A History of Failure

One of the enduring mysteries, one that is rarely explored, is why all right-wing movements in America have failed to make a dent in Progressivism. The first iteration of conservatism in America was washed away by Progressive reformers in the first part of the 20th century. When political crisis struck, conservatives had no political solutions, just theoretical analysis. Progressives, meanwhile, had a program.

In response to the success of New Deal politics, the American Right reorganized in the middle of the last century around more practical items. Buckley-style conservatism was about winning elections and implementing policy. Like its predecessor, it failed to do much to stem the tide of Progressive innovation. In the end it was corrupted by the system it sought to reform, becoming just another node on the managerial state.

The reason for this long track record of futility is that American conservatism has always been dominated by bourgeois objectivism. Unlike Randian objectivism, bourgeois objectivism is the assumption that the world runs by a set of immutable laws and that the point of politics is to adapt to those laws. Discovering the right answer is the point of all political activity as once the answer is clear, everything falls into place.

In the realm of politics, it means that all political actors, individually and in groups, are acting from rational and discoverable motives. This naturally leads to a reductionist interpretation of Progressive politics. Whatever the Left proposes is feverishly analyzed by conservatives to discern “real motives”. Further, it is always assumed that the Left is driven by the same desires as the Right would be driven, if the roles were reversed.

Read the rest here

102 thoughts on “A History of Failure

  1. With regard to democracy Z, the enemy has mooted democracy.

    Democracy died by Fraud and Force at the hands of the Democratic Party.

    Its one thing to not interrupt an enemy committing suicide, it’s another to rail at the corpse.

    If you mean don’t attempt to resurrect the corpse – well no- but perhaps its more profit to denounce the assassins? Have no fear, none have any stomach for danger on behalf of democracy. Your enemy democracy is dead Z. None can bring it back.
    So is the Constitution, the Enlightenment- all of that is dead.

    You may want to attend to the assassins before they prove the most dangerous things in the world aren’t ideas – but men, especially desperate men. And desperate they are. And very dangerous.

    • Democracy is Caesar’s corpse, the Bloody Shirt.

      Wave it at the assassins- that is the utility of democracy.

      Don’t worry, it shan’t return.

  2. John Adams wrote the following:

    “I might have exhibited as many millions of plebeians sacrificed by the pride, folly, and ambition of their fellow-plebeians and their own, in proportion to the extent and duration of their power. Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide. It is in vain to say that democracy is less vain, less proud, less selfish, less ambitious, or less avaricious than aristocracy or monarchy. It is not true, in fact, and nowhere appears in history. Those passions are the same in all men, under all forms of simple government, and when unchecked, produce the same effects of fraud, violence, and cruelty. When clear prospects are opened before vanity, pride, avarice, or ambition, for their easy gratification, it is hard for the most considerate philosophers and the most conscientious moralists to resist the temptation.”

    • Politicians, the media, and educationist, know how easy it is to take the harmless enthusiast and turn him into a dangerous fanatic. Insanity is uncommon in the individual, but not uncommon when the propagandist replicates it to spread fanaticism. Our elites have done so. They have whipped up this modern day madness, this psychosis, this fanaticism called Wokeness. Reality has been replaced by something more numinous. Plato has returned to his cave. How else to explain how the black man has become so worshipful?

    • The only Defense of Democracy that I ever mounted or can be presented is the voters were rejecting the Left. I strongly believe they did in 2020.

      That question is now mooted.
      Utterly. There was no voting from the roof, for all the blather. Just as well.
      Moreover with every day in peace the undemocratic becomes more legitimate, or at least tolerable. Certainly it is tolerated. Fine. We were never going to vote our way out of this, now we don’t have to.

      So…whatever sweeps away this refuse perhaps stay out of its way. It is quite likely the young Left. If not in the cities not our problem. If you remain in the cities you certainly had fair and explicit notice of your Doom. If they move out of the cities perhaps a real break at last.

  3. Well Mr Z I see you now speak for “The Right” according to the subhead your piece appears under on Taki’s front page.

    Not dissenting anymore then?

  4. The reason why the “right” always fails in it’s efforts tomake a dent in the “lefts” efforts to destroy America, freedom and everything else is simple. One side has rules and generally obeys those rules. The other side has only ONE RULE….WIN. By any means necessary. And as long as that is reality nothing and nobody will ever succeed in stopping them. And the “left” has succeeded so thoroughly in corrupting this be the exact same rules they use to imprison anyone who opposes them DO NOT APPLY TO THEM.

    • The Left wants power too, oh so much more. We just want to be left alone- which they cannot do.

      “When I saw that schoolhouse I knew we were doomed. They want to rule the world, we just want to live.”

  5. Does Taki’s still have a commentary section? I hear it went behind a paywall with the advent of the bint.
    If so, does Z collect any comments?

    • This explanation of the ratchet effect doesn’t need to be this complicated. We don’t need all these “isms“ to explain.

      Theater Roosevelt split the vote in 1912, allowing a terrible man with terrible policies to do terrible things, including involve us in a war, effectively abolish the 10th amendment, and introduce the income tax.

      After a decade of a return to sanity, a progressive running under the Republican platform did terrible and stupid things in the face of a crisis, and although he meant well, the Fed made that bad situation worse.

      In 1933, Franklin Roosevelt started buying votes wholesale. After four years, they voted for anything, he started instituting make work projects and welfare and setting time bombs like Social Security.

