action on climate change.
As always, it’s who gets to pick the dictator that creates the biggest hurdle.
I would actually tie citizenship to military service, and nobody under 25 votes unless they pay a net income tax at the end of each year. You 1040 form becomes your voter registration.
The reason nobody would long mourn the loss of Cook or Bezos is that there are plenty of people climbing the ladder to take their place. Cut the head off the chicken, and the chicken dies. No incentive to move up creates nothing but logjams up and down the ladder. No, the constitutional amendment you’re looking for is the one which bars corporations from infringing in your rights. Not just the Feds. The Feds are weaponizing banks to squash dissent, for example. And the internet companies. Take away that weapon.
Term limit SCOTUS. Subject all SCOTUS decisions to ratification by a) Congress/President or preferably b) 3/5ths of the states.
Bodies in military service = extra manpower for extranational activities undertaken by the elite (means empire for the ignorant)
Empire = destruction of your nation , and invasion by representatives of the invaded peoples said empire comes into contact with when it goes into their nations.
Do any of you guys pay attention at all?
Ever since the US became an empire – people from every single place this country stuck it’s troops into – have flooded into this county. It’s something I brought up as far back as the 90’s when Bush engaged in Desert Storm – and I brought up again after 9/11 when the neocons started advpcating the whole world (starting with the Mideast).
Overseas adventures directly = overseas immigration from the target regions.
This is a historical pattern repeated over and over and over again.
If there’s going to be universal military service – it needs to be militia service – not service in a standing army.
I didn’t say universal military service. It should remain a volunteer force. That makes citizenship and affirmative choice unlike a draft which is compulsory.
Service in state militias, National Guard, should count.
Also, what do you think the odds are of military adventurism if the voters are the people being sent into combat?
The chances of military adventurism is zero – if there is no military capable of adventuring.
That was the point of the militia – which was under STATE control. And it’s exactly why it was eliminated in favor of the National Guard – which is ultimately under FEDERAL control (and therefore usable for overseas adventures).
Who went around confiscating firearms in New Orleans – was it the true militia – or the National Guard?
Who bells the cat? We won the presidency and got nothing but a four year (I hope) lull in the rate of acceleration of some of the abuses.
Our rulers won’t make any real concessions to anybody who hasn’t demonstrated a will and ability to throw their friends out of helicopters. Even then, they’ll find a way to screw us. You have to replace them. But with what?
Our NPC permanent civil service won’t implement any changes unless the new boss hangs a few examples in front of the federal building, and even then they’ll drag their feet, obstruct, and plot against us.
We think of the state NPCs as faithless weasels, but they’re fanatically loyal to their “tribe” — call it the Cathedral, or the Cult, or whatever. There’s no formal definition or membership list, but they know very well who’s on which side.
The rot is too deep. We need a dark age, and if we’re lucky that’s the worst we’ll get.
And: Abolish the Federal Reserve Board. It’s not just nutty libertarians who call for this. The pre-1913 system was much better. The Fed is run by banking oligarchs for their own benefit. Just look at its $16 trillion banking bailout of 2008, paid for by everybody else.
I hate to be the shill for the Fed, but the pre-central bank era was wrought with numerous financial panics and bank failures. That sounds eerily similar to the current problems with cryptocurrencies. The problem is the lack of oversight by Congress. It was Congress that authorized the Treasury to sell the bank stocks, forfeiting hundreds of billions in dividends that would otherwise have accrued to the federal balance sheet.
LOL.
Get the politicians involved in the issuance of money?
Hahahahahahaha.
Hello Weimar Republic and hyperinflation.
Inflation of the money supply is a tax on you by the oligarchs. He who gets to spend the inflated money first – makes out. Everybody else further on down the line gets screwed.
The screwing can be quite easily demonstrated by going online and looking for “value of US dollar over time”.
From 1796 or whenever it was the dollar was created – until something like 1895 (going from memory) – the value of the dollar bounced around. But the fact is that in 1895 or so – the dollar was valued at 96 cents. So if you stuck 100 dollars into the bank in 1796 with NO INTEREST. You still retained 96 dollars in value about 100 years later.
Since the Federal Reserve came into being in 1913 – the value of the dollar has fallen to something like 5 cents. That means in (again) approximately 100 years – you LOST 95% of the value of that $100 you stuck in the bank in 1913.
Explain to me again how this isn’t a screw job?
The tell-tale here is that the institution of the Federal Reserve in 1913 was one of a laundry list of “reforms” that were instituted by the so-called progressives – another one on the list was the direct election of Senators , already mentioned by Zman in this post.
Calsdad, I’m sorry for my ignorance, but how does the dollar fare in relation to other currencies? Is this how all countries do it with their currencies or… ? Is it like this everywhere or are we especially bad? Finance is a language I don’t speak, unfortunately. But based on what you said, it sounds like a total screw job to me!
It’s been worse in other places. Germany, Zimbabwe, Israel, and Venezuala all come to mind.
I think you’re choosing the wrong yardstick to measure by though.
I would spend some time reading Martin Armstrong for a better idea of the historical yardstick to measure by – since most of the issues around money have repeated themselves over and over and over again over thousands of years.
https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/blog/
The libertarian/Austrian economist types will say we should have “honest money” – and what they mean by that is something that may go up and down in value (like the dollar did during the 1800’s) – but at least it’s not manipulated from on high – for the cloud’s exclusive benefit.
Look at the value of the dollar since it’s inception – and ask yourself – would you choose variability, or the long slow grind into total loss of value?
The people who say that the Fed was “needed” to stop the “vicious ups and downs of the economy and money supply” during the 1800’s – sold you a screw job. The economy goes up and down. The value of money – goes up and down. The temperature varies – and the climate changes. Anybody who tells you differently is selling a lie.
Excellent ideas for reform. Can’t see them happening, short of an outright revolution unfortunately. Still, concrete prescriptions, however hard to implement, are better than hand-wringing and whining. As usual, kudos to Z for his insight into the present mess.
Nicely said.
Won’t Get Fooled Again
The Who
We’ll be fighting in the streets
With our children at our feet
And the morals that they worship will be gone
And the men who spurred us on
Sit in judgement of all wrong
They decide and the shotgun sings the song
I’ll tip my hat to the new constitution
Take a bow for the new revolution
Smile and grin at the change all around
Pick up my guitar and play
Just like yesterday
Then I’ll get on my knees and pray
We don’t get fooled again
The change, it had to come
We knew it all along
We were liberated from the fold, that’s all
And the world looks just the same
And history ain’t changed
‘Cause the banners, they are flown in the next war
I’ll tip my hat to the new constitution
Take a bow for the new revolution
Smile and grin at the change all around
No taxation without representation, or: if you have a job and pay taxes you deserve a vote. But: if you draw a government check, you loose the right to vote.