      Social Security and Medicare our time bombs because they will create a catastrophe in due course, but the political environment is such that nobody responsible can do anything about them.

      It’s really just that simple.

  6. The Founders and Framers certainly weren’t liberal democrats: in their original vision, only property-owning White males had a say.

    So it seems that part of what’s entailed in liberal democracy, is the constant expansion of tge franchise, of those who are allowed to participate: non-property owners, women, Blacks, and now, if Biden & Co get their way, illegal immigrants.

    Clearly, the inclusive premise of liberal democracy— that the more inclusive we are, the more types of people are given a say in governing, the better things will be— is NOT what the Founders and Framers had in mind.

  7. “Put another way, the reason for conservative failure over the last century is the inability and unwillingness to question the premise of liberal democracy . . . . The only way forward is a right-wing radicalism that challenges the premise of liberal democracy and perhaps the Enlightenment assumption on which it rests.”

    All ideologies rest on specific premises and assumptions concerning human nature. Marxism failed because it saw human beings as more malleable than they actually are: imagining that communist society would transform selfish materialistic human beings into selfless servants of the State, no longer seeking status, prestige, and power over their fellow citizens, but instead content to make whatever sacrifices were necessary, while taking only what they needed.

    Liberal democracy too embraces a constellation of flawed, utopian premises concerning human beings, in it’s egalitarian, “anti-racist” insistence that all human groups and types are equally endowed and equally capable, and that given equal opportunity for all, a democratic paradise on Earth will naturally ensue. Diversity is our strength: the more diverse we are, the more wonderful things will be.

    Whereas it’s become clear, to anyone with eyes to see, that, on the contrary, an emergent property of ever-increasing diversity is chaos, division, and strife.

    In what perhaps can be seen as a prescient recognition of another of the fatal emergent properties of liberal democracy, Alexander Fraser Tytler predicted (over 200 years ago) that:
    “A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury….”

    While Federal Government benefits programs may have originally (FDR and LBJ) been motivated by the best of intentions, it seems likely that by now, our elite rulers have seen their potential to create an ongoing permanent underclass, addicted to receiving their “entitlement” checks, and resentful at any attempts to curtail them.

    In what can be seen as a *realistic* premise regarding human nature, they recognize that given the proper circumstances, many (most?) people are inherently lazy and easily bought off. The ever-expanding promises of more and more “entitlements” ensures Progressives of a large and ever-growing constituency; and eventually, a permanent majority.

    The emergent property of liberal democracy which Tytler warned of has become a reality: politicians legislating (in the name of their constituents) ever-greater handouts of “free stuff”— for which people feel not grateful, but entitled— ensuring that those receiving them won’t object to their (the politicians) permanent ascendancy.

    And then there’s the paradoxical fact— which anyone who’s spent much time in the “helping professions” has likely noticed— that people who are receiving help often feel resentful of that fact.

    I noticed that in my years working at the homeless shelter: where you might expect to see gratitude from those you’ve helped, you often see them finding ways to resent you. Another unexpected emergent property of human nature whose reality only becomes apparent in the instance.

    That dynamic definitely seems to be in play with Blacks: the better things get for them, the more angry and demanding they become.

    And Progs are clearly playing on that, in the way they constantly encourage Blacks to believe that the evils of the past live on in the present, and to feel angry and resentful and put-upon no matter what happens.

    Regarding the animosity which Progs themselves clearly feel for the rest of us: I suspect it may be instinctual and gut-level, rather than reasoned-out: they just don’t like us.

    They may come up with apparently-rational “reasons” to hate us and want us gone; but the real root may simply be the fact that we comprise a different, opposing tribe, with radically different premises about what people are like and how things should be done.

    • All true, but at what point do you stop defining & elaborating upon the core problems in excruciating detail and instead use some of your mental energy to focus on effective solutions? Diagnosis alone will never cure cancer.

      • TomA,

        I hear you. But before you can start searching for cures, you’ve got to diagnose exactly what’s wrong. Which includes seeing how and why we got sick in the first place. In as excruciating detail as is needed to perform that task.

        And once we’ve figured out what’s wrong— seeing as how the cure has to involve collective action— our next task is to inform/convince as many of our fellow citizens as possible as to what the situation is.

        So our first job is one of communicating our understanding of the situation to everyone who might be open to it: to rally as many people as possible to our side.

        That may be the most valuable contribution of this website.

        As far as solutions: I see separation/secession as the only satisfactory solution, in a society as divided as ours is.

        But I’m skeptical whether that would be possible. So we may be headed for an end state that none of us is able to imagine.

        • So how will you know when the time is right to transition from diagnosis to formulating a remedy? I think we are stuck in diagnosis Hell (analysis paralysis) because remedy actually requires tangible effort as opposed to mental exercise. IOW, we’re lazy and yakking is poor substitute for action.

          • The solution I’d like to see happen— division of the US into two or more separate countries— would require a consensus among millions of my fellow citizens.

            So I’m seeing what you’re calling ‘diagnosis’ as a combination of consciousness-raising and recruiting: hoping that eventually enough people will get the message, and at that point what is now impossible will become feasible.

    • Alas, being from the same tribe (or ancestral tribe) does not spare two groups from being mortal enemies. Right now in the Middle East they are at war for the Nth time, two peoples probably genetically indistinguishable from one another. Even their respective mythologies claim they are descendants of Abraham. A similar argument can be made for many ethnic conflicts in history 🙁

      • Ben,

        While their respective mythologies do indeed posit a common ancestor, the two belief systems and the world views entailed in them are also radically different.