Define taxes
Most poor and working class people pay taxes at the State level and often Federal specifically Social Security and the like.
I get the desire to not deal with redistribution but you really don’t want to end social security or the rest. This won’t result in anything good.
Basically the GDP will contract by around 1/3 much directed at the working and poor people.
Less business revenue means lower wages and if wages don’t go up, the population will not stabilize ever. You can’t lower the cost of living low enough to make having kids plausible in a modern urban environment
You also can’t convince enough people to believe religious leaders and act against their rational best interest. For most people the optimum number of kids in between 0-2 and this is well represented by low fertility, 1.6 among Whites 2.0 among Hispanics and similar rates in every single developed nation. All of them. 100%
There is no way out but through which means long term economic prospects and good wages and a sound marriage friendly child friendly social policy. This will require boots on necks and its expensive .
Worse it might only work partially but outside of immigration which is insane the only other option is to let the population decline till there is enough work or control automation
There may not be a a floor on decline either well till everyone is Amish 1.6 forever is not a strategy
Basically we are in a complexity trap made worse by globalism. Since we don’t want to throw way the complexity all we can do is ameliorate it some,
No net income tax at the end of the year? No vote. Bring your 1040 to the voting station.
The poor aren’t the source of the problems or even most of the spending. Its old age related (pensions and medicine) and military
All those people pay taxes.
Also you require the consent of those poor to have a republic, they get a vote on what qualifies as “just consent” as much as you do and if they chose to withdraw it can end the Republic just as fast as your side.
And no you can’t separate the nation that easily either, the poor and wage starved working people are all around you and while not as well armed, don’t need to be.
You don’t like that? Be prepared to create millions of jobs and be prepared to deal with an economy with high savings and low consumption at the same time as innumerable bad social effects from poverty
You don’t want to deal with paying for the homeless, better hope no one you care about or anyone they’ve ever met has been near them at any time. Drug resistant TB is everywhere
Modern society is complex and this means a larger more expensive state sorry to say
What we can do though is send back 30-50 million people and change the law to execute habitual offenders who prey on people, This will lower your costs quiet a bit
But as for basic health, welfare. You are going to pay for it and should not disenfranchise people over fear of higher taxes
if you don’t, as a society we’ll regret it, big time.
But then the cucks lose their shield, “Social Security is the third rail!”
At least the old landowners and robber barons rose through their own personal abilities and achievements. The average CEO, like the average politician, is an interchangeable cog put there by an indifferent committee. He doesn’t care what happens to “his” company in 20 years, only what he can get out of it in the next 2 or 3, usually by selling out to special interests.
Peisistratos only reformed a city-state, and Athens didn’t last long afterward. It’s a nice thought, but it isn’t practical for the American Empire. Our options are (a) Caesar Augustus, (b) breakup or (c) collapse/conquering.
https://www.spectator.co.uk/2002/12/the-secret-of-churchills-gold/
I like a lot of Z’s suggestions but they aren’t going to happen. They may have happened if the heritage Americans were still 80+ % of the pop and controlled the institutions. But we will soon be a minority and none of these suggestions are going to be embraced by our Jewish and Chinese overlords or our replacements. I don’t mean they won’t vote for them. I mean that they and their (((sponsors))) will be in positions of power. The whites that will still be powerful are on their side against the masses of bad whites. Any dictator/tyrant will be in power to crush bad white rebellion.
Case in point: “The first reform would have to be an amendment to the Constitution enshrining free association and private discrimination as a sacred right.” There is no chance our Jewish (and competing Chinese) overlords would ever allow that nor would any good white in a position of power.
Did Zman say no force would be required?
Even in a small city state like Athens these reforms were short lived until a heavier hand took charge…
We face a continental scale problem with significant region differences, serious logistical problems and the invasion of outsiders who will never acclimate to our or their satisfaction.
I don’t see any workable alternative to balkanization. That or a bloodbath.
Exactly. The US population, as a whole, is far too degraded to support a single serious federal reform. That can only be done locally–very locally. Balkanization is a term that carries negative vibes. Better to observe how the Swiss govern–by county. The county is the citizen’s primary government, both taxes and rules. A citizen will move to the next county (or threaten to) to benefit himself through those difference, but he can’t vote unless they say he can. This is original federalism. Switzerland began a slow slide however in 1971 when women were made eligible to vote (county by county). By now they are fighting over gun control and immigrants rights. Z’s idea of only married (heterosexual) couples one household vote would minimize the death star of female suffrage.
Changing suffrage in any way that effects the Left will have to imposed by force. A vote in reality is very little real power by itself but almost no one willingly gives up power and without votes the Left Mob would be powerless
While I am exceptionally glad that people here are discussing options, too many reactionaries avoid the topic. Without an idea of what to fight for you can’t fight and as autistic as it sounds , policy is the core of what is fought for
It fires no one up other than Melvin Nyquist accountant at large but those choices are how you get to the emotional place a society stands for it. The heart stands on policy
Also I still suspect baring a Right Wing takeover will all the awfulness involved its all ghost dancing
Still If you have/get/take power during that interregnum of a few decades , you just do what you need to do and your own guys won’t turn on you for.
Than start on who votes because for a few decades, the answer is nobody
Once that’s done you can start considering policy
Regional diffirence is vastly overblown by nostalgics. The homogenizing force of rapid transit and instant communication have made culture far more level outside of the most rural areas. The left is also not interested in losing any territory as they ascend. Red states that don’t have a burgeoning brown population will get one and the new manifest destiny will be to resettle a microcosm of the world’s non-white nations into every city and state.
Yes, Biden’s 1980 Refugee Resettlement Act could be immediately halted with President Trump’s signature, yet he has not acted, nor spoken of it, that I’ve heard. Ann Corcoran posted on her informative refugee resettlement blog for years and just threw in the towel a couple weeks ago to “take a break.” I think actually she’s given up. https://refugeeresettlementwatch.wordpress.com/
After flooding our country with peasants and savages and placing batches of them in communities where there still might be a factory making wrapped sliced cheese or file folders or something, the white American workers are laid off and replaced with the wonderful refugees, ignorant and often black and Muslim, at rock bottom wages. The local politicians and Chamber of Commerce work with refugee placement agencies to displace their own constituents and make a buck while doing so. Cheapest is best. The laid-off Americans go on to work for peanuts driving the many children of the refugees to school or around town or are otherwise on welfare, maybe depressed from a meaningless and hopeless existence and addicted to alcohol or drugs, or stone broke, living with relatives or friends if they can or living in the streets or in one of the U.S.’s many tent cities.
That is true until you shrink the region. States are too large an entity to effect normal human differences, but counties are not.
Pre-US Constitution, we were in fact a Christian nation. The 17th century colonists came here for the express purpose of building the Kingdom of God, and they established their society to carry out that role for themselves AND their progeny. Their systems of law and governance were based on the biblical scriptures and their founding constitutions specifically stated that. They were white Europeans, mostly British, and overwhelmingly Protestant.
This WAS the founding nation which displaced the aboriginal peoples and took dominion of the continent from sea to sea. The so-called “ratification” of the US Constitution in 1789 was actually a coup against the original Cristian nation of America. See Gary North’s “Conspiracy in Philadelphia” for ample proof.
If we are to get back to “the way things were” and receive again the prosperity and blessings that our forefathers had, we must “seek the old paths”… BEFORE the Constitutional coup was inflicted upon us.
Our current Constitutional government (so-called) is not broken. It is working exactly as it was designed. As Spooner warned us so long ago: “But whether the Constitution really be one thing, or another, this much is certain – that it has either authorized such a government as we have had, or has been powerless to prevent it.”
Nearly all of your suggested reforms, Z-man, would take care of themselves if we simply amended the Constitution completely out of existence and returned to the government of our fathers…Which was certainly not a democracy.
Fine by me. But each state would be its own country.
The reform ideas will never take root. Helicopter rides are a real world possibility. More likely is a systemic meltdown that solves the problem of the blue cities in an organic fashion. Just be sure to have a way to discern the locals from those fleeing the cities…
Sometimes the best reform is allowing the political class leeway to further alienate their population. Trump, if he fails to deliver any reforms prior, should be voted out in 2020 so that alienation can continue apace. The illusion that he provides to boomercons in particular is disruptive to the natural process that leads to “pruning.”
There’s better ways to handle the problem of stupid people voting. Rather than thinking in terms of who should vote, we should be looking hard at those who shouldn’t:
– convicted felons and criminals
– people on welfare
– govt workers
– illegal immigrants
Also, yes we need to trim the elite class; but how to go about that? Welp- like it or not, the US Constitution will tell you exactly who needs to be taken out – and that’d be the guys that try to subvert it for personal gain. That will kill many birds with one stone. If the people saw the Clintons hanging from a gibbet… it would speak very loudly to the Feinsteins, Weinsteins and Bush types… AND the idiots that vote for them.
Funny thing about growing up with exiled Cubans…always thought Pinochet was a guy with the right idea. Wasn’t until I went to college that I found out he was apparently an evil dictatorial fascist. Thankfully history has been his friend. At my old firm, Chile was the most profitable operation in South America and had been for years.
… and still is.
Those are intelligent ideas rooted in a pragmatic perspective on modern life. They might even work if the bulk of society was healthy and robust; but alas, it is neither and the trend is downward. The history of evolution on planet Earth suggests that a different kind of fix is inevitable, and even an artificial hurry-up version is likely going to overwhelm even “the bet laid plans of mice and men.” Short version, if you’re in the smart/strong cohort, you’re chances are better.
Repeal the 16th, 17th and 19th amendments. Our system rapidly deteriorated due to that malicious burst of meddling. Actually Zman’s proposed voting scheme would take care of the 19th.
my first thought on reading this one was the 16th amendment has to go as you say. add to that the federal reserve act, and whatever enabling legislation survives review with that change must be accorded attention as well. there is no higher truth in our corrupt times than that implied by:
“Permit me to issue and control the money of a nation and I care not who makes the laws.” Mayer Amschel Rothschild, founder of the Rothschild international Banking Dynasty, 1790
the greeks did not have to contend with a corrupted money system – in this world, that is the longest lever wielded by the corrupt elite.
No new amendment on immigration, or does that fall under the “small reforms” category?
Regardless, as much I like these ideas, they are just stopgaps. The issue is and always will be mixing different racial, ethnic and religious groups in a single territory. You will always be trying to make the best of a very bad situation. It’s untenable long-term.
The freedom of association targets that issue, but, like the Constitution, it’s just words on a piece of paper. What is that compared to genetic differences. Words can always be changed. Definitions of words can always be changed. Genetics change very, very slowly.
What you suggest isn’t much different from what the founding fathers wrote and look how their words have been corrupted and ignored. Sooner or later, the various groups will look to amend your amendments or change their meaning.
And let’s face it. What you want is a return to WASP rules, if not necessarily WASP rulers. The blacks, browns, NE Asians, South Asians and our besties the Jews won’t go for it. Jews have been working for 100 years to implement their rules and their rulers over this country. What’s more, they succeeded. They’re not going to just give that up.
Even if you win for awhile, Jews will do what they always do. Pull back and work like crazy behind the scenes to undermine the dominant group. It’s what they do, and they’re extremely good at it. Their job will be made that much easier by the fact that ours is a multi-everything society, which allows them to play different groups off against each other.
Sorry, Z-Man, as much as I like what you’re suggesting, it won’t work. The only real solution is separation. That said, I can’t see that happening anytime soon, nor do I see some civil war/white uprising. The society will need to grind down to the point where the government doesn’t function well, and white people start to realize that they don’t have much to lose by forming independent communities. But that’s a long, long way in the future.
The best that we can do for now is form informal, non-political groups that hopefully become something more in time.
The government is always an agent of the rich and powerful. Even in post-colonial America, the officials were all landed rich men. no indentured servant was in Congress.
The difference in America is that the government was severely hampered in powers (enumerated powers) and divided up into States, judiciary, administrative, legislative, and limited by an explicit bill of (individual) rights. So the government could only do so much to favor the rich and powerful.
As limitations on the government fell DC got richer and bigger every year – its product is pushing people around, – and the average person got poorer and more powerless.
In China, Japan, France, Switzerland, Rusia, etc. government is an agent of the rich and powerful, the main difference is how much power the government wields over the populace.