        Specifically, Allah in the Koran commands Muslim believers to take over the entire world, by any means necessary; while at the same time assuring them that it’s inevitable that it will happen; since nothing can stand against Allah’s all-powerful will.

        While the Jews interpret God’s mandate to them in their holy texts much more narrowly: “Jehovah gave us this piece of land as our habitation.”

        I’m not an expert on the situation in that part of the world, but I wonder if what’s going on is simply a case of two groups— whose histories have generated strong animosities between them— competing for the same plot of land.

        That primal competition for the same piece of territory may be the root cause of their strife, while their differing belief systems just provide a narrative explaining and justifying it.

        Throughout most of human pre-history, conflict between two groups could be solved by one of them moving on to occupy a different territory. In today’s world where all the land is already spoken for— where the Palestinians have nowhere to go—- ongoing conflict is the only possible result of two feuding groups trying to share the same small plot of land.

  8. One cornerstone of our culture and assumptions- with its now global outreach, as ubiquitous as English language or Negro beat- is a certain Book, whose entire premise is dedicated to tearing down other’s temples and asserting the morality of it, the necessity of joining them in doing so.

  9. The mistake Conservatives make is thinking the Dems/Left is that they simply hold a difference of opinion and that they can reason with them. You can’t. They hate the Right in any of it’s expressions. They hate mainstream America and what constitutes our Western heritage.

    For the longest time they kept their mouths shut about how much they hated mainstream America but we saw glimpses of it from Obama and when Trump became president they dropped all pretenses of being anything but agents of destruction of the U.S.

    Really how else can one describe Democrats? They are pro criminal, pro open borders, pro demographic destruction of whites, cuddle up to communists, want to strip peoples right to self-defense, brain washing children, anti-family, anti-Christian, etc. Look at the blue states They are already hell holes or becoming one.

    The crazy thing about this is that it’s most fervent supporters are college educated upper-middle and upper class whites. Who want to bring down society.and kill of lower class whites. Yeah they think they can ride it out in their mansions and hired security goons. Except this isn’t Brazil. Everyone here is armed to the teeth, it would just be a matter of time before armed gangs start preying on those dwelling in mansions and penthouses.

    If I didn’t know better I’d say the Left is a death cult.

    • Rwc: While many Americans are armed, most of those are not organized in any legitimate fashion. Those who advocate doing so – in the form of a militia, for example – are mostly feds. And those militias that do exist are either harassed and arrested by the feds or merely make fools of themselves running around in the woods as if they’re frontiersmen fighting against the redcoats.

      I read a lot of TEOTWAKI fiction, mostly for relaxation and escapism but also for ideas. Not for purchasing this or that magic gun, but for general themes. Some of them, when considered in conjunction with my online reading, common sense, and discussion with a very few trusted others, make sense to me. Given that bridges are natural places to ambush or blockade or destroy as needed to control population movement and territory, all things being equal, I’d rather be West of the Mississippi.

      Existing organization, not merely weapons, is crucial to taking advantage of any anarchy and societal collapse. Drug gangs and motorcycle groups and any overlap between them are in prime position for this, with existing networks and contacts and informers. And they have plenty of guns, and many of their foot soldiers were trained by the US military, which they deliberately joined to acquire offensive capabilities for their gang.

      I will agree that it’s highly questionable just how well the managerial elite will survive any societal breakdown, but many of them already have strategies and bolt holes. And since they are managing much of the breakdown, already, they will be the first to know when it’s getting out of their control and they’ll be the first to go to ground. I’d love to think that armed, organized patriots would ultimately prevail, but just don’t see that. Even after all those proverbial gun owners decide that being called racist perhaps isn’t all that terrible, when compared to the imminent destruction of their families and their lives, there just isn’t the training and organization and mindset necessary. Relying on that ‘silent majority’ of anything is very shaky ground.

      • The Deep State does not fear insurgent organizations. They have massive resources for surveillance & covert infiltration of these groups, and the means to destroy any identified target. What they do fear is the bolt from the blue, especially when it’s focused on a priority link in the chain. That kind of thing undermines the image of total control and creates doubt. And they can weather a few hits without much impact, but if lightning starts striking everywhere all the time, that’s a whole nutha kettle of fish.

        • In a major breakdown, the (former) elite would likely find out quickly that their former associates had become their own worst enemies. Remember the old saying “The Revolution eats its own?” There is no honor among thieves, and I conjecture that those in the shadows are knaves of the first order.

        • Bill – Thanks for the recommendation; I’ll definitely take a look at it, although we already have an area in mind.

      • 3g4me, Spencer Quinn’s new book, “Charity’s Blade” is excellent. I think that you might like it. The protagonist is a woman, which is unusual for WN fiction. It’s great.

        Bill, Skousen’s book is a significant reason why I live where I do now. Montana became somewhat less attractive when I learned of all the nuclear missiles siloed there.

        • Line – You know, I’m pretty certain I ordered that book months ago, and then forgot about it. I never received my copy although I’m almost positive I paid for it. Have to check that out.

          I’ve read a great deal about the northwestern states, and although I’d be willing to move to that area, my husband isn’t, for various reasons. I think there will have to be many small nodes, various communities, which can later (when circumstances are more fortuitous) spread out and combine with others. Surviving is goin to be a long and difficult process.

  10. https://www.chroniclesmagazine.org/anarcho-tyranny-u-s-a-5/

    One of Francis’s articles specifically about anarchotyranny spends a lot of time on a (probably) Jewish pedophile name Jacobson who also drove a school bus. He thinks Jacobson, since he denied ever touching kids, is therefore one of these honest, law-abiding citizens entrapped by the tyranny part of anarchotyranny.

    While it is certainly true that his point is well made in that entrapping Jacobson was a lot easier than going after the producers of said child porn, they did, in fact, keep this pedo away from our children whom the state employed in ferrying children to and from state mandated school. One arm of the state was procuring children for this pedo while another arm of the state was going after him for being a pedo.

    The seat-belt racket is just a much better example, along with all the felons being mass paroled. The reason we have no money for prisons is all the money is being spent on cops (and other massively bloated government agencies to include the BOP). All of the diversity hires all need managers, equipment, office space and make the same salary as real police officers. For the sake of diversity, they are the first promoted. The result is bloated and ineffectual police departments who harass citizens while the criminal class goes largely unmolested. You would think with all these cops we have, they could shut down all of these large open-air drug markets littering our cities. But that sounds too much like work, I guess.

    • Tars – My husband was just noting to me that the triple-amputee vet who was charged with financial irregularities for trying to build a border wall had his home raided by 18 armed officers from . . . the US postal service. Whereas my husband’s employer cannot get even one post office official interested in theft or loss of hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of precious metals sent via said post office, a theoretically non-government agency. Not to mention that said post office, not merely Homeland Security, was one of those ‘not federal’ entities purchasing hundreds of thousands of rounds of ammo over the past decade, working to exacerbate the ammo shortage.

      So no worries, when the your door gets bashed in at 2 AM by armed agents of the state, you can relax because it will be ‘the post office’ killing your dog and dragging you away.

  11. Just a quick check with the commenters about the meaning of “liberal democracy.” Terms like this, and “cultural marxism,” are frequently invoked to explain a lot but the definitions are often murky.

    I think of “liberal democracy” as 51+% votes takes all, everyone in the country (or world) is encouraged to vote, and the politicians and mass media collude to make every issue a morality play where the most apparently compassionate politician is the winner.

    I searched Z’s archives and this post seemed most relevant: https://thezman.com/wordpress/?p=23469

    How accurate is my definition?

    • IMO. People tend to breeze past the “liberal” part of liberal-democracy.

      Liberalism – is the the enlightenment idea that people should be freed (liberated) from oppression to reach their potential for progress and good. Originally that oppression was Autocracy – unrestrained rulers – but then morphed to include religion and culture and economics and now biology itself.

      In that framework, liberal-democracy becomes a mass movement to actuate such “liberation”. It’s a pseudo religious movement that inevitably leads to war against nature. Which sounds like a big stretch – but it explains why we are at the point we’re at now, why the left always talks about the arc of history and liberating people and such. And also why conservatism is a failure – it accepts the broad premises of liberal-democracy, but seeks to stop before the end of the road is reached.


      • BTW that pseudo religious element is also revealed by conservatives who engage in idolatry of the constitution. They describe it, and the mythical republic, in terms of religious reverence. You’ll even see a lot of them flat out state that it was inspired by God and that current failures are caused by a deviation from the inspired document. Their idol hasn’t failed the people, the people have failed the idol.

        An especially bizarre aspect of this cult is that the people engaging in it usually describe themselves as Christians. But the idolatry is absolutely anti Christian.

      • Liberation is another word for salvation, which will lead us back to a mythical Paradise.

    • Technically, there is no difference between illiberal and liberal democracy, considering that the countries usually considered as illiberal democracies are Hungary or Russia. Just like in liberal democracies, the system is winner-take all.
      The real difference is in culture. The system itself (democracy) is still flawed and will lead to degeneracy and collapse unless reined in by undemocratic rulers and culture. That’s where subversives usually step in to slowly remove the “il” from illiberal.

  12. The world does, in fact, operate by immutable laws. The laws of Nature, that is. Now, if by “law” you mean “Man’s law,” then all bets are off. Man’s laws are entirely the whim of his own creation. As I (and much wiser men going back centuries) have often tried to illustrate, there is an unbridgeable gulf between our mental world, sometimes called the ideal or (confusingly), the “real” (Platonic), versus the outside world, empirical, objective reality, or (again, confusingly), the “apparent.” In the mental realm, there are few if any impediments to create structures: whether magical castles in the air, a well-reasoned (and proven by real world experience) scientific theory, and everything in between. If you accept the above claims, it’s easy to see why politics is such a muddle. It’s a battle of ideas, most of which are poorly grounded in reality.

    A (mis-) quote from Nietzsche (or one of his critics) is in order. Protestantism was the halfway stop from Catholicism to outright Atheism. The newly minted Protestants rejected some of the old Church’s tenets, but most importantly, they rejected the central authority of the Papacy. Nietzsche argued that, having abandoned Christianity, Europe (19th century) still had Christian morality (for better or worse). But even that rapidly becomes passe. No sense listening to those silly Lutheran ministers. Darwin said that Man is descended from ape-line ancestor. He and others showed that Man is inherently unequal. Let’s make up our own new, Progressive laws. But even that must eventually be cast off. Don’t like even those newer laws? To hell with them. Do you own thing, man. Never mind the old religions; after all, if we can abrogate man’s laws, why not Nature’s?. After all, it’s racist and we can’t have that! Welcome to the last stop on the line: nihilism, the rejection of all values.

  13. “Challenging the premise of liberal democracy.”