America does have that 2nd Amendment thing… the fundamental problem is there aren’t enough people motivated to actually effect a change in direction. It is clear democracy is a cause of problems not a solution for them but it isn’t clear how some kind of systematic organisation is to arise to counter globo-homo financial interests. They’ve got all the money in the world which seems to be the crucial factor. Nobody is going to press that red button and I don’t believe it will all collapse of its own accord, excepting some unforeseen (unforeseeable) extinction level event, because (much as with fusion power, strong AI, and a host of other modern day miracles) collapse of so-called civilization has been just around the corner my entire life.
The 2nd Amendment reflects three functions of the militia. Security against invasion, suppressing insurrection, and finally removal of a tyrannical government. The militia system effectively collapsed after the War of 1812, as a large portion of the country had no interest in fighting. For all intents and purposes the militia was formally abolished in 1903, the National Guard is a legal fiction that is mostly funded with federal dollars. Absent the functioning of a militia, the 2nd Amendment is vestigial.
What the older generations here will remember, and I learned only as a secondary experience, was the “militias” of the 1990s. These organizations had a relatively large footprint, but disappeared after the OKC bombing. These organizations were flawed from the start, as they never sought affiliation with the state. In effect they wanted a recreation of Shay’s Rebellion, which the Constitution was a reaction to.
Recall there are both the Organized and Unorganized militia (10 USC Sect 246). Yes, the former was radically changed with the Militia Act of 1903 (the Dick Act), and it functions now with approval of the federal govt …. contrary to the founding concept. This is achieved through funding control, as you point out. But the Unorganized Militia is still there too, its mission intact and not dependent on funding from on high.
Yep, this talk of economic collapse “real soon now” seems odd. What percentage whites and mixed is South Africa? It may finally be coming to an end in a few years, but it hung on for 20+ years with whites and mixed being what ~20% of the population and the other 80% being African.
The United States will be more than 25% white and Asians for a very long time to come. What’s more, the other big demographic group will be Hispanics not Africans.
This country is a very, very long way from economic collapse. Not social collapse may be a different story, I don’t know. But waiting around for the whole system to fall apart economically is a fool’s game.
South Africa has been propped up by China, the EU and India have also made questionable “investments” that mask bribery. Furthermore, South Africa itself bailed out Zimbabwe through free electricity and illegal immigration. My namesake also has conned numerous Westerners into buying Israeli-cut shiny rocks, without which the Oppenheimer fortune would disappear and take the ANC down with it.
Imminent collapse sans catastrophic cause would seem somewhat remote, but a reduction in wealth and standard of living seems much more likely. As we reduce the white population, we reduce the average IQ of the nation and more importantly the critical fraction of the population with high enough IQ to keep a highly technical society like ours operational.
Z, the issue with the elites is that they’re ignorant. Hardship, real struggle, various elemental lessons that the unwashed lowers like us learn and re-learn simply don’t exist for them. They won’t consider any compromise, inflated ego, overstated intellect and simple plain ignorance will necessitate violence, that surest of educators. Orderly Pruning, as you said! Name your effort that and you might be shocked at the support that shows up from nowhere (that being a synonym of flyover).
I like it for the most part, but part of the reason for lowering the voting age to 18 was vietnam. You can’t disenfranchise military age males. Old men love sending young men to war. It’s the greatest football game on earth! It’s entertainment. Arena sports are a symbolic substitute for war in our civilized era. Also, it serves as a mechanism of removing sexual competitors. Part of sexual competition is the elimination of rivals. Younger men have an advantage because they are of course more handsome and virile. There is a powerful biological impetus for older men to send them to war for temporary removal and perhaps permanent with death or maiming. You would need a mechanism to diffuse this before raising the voting age to an otherwise favorable level.
“You can’t disenfranchise military age males.”
Why not? This has been the norm for 99% of human history.
Illiteracy was also the norm, along with population at the Malthusian limit. An industrial society dependent on a large class of wage earners tends to favor the expansion of the franchise. Ancient Greek hoplites had to purchase their own equipment, men rowing in triremes did not. By contrast, the trend towards deindustrialization and the rise of both FIRE and Tech has resulted in the democratic popular will being subsumed to that of the unelected judiciary and other classes of experts.
Well, for the reasons I stated. Also, the norm for most of human history has been needless catastrophic wars for the interests of predacious elites.
I mean, some progress is made. Another norm of human history is no penicillin. Should we go back to that?
This is an example of the fallacy of the undistributed middle. It can be clever rhetoric on dumb people, but it is slopping reasoning. There are good reasons to not abandon modern antibiotics. None of which have anything to do with voting. There’s simply no reason why military service should be a gateway for voting. The military does not select for good citizenship. it filters for useful men in a war machine.
It is a result of the POZ in modern life that many people assume military service equal good morals. Lots of lunatics and screwballs have served in the military. Many are now generals.
Not necessarily. Although definitely true today, the military used to select for competent leaders who understood the relationship between actions and consequences, friends and enemies etc.
In fact, that is another huge problem we have to face: our new nation will need an effective military that isn’t oozed with queers, women and degenerates.
John, correct. But that requires we come to an understanding as a nation of the truth wrt people’s differences in ability and desire to undertake various societal roles. We live today in a PC fantasy world. Revert back to a common sense understanding of natural differences and the military (and other institutions of vital need to a well organized society) will shed itself of such undertow.
That’s not what I meant. If voters make policy and vote for war, males too young to vote who are the primary combatants have to fight. It’s the whole Vietnam thing.
I’m not likening antibiotics to voting, only that in the broadest sense that older is not necessarily better. We are conservatives and feel this in most cases, but progress is real. Never mind, it was a small peripheral point.
Chaotic. One of my old recommendations was designed to combat your concern, I call it, “Everyone pays and everyone plays”. 1) Every war requires the money to fund it come from an income tax surcharge which everyone is assessed, i.e., no one is considered too poor to pay a share. 2) Bring back a universal draft, no exemptions.
Not perfect, but I’m betting folks getting hit in the pocketbook will not be inclined to fight many wars that primarily enrich wealthy industrialists.
Everyone not entirely on the dole pays Federal taxes in the form of FICA and numerous fees. Even those people pay State sales tax and other fees as well
Now a progressive flat tax on everything above minimum wage might work with marginal rates making so that no is getting more than 20-30x more than the bottom has value.