    I don’t imagine it’s a matter of conscious choice by the system’s disaffected. An emergent property sufficient to challenge the premise could be mass impoverishment that results from the properties, methods and interfaces of the system. This isn’t something to be wished for as the suffering would be immense. But as an impoverished people, by necessity, begin, in a thousand ad hoc ways, to see to their survival, the premise, of necessity, may evolve to a new structure of values on which social relations are based.

    The Z man hints at, though doesn’t recommend, the dark side that accompanies revolutions after which the revolutionaries are dispensed with, each Robespierre apparently succeeded by a Napoleon.

    • Collapse yes, but not the form of impoverishment that you surmise will be necessary to get Normie off the couch. We’re not talking children with Biafra bellies bulging out, but rather rationing only one Starbucks latte per week and then the wailing & knashing of teeth will grow to 155 dB overnight. Then it will get interesting, as the DC corruptocrats start envisioning another Jan 6th, the day that lives in their infamy. That is when the Jackboots will start to make their presence known. Don’t be in a city when it starts.

      • My latte? He!!, I might have to ki!! somebody in the parking lot for their toilet paper

  14. Masculine republics give way to feminine democracies and feminine democracies give way to tyranny. Aristotle.

    Entering tyranny phase now.

    • David, can we break the cycle? I once asked a friend of mine, who knows Spengler really well, that if we can apprehend the natural life cycle of a civilization, can we use our brains to break out the cycle? Unfortunately, his answer was, “No.”

      I guess in this limited sense I am an optimist. I say, “Maybe.”

      • I honestly don’t think there’s much chance. The Left is oblivious and so is much of the normie Right. Those on the Right who do sense something amiss have no idea what to do about it and would likely do the wrong thing even if they had the power to do something.

        Seriously, consult some of the things this side of the political aisle has advanced as solutions: cutting the department of education, banning teachers unions, telling poor white women to become baby factories to out breed the third world, buying guns, waiting for hyperinflation. It’s one long list of impractical suggestions and endless counter signalling of useful efforts.

        One side is evil, and the other side lacks cognitive talent. Only a miracle in the form of a genius dictator who just so happens to have the right temperament, historical understanding, and loyalty to the normie masses could turn this thing around now. How likely is that? Alternatively, partition could work … but then the counter-signalling from old boomers unwilling to move on from their childhoods but totally willing to drag down the younger generations just so they can die in peace.

        • Jeesh. Who’s side are you on, ND. So we’re defeated even before a shot is fired.

          Nothing wrong with brainstorming, unless you’re a saboteur. We don’t need your defeatist attitude over here. Go peddle your white flags over on the other side.

    • “What would a victorious right wing look like?”

      Think of it always, speak of it never.

    • Cut government spending by 50%.
      Close half of all government agencies.
      Term limits.

      Half the number of congressman.
      Freeze immigration.
      Balanced budget.

      One page tax code.
      Freedom of association.
      Eliminate all affirmative action programs, quotas.

      Voter ID requirements. No voting by mail.
      Restrict voting rights to citizens who pay taxes, graduated HS and pass basic civics test.

      Ban teacher unions. School taxes provided to parents, not education bureaucracy. Close Federal Department of Education.

        • Dramatically reducing the size of government won’t ever happen. It’s a weird YT fantasy. Instead of wasting time on such, people should think of how to use the government to advance the interests of our people. That is a possibility.

          • ” Dramatically reducing the size of government won’t ever happen.”

            Oh but it will be reduced, once our paper money devolves into a cheaper alternative of toilet paper. An imperial collapse is occurring right now. The big question will be what to do with the remains after it occurs and no one alive can deny it.

            Either the Government returns to a much less expensive, and by necessity, a size that’s probably 10% of what it is right now, or if the people can’t agree upon that, then there will be a divorce among the states. I don’t think there will be much of a civil war, as the Federal Government will have very little resources left to resist the desires of many exiting states. We’re well into the process of watching the Soviet Union Dissolution #2.

          • Coalclinker. No offense, but that is pure ahistorical fantasy.

            I like the fantasy and wish it would happen but it won’t. There’s literally no precedent for that happening absent a complete collapse into anarchy. Which won’t happen in our lifetimes.

          • “Oh but it will be reduced, once our paper money devolves into a cheaper alternative of toilet paper.”

            That’s a ridiculous fantasy common to the right — hyperinflation, systemic collapse, etc. Hyperinflation is nonsense. Only in desperately third world countries with no human capital like Zimbabwe or in countries after a massive world war does that ever happen. In all likelihood, there are more than enough natural resources on this continent to keep things from ever getting that bad, at least within your lifetime, even if living standards dramatically fall over the coming decades.

            Government is about power, not money. Sure, less money may be spent on NASA in the future, but you can forget about the ruling coalition downsizing themselves and their levers of power. They’ll fund them even at your expense; they’ll take your home, your bank accounts, your paycheck … So, no. Government is definitely not shrinking in any way that counts. That’s a fantasy.

      • John’s answer is excellent but I want to contrast his approach with mine.

        John wants to improve the processes by which we are governed, to fine tune the government and economy.

        I confess that I get impatient with all this focus on process. Why not just say what we really want and make that the explicit highest value?

        In my case, I want a government that explicitly states that its highest purpose is the flourishing of white families. We can argue about process and economics after we explicitly state our goal.

      • That seems to me, again, to be simply accepting the framework of the current system and just tinkering with it, like conservatives always do.