Rich people can’t be allowed to be so insulated that in pursuit of social signalling they promulgate policies that harm everyone else.
Make it harder to have super zips and a lot of problems will go away
As to warfare, it is becoming heavily automated and many of today’s soldiers are just work-fare cases.
What might work is the original idea of the founders, eliminate the standing military except for the Navy and Marines and eliminate gun laws as well. A stiff nuclear deterrent with a population of heavily armed people that follows a minimal intervention policy is cheap and reliable
And yes I know the inner city population will kill each other en mass, Oh well, if they get that far out of control we have gallows
So they can behave properly, maybe have an economy with a demand for modest skilled labor and marry etc or if they choose to be a big enough problem, swing.
Do it enough times and the problem will mostly vanish.
The draft was fine back when the military brass was sane. Today, the military is primarily a brainwashing exercise for young people. I can’t tell you how many vulnerable white girl soldiers come home with Leroy’s baby. So until the military changes, I’m not interested in drafting whites into that shithole.
“To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize.”
I’m generally pro military, but the almost worshipful reverence given to anyone who voluntarily joined the military is nuts.
Any serious critique of anything the military has done post-9/11 is never allowed to criticize the actual troops.
Certain sorts of young men are easily manipulated by older, more experienced, and vastly more cynical men to implement imperial policy. Calls to brotherhood, esprit de corps, competition, uniforms, cool hats, fancy ribbons, big booming weapons, and so on spring to mind.
18 yr old men are pretty malleable and open to suggestion. An 18 year old private will take an order to charge an impossible position by a butter-bar 21 yr old who’s fresh out of ROTC. A 30 year old private with a wife and kids would probably tell a second lieutenant to go stuff himself.
There are good people in the military, but I agree…military service alone shouldn’t equal automatic hero status + the franchise.
ProZ, correct. But the military worship we encounter today is just another aspect of PC correctness. This time coming from the right side of the spectrum. PC is the enemy.
ProZNoVx,
Your comment brought to mind the story of Pat Tillman and his death — his head blown off by his own fellow soldiers while he was on the side of a mountain during an ambush and waiting for their response.
https://youtu.be/laNQ5J2caOY
The guy sitting next to him after Tillman’s head was blown off said the sound of his blood running from his body sounded like a soda fountain, his life force pouring out on to the rocks of Afghanistan, so far from home. If you haven’t seen it, I recommend it, and I’m not a gung-ho military type. I love my country and our military but this is a super creepy, sad story. It was one of the many things that brought about my red-pilling, watching this documentary on an beautiful, strong, red-blooded American patriot, former football pro, killed for becoming a wrong-thinker. Scary as hell cuz it shows what America has become, back in the early days of this globalist manifestation.
Rest in peace, Pat Tillman, and all our fallen American soldiers.
Anyone who would join the army to fight in the Zionist wars is the definition of an idiot.
Former Marine here. I agree, but I think the (possibly obvious) side effect of the amendments you proposed in the piece, is that the entirety of US military personnel currently overseas be redeployed to the US for immediate overhaul and downsizing. The remaining personnel (read: hetero males) would then be stationed at bases positioned along our borders. Anyone suggesting military intervention in a foreign land would immediately be exiled to that place. I am also not against mandatory proscription but am open to discussion on the issue.
I would also implement mandatory repatriation for all non-white criminals to their places of origin, whether they were born in the US or not.
Mike, exile or banishment is an excellent idea for repeat or serious offenders. Trouble is, I can’t figure out an unoccupied place on the earth to send them all to.
Merely to the lands of their ancestors. Right off the bat we’re talking 60% or so straight to Liberia.
Don’t even land the planes – just strap an old WWII style parachute to the individual for a LALO aircraft exit.
LALO = low altitude low opening …
sort of what DB Cooper did.
Antarctica comes to mind – it’s kinda empty.
My father always said that bad people who enter the military are bad when they exit the military.
No doubt. The “support our troops” propaganda that began concurrently with the great WoT mysticised and romanticized the US military. It left people thinking that boot camp consisted of a fairy godmother bouncing her star tipped magic wand off of each recruit’s head and *poof!* it’s a completely changed man!
No.
A massive downsizing would create the ability to greatly increase minimal standards of enlistment to potentially (I’m not saying definitely) eliminate many of the real problems currently destroying our armed forces.
You’re going to bring out the (hopefully former) Heinlein libertarians in a lot of folks with that comment.
Perhaps military service is one more requirement, along with being married with kids, needed to exercise the franchise.
1. Future orientation (being married with kids)
2. Willingness to sacrifice (volunteering for potentially lethal military service)
and maybe
3. Real property owner (have a stake in status quo/stability)
No. The day after you made that rule, whole classes of safe military service would be invented as a way to qualify for the franchise and to protect the scions of the elite and pay them for doing so
Heinlein was naive.
Maybe so. The cynicism requisite in order to keep up with our foes rises nearly exponentially as time elapses.
I could respond and say, “limit it to combat arms” but then they’d classify everything “combat arms.”
I fear that knowledge of the foe is some sort of Cthulhu-esque trade-off: the more you know of the foe, the more cynical or insane you become. When you finally understand them completely, you are too cynical or mad to be effective.
I liked Heinlein’s idea that ONLY honorably discharged should be allowed to vote. Another way to achieve the same thing Z proposed – only people with a real stake can have a say in government.
That’s an easily corrupted idea. Just look at the lady pols running around now claiming to have served in combat. The definition of “service” will be expanded to include beating and standing upright. In a big continental country like this, military service should be exceedingly rare.
We had one in NJ – Sherell or something like that.
That crap works on rubes who were never in the military. Actual Veterans roll their eyes at her BS. If they were the only people voting, she’d lose in a landslide.
It IS exceedingly rare, isn’t it?
See my post above. It would never work out in the real world.
Having men who have not married and sired a child serve in combat is an abomination anyway. Virgin sacrifice is not good for any society. And before anyone runs on the tangent of male expendable nature, recall that as close to a 1:1 male to female ratio is also required for stability. Excess women is how you get spinster harpy cat crones.
And excess men (China has 55M) gets you war.
Excess of either is a destabilizing factor.
It would be the responsibility of their respective heads of household to look out for their interests.
The proven problems with youth voting and voting by people who are net consumers of government resources outweigh the interest in the franchise for young men of military age. Let them marry, if it’s so important to them.