        First there’s got to a separation, probably violent. It would be nice if the separation could go a long way simply through “Irish Federalism” — as many states have been simply making laws that are either contrary to Federal law or explicitly rejecting Federal law. At some point, Rome ceases to matter to the provinces, and Rome doesn’t have to resources anymore to extend its power. Rome, er, Washington still showers largesse on its loyal governors and apparatchiks, but as they are busily devaluing that currency, how long before a state says, “Oh, what, another quadrillion dollars of monopoly money? No, thanks.”?

        After that, a new government with new rules. Some of them may be similar to what you list above, but quibbling about your new Constitution when you’re still under the thumb of the old regime is the very definition of counting your chickens before they hatch.

        “The only way forward is a right-wing radicalism that challenges the premise of liberal democracy and perhaps the Enlightenment assumption upon which it rests.”

      • None of that will happen. Democrats and their constituents aren’t voting to limit their economic prosperity and representation. Reading this list is a blackpill. Conservative normies have zero understanding of power and how to exercise it. It’s all a laundry list of demands without practical consideration, much like Donald Trump’s Twitter account “Law and Order!”

        Freedom of Association means envious blacks aren’t included in things invented by other races, so that will never pass. They’ll be protests and accusations of racism the first time a black woman isn’t admitted into your club. The left has all the lawyers, money, government and organization. They’ll steamroll your conservative normie efforts.

        Abolishing teachers unions will never happen. They are mostly democrats, and they are organized. There isn’t enough support for it in the population anyway because many teachers live in Red districts. Even if it occurred, nothing will come out of it because no restraint on what is taught in the classroom will follow.

        Conservatives don’t believe in “big gubmint” so the left monopolizes it. Being more organized and aggressive, they’ll determine what books are taught in your children’s schools. They control the publishing houses and most of the intellectual talent writing our history. That’s not an issue that can be solved by banning teachers unions.

        “Voter ID requirements. No voting by mail.”

        Irrelevant after the next amnesty. Just like in California, the other side will have a permanent majority.

        “Restrict voting rights to citizens who pay taxes, graduated HS and pass basic civics test.”

        That will never happen due to the doctrine of disparate impact. Accusations of racism will fly the moment more Whites pass your test than blacks or immigrants. Congress will also never pass those things because there are more than enough Mitt Romneys and Liz Cheneys to shoot it down, and the democrat’s federal judiciary would strike the bill down anyway.

        There isn’t the will or the power to pass a constitutional amendment overturning the Supreme Court. It’s all irrelevant anyway. There are more than enough non-Whites already present in the population (an outright majority under the age of 12) to vote down every one of your proposals. Any civics test would be irrelevant in such a country.

        “Cut government spending by 50%.
        Close half of all government agencies.
        Term limits.”

        Embarrassing nonsense. The public would vote out any Republican Party that even tried it. Social services are wildly popular. Government employees would pump countless billions into democrat party campaigns. Term limits would likely require a constitutional amendment, and the last one took something like 200 years to pass.

        “Half the number of congressman.
        Freeze immigration.
        Balanced budget.”

        Nobody voluntarily surrenders their own power. So, that’s not going anywhere. In any case, the UK Parliament has even more members than the US Congress and they manage. That leads me to believe this isn’t an issue with numbers.

        We’re not freezing immigration because the ruling class doesn’t want it (the first act of the new congress was led by a GOP effort to increase H1B visas — passed unanimously). The budget can’t be balanced due to demographics — we pay blacks not to riot by giving them government jobs and welfare, so cutting off their money would mean mass crime and urban rioting.

        “One page tax code.
        Freedom of association.
        Eliminate all affirmative action programs, quotas.”

        Lol. Conservatives will never change. This is nonsense from the Ron Paul campaign / Rush Limbaugh from the 90s. How do you imagine a republican running on this platform would fare in a general election? How did Ron Paul do in the primary? Did Rush Limbaugh ever win a battle in the culture war?

        Further, the tax code isn’t really that complicated if you have a moderate income like the vast majority of the population. It’s complicated mainly for large corporations. They can afford attorneys to go through it. I’m not shedding any tears. Changes can be made, but let’s not pretend in the era of online tax programs that this is a pressing issue for most republican voters.

      • John Wayne: tl;dr: An autocratic, hierarchical, traditionalist nation populated by and dedicated to White people and their future.

    • Most likely an expulsion of ((())), and all non-Europeans. Strict litmus test to detect subversive Europeans and subsequent expulsion of them too. Brutal crushing of any and all leftist organization. Limited women’s rights. Likely decreased material prosperity. State religion of Christianity with leaders appointed by the State. Tax disadvantages and fewer social services for those who do not reproduce. Etc.

      Will any of this ever happen? Probably not of our own accord. I believe we are more likely to be forced into action when the violence of non whites becomes extreme. They really hate us, at least here in Canada, particularly those who arrived after 2010 or so.

      • TINVOWOOT There Is No Voting Our Way Out of This

        Maus, forgive me if I’m mistaken, but I thought that you were a civic nationalist who wanted to see the current order correct itself. Like Brimelow or Derbyshire, Peace Be Upon Them.

        How would you like to see all this work itself out?

  15. I cannot understand the left anymore frankly, they are like a whole different species, they hate the govt, but dont understand that they keep handing more and more power to govt expecting the socialist utopia, hate themselves and as a consequence project this onto the world, are the most entitled people on earth, yet see oppression in literally anything they disagree with and completely deny any sense of objective reality whilst at the same time rejecting anyone elses reality!