A lot of problems, such as why not allow military personnel to vote, are potentially solved via a more elaborate definition of sufferage from “universal” to “earned”. In Z-man’s criteria, an arbitrary age requirement of 35 (let’s leave out the other criteria for the moment) still implies that a voter at age 35 is competent to vote. I disagree. Half the people in my county are property owners and over 35 and we still have a crappy local government. But I like where Z-man is heading—it’s the right direction.
Interesting, to have the notion that you can save the country/world by shifting it around, changing the rules, and so on. This world is a wasteland, everywhere you look relatively speaking, and it’s not because rules.
The fabric of many many human beings has changed in my lifetime, to ego centric, ego reactive, separate beings on damn near sociopathic autopilot 24×7.
Society has always been a system you had to live within, but in the past individuals had temperament to use/bend the system to accomplish meaningful human purposes. Now the system eats us up and relieves us of our humanity, and all we say is “thank you can I have some more for ME”.
We’re so far past rules, Ebola is starting to look reasonable for a reset of the conscience of the planet. Hard to imagine I actually said that
The voting age was lowered when there was military conscription, though it was almost ended by the time 18-year-old voting came into effect. There is a volunteer military, at least for the present. People under 21 can ‘vote’ by not enlisting.
The “old enough to fight implies old enough to vote” argument was always bogus anyway. There are plenty of voters over 21 or 25 or even 35 to send young men to war, especially since younger people don’t vote much.
Democracy returned “in time.” Heh. That’s the understatement of the year.
Sulla’s reforms of Rome worked too – until Sulla wasn’t around to make people follow them.
It’s one of those basic flaws in government. Us conservative types who want freedom, a decent society, and not much government, don’t want careers in government or to be constantly worrying about it. The leftists who worship the state are willing to spend their worthless lives in and around government. So eventually, we wake up and realize that the statists have created some kind of government monstrosity.
Then we have to purge and restart with new rules about how the statists can’t take over again – and it lasts as long as the rules are strictly enforced with violence if necessary.
So maybe we settle for a Putin instead? I see you gave this some serious thought and if we can get a quorum here I will cast a vote to affirm your proposals. I am married and over 35.
These are not constitutional crisis times but far more drastic in need of drastic measures. I fear something like a major financial meltdown (we all know it is coming) may be an impetus to start this. Unfortunately the effects from it won’t really bring about anything or anyone which will return us to a more saner and moral country. Still some crap has to hit the fan.
Everybody always just assumes that there will be some giant financial crisis. I’m not so sure that this will happen. Yeah, yeah, fiat currency never works and central banks are loaded with debt and the welfare state is untenable.
Maybe, but the world economic machine is pretty productive. All those goods and services are real.
Debt gets wiped away all the time through bankruptcy. That’s what should have happened to the big banks in the financial crisis but didn’t. Instead, the government nursed them back to health on the backs of savers. Regardless, the real economy is very productive, thanks to whites and Asians. It won’t just die because some debt gets written off.
As to gov’t entitlements, that can be fixed:
1. Eliminate the income cap on SS taxes so people pay SS tax on income above ~$130k. Boom, that’s a ton of money, mostly from whites.
2. Means test SS and Medicare. Raise premiums and deductibles on retirees with income above $60k. Boom, a bunch of money, mostly from white people.
3. Tax higher level health insurance policies. Lots of money, mostly from white people.
4. Increase the high-income tax on income over $250k.
5. Increase cap gains tax rate to regular income rate
6. Death tax starts at $500k. 50% tax on wealth over that.
7. No mortgage interest deduction for mortgages above $500k
I could go on, but you get the idea. You can keep this ship going for a long time on the backs of mostly whites, who seem to never complain so why not.
Why does everything you propose sound like it’s straight out of the Dem playlist? It all seems like the type of class-warfare they like to promote.
Because the US is ass deep in class warfare mainly by the rich against the working and middle. The poor are mostly tools of the rich and since Clinton can’t really be said to have that much political clout
Wages measured as percentage GDP are less than half what the were in 1973 and 40% of that GDP is government spending.
A bigger economy masked some of the effects but people are not doing well and this is caused by the wealthy’s policy choices and little else
In some sense the sudden appearance of all the commies is a natural response , the failure of the USG to deal with a the 1930’s dust bowl , mass impoverishment and famine got decades of Roosevelt’s Social Democratic ideals and our failures this time will get us similar troubles
Now the Founder’s never intended the Republic to work this way but they were dealing with 1776 assumptions not a modern automated society
I’m not endorsing those “fixes” to the govt’s problems; I’m simply saying that a Dem-dominated government could pass those measure and keep this crap-ass ship going for a very, very long time.
I used to hear similar happy talk from RE agents who thought the $1 million dollar tract home would be the norm and that RE would never go down. That was in early 2007, by 2008 these RE agents were out of work.
The whole system almost collapsed in 2007-2008. If it wasn’t
tor TARP we’d have had a revolution in short order once the big banks started closing for good.
Right now the real economy is shrinking not growing. Jobs are still being off shored or foreign workers brought in to replace Americans. Real wages have no increased. Medical costs are eating up more GDP every year, into the not too distant future it will be near 100%.
The so-called tax cuts a**raped workers in blue states and actually increased their tax burdens.
Entitlement reforms? You’re joking. There will never be any except more freebies for 3rd worlders.
Do you even realize illegals get SS, medicare and medi-cal? Or that they are killing our social safety net. Go to any hospital and it’s loaded with illegals. Same with dialysis clinics, it’s 90% illegals.
That’s the ugly reality being papered over by happy talkers like yourself who think the party will go on forever.
Thanks Rod, couldn’t have said it better.
The illegals rape of our SS etc, boils my blood.
No wall needed if you take these damn gibs away.
David, what you suggest is often called “souring the milk”—you can use this concept whenever you hear a politician talk about illegals and the solution to “the problem”, to know that they are bullshitting you to your face. That includes Trump and his wall. No serious solution can be proposed that does not undertake to prevent non-citizens from working and receiving welfare. And those proposals currently are….
Look, I’m not endorsing those measures. I’m saying that a Dem-led government could and would implement them, allowing them to keep things going for a long time. Naturally, middle class whites would get whored but what’s new.
Also, the economy is not shrinking. GDP per capita is higher now than it was in 2008. Granted, almost all of that wealth has gone to the top 1% and what’s left over went to the remaining top 9%, but the economy IS growing.
https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/gdp-per-capita-ppp
Now, could a debt crisis cause a huge recession? Sure. ’08-’09 nearly sent us into a depression. It truly was a systemic financial crisis. The banks were broke and should have gone under. If the Fed didn’t spend unbelievable amounts of money on the banks, short-term credit could have come to a halt, which would have stopped the economy cold.
So, yeah, we could have a very nasty recession, even depression. But the fact remains that the U.S./global economy produce a massive amount of goods and services. That capability won’t just disappear if we have a depression.
My point is simply that everyone keeps saying, “Just you wait for the crash, that’s when things will get going,” but there’s no guarantee that will happen in our lifetimes. The Dems will takeover a very productive economy. It could take them decades to screw it up to the point of whites hitting the streets.
Rod1963, yes, and similarly, go to any court system and it’s 90% blocked up with illegal immigrant crimes and other issues. We in the U.S. hemorrhage money on illegals. Go to any charity, it’s 90% serving illegals.
You’re mistaken, Commie. We just need to sit in our basements, polishing our AR-15’s until the salvific Crash arrives, spontaneously transforming the minds and souls of whites, ushering in a millennium of boomer-con heaven-on-earth. I can see it now, whites draped in American flags, standing before an image of the Gipper, teary eyed as “God Bless America” is played on loud speakers. The return of our Constitutional rights to free-markets, with an added amendment requiring substantial marginal-tax cuts every 6 months in perpetuity, will bring an era of unrivaled plenty for all. McMansions and Applebee’s will be everywhere, and in every driveway, a gigantic motor-home, a Harley Davidson, and two beautifully enormous SUV’s. 1950’s Episcopalianism, Milton-Bradley board games, two weeks a year at a Las Vegas timeshare, ….
Caesar is coming. Trump is merely a herald. One reform would be to make financial foundations spend 100% of their yearly income and an additional 10% from their financial investment capital. That way they’d work themselves out of business rather than becoming liberal sjw sinecures and funding mechanisms for radical politics.
Retroactively tying voting to our place of birth would have interesting consequences in places like MA. While people in red states get pissed about liberals from CA moving in, the opposite is true too. I grew up in MA and knew I wasn’t going to stay in that leftist dump from the time I was in high school. I worked there for a few years after college, then left and never returned except for family visits.
Every place I’ve been since, I’ve met many similar MA refugees who loved some things about the state, but will never live there again. Give us the vote there – and take it away from all the liberals who flock to places like Boston because they want to live in libtopia – would change things dramatically there as well as some of the places the liberals left.
I wonder if it’d change things. MA would still be a leftist nuthouse as would California and other blue sewer states. They would still continue causing all kinds of problems for their neighbors and the rest of the country. I’ve been told that the bulk of progressive lunacy is confined to the big cities.
Like Solon, Z would solve a lot of problems but he’d create a lot too. I don’t think a peaceful resolution is possible. Somebody is going to have to get culled or genocided first.
Sure – cut the cities and the rich inner suburbs out of any state and it turns deep-red. Even NJ and NY.
Hillary majority vote was the same count as four NYC boroughs. The ff’s were geniuses to conger up the Electoral College.
The one thing that’s kept it going this long.
When “they” finally get rid of the Electoral College, this country will then absolutely be a democracy. It may be possible that a Convention of States would avoid an all-out civil war. Or cause one. I pray for my country.
Why would you want an absolute democracy unless you think people are interchangeable? Think it over and I believe you will realize our system is one of sheer genius and flexibility.
The Constitution is not the problem. An article 5 controlled by leftists…. no thanks.
Actually I believe I read and saw the map with counts from the (4) of 5 NYC Boroughs (exception Staten Island) needed a slight read fractional “assist” from metro Lost Angeles county. One of the few instances the JYT was useful. State of NY: For NY State: https://www.nytimes.com/elections/2016/results/new-york
and too, Lost Angeles county: https://www.nytimes.com/elections/2016/results/california. Again, the wisdom of our Founding Fathers was and remains profound. In this instance their look into the future and subsequent codification of the Electoral College.
New York City, when I was young, had a persistent call to become “the 51st State”. Perhaps they were on to something. Let them go their own way and stew in their own filth.
Here’s the thing: MA used to be a conservative state. If you don’t believe me go look at the records. The transition began with mass immigration to the urban centers and mill towns and spread from there. Curley was a crook. Re-elected from prison. That didn’t bother his voters in the least. The majority of his voters’ descendants never stopped voting that way. That’s why we had the Bulgers and the current MSP scandals.
New Jersey was a very conservative farm state. A no-income-tax haven until the mid-70’s.
The problem with tying it to birth state is that, if you left that state, you really have no “skin in the game.” Tying it to marriage (with widower/widow carrying over the right) and land ownership is better IMO.
Part of the problem here is : there’s too much to vote for.
One of the premises of the country the way it was founded – was that there were a whole list of things that were simply not considered to be the purview of the Federal government. “Progressives” have incrementally dumped one thing after another into the bucket of the Federal government – so that now the right to vote has absolutely become vital because you’re either getting free shit – or paying for it.
I have read numerous stories from the times before FDR pushed thru all sorts of FedGov welfare programs – and much of it was previously handled locally.
Local control meant that everybody knew who the scammers were – and/or “welfare” might have been divided along racial lines. White people went to the white church – and took care of their own. Black people went to the black church – and took care of their own. Now the Feds do it – the churches don’t – and the white churchgoers are therefore FORCED to support the blacks.
If you didn’t like filling the plate at church all those decades ago – then you didn’t go and lived on the outskirts of town. There was at least somewhere to run to.
Now – there is nowhere to run to if you are involved in the “economy” in any way , shape , or form.
If they get rid of cash – you’re REALLY going to be screwed.
The longer this tragedy continues, the more convinced I become of the absolutely mortal damage Lyndon Johnson did to this country, partly in altruistc benevolance and the rest in craven political demagougery.
The fact that you’re beginning at Lyndon Johnson is part of the problem.
Altruistic benevolence from Lyndon Johnson???? That’s crazy talk.
None of it was benevolent.
People keep concentrating on voting – and I still think the problem is finances. Maybe you can’t fix the financial issues without fixing the voting issues first, but after a few decades of watching this insanity – I am still firmly of the opinion that much of this leftist lunacy exists simply because the people who engage in it are inside a financial bubble that feeds their craziness.