    In essence the left of today are just ego centric children, never personally responsible, always victims, theyve been taught that tantrums get them attention and so tantrum constantly and live superficial, affirmation requiring lives, spending more time fixing selfies to tolerate themselves than looking at the real causes of their problems, they just dont like themselves! This is why the left is largely female driven, why its so superficial, why everything they do has to be collectively acknowledged, they are entirely subjective beings who have never really been taught to understand one very simple concept which couldve prevented all of this, their opinions of themselves should have always been the most important!

    • They don’t hate gov., they hate your gov., it represented the old ways.
      The promotion of irresponsibly is a tactic to weaken your society, to make a way for theirs.
      Evil is a psychological condition that should have been smacked out of them as children and dose of good manners taught.

    • At this point, the so-called radical right is anyone (which is a lot of people) who don’t believe anything or care one iota about anything the Left or their organs of The Imperial State have to say anymore. I think that’s one reason they really hate the so-called Right nowadays. The Left doesn’t realize it, but they’re slowing sliding onto what many call the ash heap of history.

    • Pinochet was great, but Chile ended at the same destination as everybody else in the West. He didn’t fix the system enough to be able to select a suitable successor. Russia has the same problem. Hungary is even more fragile.

      • Yeah, it would seem the era of the “strongman” leader in the west is finished. The current political climate reminds me of a couple of videos that came out a few years ago. One was “Why Women Destroy Nations” by Black Pigeon Speaks (now Felix Rex), and the other is “How Women Weaken Nations (And Why Men Let Them)” by Vertigo Politix. I believe the feminization of western politics and society in general has contributed greatly to the sad situation we’re in. Have you noticed that young white women seem to be in the vanguard of most of these “progressive” causes, whether it’s animal rights or Black Lives Matter?

        • What’s new? Young white women were in the forefront of the abolitionist movement both in Britain and America in the early 19th century. So that’s ballpark 175 years. Maybe we should blame Queen Victoria for feminizing Anglo-American culture…

          • They also took away (in USA) our right to get pickled about a century ago. 🙂

      • Today Chile is overrun with Venezuelan mestizos and Haitian africans. From what I heard, you need a pass just to leave your house to go shopping, and can only leave twice a week. Despite it being one of the most heavily vaccinated countries.

        The specifics generally don’t matter; the “dark” people flee to the prosperity and social capital created by the “light” people, and destroy it.

        Any civilized “light” population capable of higher thinking seems to have the desire to destroy itself. We’ve seen this not just in the West but in Mao’s China, Cambodia, today in South Korea with the ultra low birth rate, etc.

        • Perhaps when the time comes to, er, rectify matters, the choices will be easy. Color coded, so to speak. 🙂

        • I feel like the lunacy in Chile is the WEF’s attempt at avenging Allende’s memory.

    • How do we use the principals of emergent properties to weaken and replace the current order.

      A dictator at best is a temporary solution.

    • There will be no need of a strongman. All that is required is a very weak and worthless petrodollar, and that occurrence will radically change the current state of affairs in a country that is in an advanced of imperial collapse.

      • There are two fast-tracks to a shooting Civil War 2.0, the first is an attempted nationwide firearm confiscation program, and the second is no gasoline at the pump.

        • Not really. That’s fantasy. The Right doesn’t control even state National Guard units, so you can forget about a serious conflict. The Left controls the police, military, media, finance, government, the youth, the cognitive talent …

          The party that couldn’t keep men out of the girl’s bathroom isn’t fighting any kind of civil war. Historically, that kind of thing takes lots of committed young White males. There are fewer of them in the population every day.

          If the Left tried confiscating guns, the Right would complain just like they did with gay marriage but ultimately comply, then reverse their positions a few years later and start claiming “we were always against guns.” The National Review would be writing articles with titles like “The Conservative Case for Total Gun Confiscation” claiming the democrats didn’t go far enough, that guns disproportionately hurt minorities and, therefore, democrats are the real racists for not banning them all.

          You know it’s true.

        • Would the left tempt fate by trying to starve us out so soon. No only after they feel assured of their own control, see the Ukrainians

  16. I challenge your assertion that American political conservatism has failed in the twentieth century. Instead, I’d say that it has succeeded spectacularly. At the real goal of protecting the wealth and privilege of its elite members. First against the failure and near collapse of the capitalist system in the early 30s. Then against the socialist backlash within the country. Then against foreign communism and finally against modern progressivism.

    Conserving their privilege and wealth has been their core value and only concern all along.

    Every other issue they championed over the years, religious freedom, states rights, pro life – whatever has been marketing to get the rubes to go along with the core mission. And then to be abandoned as soon as they got the protection are tax cut that they wanted. Somewhere along the way they realized that they didn’t even have to give the rubes a few crumbs on the issues they cared about. Better to keep the issue raw to rile up “their” voters with the promise of success by voting harder next time. (For what it’s worth, the dems do this too, just not as blatantly as the reps). Then, in the late 90s (or so) a new equilibrium was reached with the dems wherein the dems culturekampf would remain unchallenged as would the elites wealth and privilege.

    • Was Buchanan, Francis, Sailer, and Derbyshire in on the Great Con? How did they keep their evil covert machinations secret for so long? And if they succeeded so well, why did they not retire to live pampered lives of luxury among the privileged wealthy in the Hamptons?