Harsh times beget hard people. Soft times bring soft (in the head) people.
We have soft times because of massive funding of softness – and other shennanigans like deficit spending , crazy stock market valuations, and the Federal Reserve.
Just like how ZMan talks a lot about right wing cuckiness – I see the same behavior from a financial viewpoint: much of the right defends the financial order of things – and falls head over heels for proposals like digital only money and getting rid of cash. They’ll also scream bloody murder if you talk about lowering taxes because Muh roads!! and muh schools!! and muh defense establishment!!.
I still remember the cities in the 70’s and the 80’s – they were shitholes.
Now they’re massive sinkholes of money – and the occupants are living in a bubble.
It’s time to burst the bubble.
re: massive sinkholes of money..
When Guiliani was mayor of NYC, 20+ years ago, the annual budget was about $25 Billion; now it’s $83 Billion. That’s approximately $25,000 per taxpayer per year.
Imagine a world where that budget is cut in half- and tell me how much leftist lunacy survives the meltdown.
How many women are going to keep opening their traps about equality – if NYC turns into what it was like back in the 70’s when Kitty Genovese got killed and nobody paid attention?
How many leftist loudmouths get disappeared on the streets of NYC with no police follow up – when the budget doesn’t allow it?
Again – this is why I say money is a HUGE part of this leftist problem. And it’s why there is such a huge connection between progressives and bleeding your wallet by methods large and small.
Philosophical discussions are nice – but they don’t put food in my stomach – or take it out of some dindu’s stomach.
What if we went back to a policy of naming people outlaws, meaning they would no longer enjoy any legal protection and could be killed on sight by anyone without fear of arrest or prosecution. Shitavious and his diverse band of gang-bangin’ homies would come running for the relative safety of a prison, and pedophiles would be hanging from lightpoles as an enduring warning to anyone else contemplating becoming a fondler.
Kitty Genovese was killed in the early hours of March 13th 1964. It was a ’60s thing of not getting involved. NYC really is a great city, if only they’d get rid of the politicians and the Elites. Everyday New Yorkers are terrific.
4 years ago, no one could have believed an outsider billionaire like Donald Trump would win the presidency. Just as today, most people would laugh at the notion of an Alexandria Occasio winning. And after her disastrous term in office, the people righting the ship with, oh I don’t know, say Alex Jones …
Occasional-Cortex exploited a tactic used in a few other state level elections around here. Her backers looked at the primary turnout numbers and realized they could set an ambush in a single party district. Same happened with the State Senate in my district. Then they ran a hard leftist with a core that would turn out and dumped the incumbent. But be wary of Occasional. People with just enough intelligence to hold one idea in their head, but lacking the additional bandwidth necessary to contemplate any contradictory evidence are dangerous.
She is a dingbat, but it is obvious there are people behind the scenes putting her and potato Beto up for election. They will be told what to say and what to do. The scam proceeds along.
Speaking of Beto, what is this guy’s appeal? Does he have any substantive ideas or proposals? Or does he just look good in a suit?
I’m not a Texan so I didn’t follow his Senate campaign, but I have seen self proclaimed fans of his on twitter (all female) say vaguely sexual and somewhat creepy things about him.
Beto is entirely the creation of the media. Look at the surnames of the people who have written the most fawning puff pieces of him. It’s all part of the Plan. As for Beto himself, I think it goes without saying that a Quisling like him is traitor of the first order.
The sub-species of “educated” white wimyn now component the scourge visited upon Western Civilization said to inhabit regions in and around Blue Hives… philadelphia suburbs, metro NYC, etc.
Beto is Obama with white skin. Nothing further needs to be discussed.
Agree. Even if if not, she’ll be thoroughly swallowed up be the swamp.
They’re the same as tur’doh although they may not have “part time drama teacher” on their list of credentials….if it goes off script, hilarity ensues. It’s a gd tragedy.
In the long run, she would be more dangerous to the Dem party, than to America as a whole. I say Bring It On, and be prepared to be ridiculed for 4 years. The harder Left she is, the better.. for us.
Just wanted to say I am stealing your last sentence, its good.
And that she, on behalf of C.D. NY 14, defeated none other than Joe Crowley. Joseph. Crowley. Insofar as extremes are concerned, let this sink in. I was born in this district fifty-six years ago. A drive through NY14’s streets, be it Queens or across the Tri-Borough in the Bronx is these days a visual exercise in discovery itself.
I agree but you’re leaving out one other very important reason why she upset the incumbent – her ethnicity. On the night she won her primary one of the things she told the crowd supporting her was, “You sent a message tonight, you replaced one of them with one of your own.”
Well stated. Nor would those besides of course the normies and Neo-Jacobins have predicted the top of the L.E. food chain as the Dept. pf Just-Us and their armed proxy jackboots the Famous But Incompetent have devised and then executed the attempt to first block, and when it failed, frame this lawfully elected President. This is unprecedented in the entire history of our Republic and in comparison renders “watergate” to the realm of a Class B Misdemeanor. Last month a large swath of this as presently composed electorate made a decision, probably also unconsciously, to end the congressional level investigation (Nunes, Jordan. Gaetz et. al.) into no less than (5) gov’t. 3 letters responsible for their high crimes, malfeasance, and in sum Treason. All while a significant number of those unworthy of the Right to vote remain neither aware of what happened let alone effectively suspicious.
If we Men of the West prove unwillingly to engage and by ANY means necessary destroy the sodomite enemies of Western Civilization itself we shall lose. And lose it all. For our children, grandchildren, and their seed. One day historians will marvel at this era in American History and those who ignored the warnings of their own demise, some with a seeming lust for self-extinction. I never in contemplation anticipated what has been and remains loosed in our Country. Given the present trajectory and its increasing velocity it will not end well. But one way or another it will end. If God has willed the latter it will be insidious – like a man going broke, or the sinking of the RMS Titanic, slow and little-noted, then calamitously sudden and final.
In 2008 Mike Vanderboegh (RIP) wrote: “It is no small thing, to restore a republic after it has fallen into corruption. I have studied history for years and I cannot recall it ever happening. It may be that our task is impossible. Yet, if we do not try then how will we know it can’t be done? And if we do not try, it most certainly won’t be done. The Founders’ Republic, and the larger war for western civilization, will be lost. – Mike Vanderboegh. “Refusing to Submit. The Lessons of Mumbai: Death Cults, and the Socialism of Imbeciles.”