      Whining about imagined betrayal is not a solution to anything, but rather it’s just a convenient excuse for self-pity. However we got here, the fact remains that there is no cavalry coming to save us. Hard times, hard choices, and hard work lie ahead. If we’re going to expend energy yakking, why not focus on education that leads to a realistic solution?

      • Was Buchanan, Francis, Sailer, and Derbyshire in on the Great Con?

        In on it, or victims of it.
        Doesn’t really matter does it?

        A lot of people don’t want to acknowledge that the American Dream (or delusion) from before the revolution was coming to the new world to get rich quick. That more than a desire for freedom or liberty is what motivated most people to come here in the first place. It’s really what motivated the founders to fight the revolution and install the constitution. It’s what led to exponential growth and dominance.

        The desire to get rich quick, remains a key component of American culture and identity. Much more so that ethnic, let alone racial, identity.

        • All of what you just wrote can be true, and still the underlying problem exists and will not go away until you stop whining and choose to roll up your sleeves. If you need to blame dead people for your distress in order to get motivated, then so be it. But get motivated you must.

          • I’m not whining. I’m point8ng out reality.

            Which is that the Republican establishment didn’t fail. They got what they wanted and screwed us in doing so.

            Admitting that you lost a match isn’t whining – it’s an important step toward analyzing why you lost and learning from the failure.

          • Get motivated to do what exactly? Vote harder? Out breed the third world? Buy a gun? Hunker down in local communities? I’ve heard all of these red herrings before and they aren’t practical solutions. Naming the problem is the first step towards a solution, and that is exactly what the poster did. It’s useless to delude yourself into thinking that all you have to do is “roll up your sleeves” and “do something.” Do what and how?

    • Pro life is a joke, it’s the one issue that conservatives are “allowed” to pursue. Even if they accidentally succeeded and made abortion illegal, it would just cause the African and mestizo population to explode in size and give Dems more votes.

      • I respect the dedication of the pro-life movement but I can’t help but laugh when some young female pro-lifer is distraught about aborted black babies. Ma’am, the world is now a safer place for you.

      • I agree. But here’s the thing about it. The proliferation people have been a key component of the Republican coalition for decades. The reps would be a rump without their numbers and energy. And what have they gotten for all the decades of dedication? Not shit.

        The Republican establishment couldn’t even bring themselves to give that constituency a symbolic victory in defunding PP – which wouldn’t have made a damn difference in reality but they wouldn’t even do that.

        Which tells you what working with the Republican establishment will get you, even if you don’t support the prolife position.

      • I was an Evangelical before I stopped and asked myself who it was that I was worshipping. With the way things are now, bringing kids into it is insane. A good portion of the Chinese poulation seems to agree, which is why their government’s lifting of their one-child policy won’t make any difference.

    • Basically everything done in this country for decades has been a failure, or we wouldn’t be in the shape we are now. Eventually most institutions will collapse, and only then can any alternatives be made to reconstruct a dying society.

  17. Great article at Taki! I continue to be stunned that heresy such as this can be published on a relatively mainstream blog. But since you’ve broken the taboo, allow me to push the envelope.

    Yes, the societal dysfunction that you reference in the article is systemic, and in the main is also an emergent phenomenon as opposed to an arch villain or cabal driven caper. The analogy I prefer is a societal cancer that, if left unchecked, leads to an early & painful death. And then the next question is what to do about it.

    Can we talk our way out of this disease? Rally a remedial movement of the sane.
    Can we vote our way out? Even assuming non-fraudulent elections, a fools errand.
    Can we fight our way back to sanity? 1776 redux anyone? Lots of dead bodies.
    Can we secede & partition? Even more dead bodies, and most of them innocents.
    If a collapse is inevitable, sooner is better. Higher bottom. Just sayin’.

    • “Can we secede & partition? Even more dead bodies, and most of them innocents.”

      We don’t know that. Doomsaying like this is why nothing is ever accomplished. Every time we think about it, we’ve got somebody throwing water on the fire discouraging others. How exactly are those people qualified to make such statements? Where is their track record of success by which to judge others?

      Meanwhile, we’ve got a nascent secession movement that could easily go national over in Idaho. Stop counter signalling people who, unlike others, are actually doing something.

      “If a collapse is inevitable, sooner is better. Higher bottom.”

      This is exactly the kind of attitude we don’t need: excuses to do nothing, which is all too common on the Right. “Since I don’t want to do anything, and I will discourage others who do, let’s all sit back and do nothing until the apocalypse arrives.” No thanks. We don’t need that. It’s unproductive and discourages others who may actually have a solution from pursing it.

      • “We don’t know that.”

        You may want to do a little reading on this little known episode in our history known as the American Civil War of 1860-1864, in which over 600,000 good & hard men died from both sides and more than 3 times that many were grievously wounded. It was mostly about the Southern States attempting to secede from the Union States.

        And as to your other point about “doing nothing,” I guess you are new here and haven’t been keeping up with my prior posts. Go back and read the archives in regard to my series on how to survive & fight back in this Brave New World of America.

        • “You may want to do a little reading on this little known episode in our history known as the American Civil War of 1860-1864”

          What a ridiculous response. Comparing an age before indoor toilets and electricity were common to the current age doesn’t make any sense.

          “I guess you are new here and haven’t been keeping up with my prior posts. Go back and read the archives”

          I’ve been here for years under countless names. I don’t need to read anything you’ve written. I’m sure it will be equally as unimpressive as what I’ve just read. Anyone who shoots down useful ideas “because Civil War” isn’t worth taking seriously.


Comments are closed.