Alternative Authority

Starting in the 1990’s the neocons started to talk about conservatism as a process, a means justifies the ends approach to politics. This was not a change in how conservatism defined itself but it was a change in how it sold itself. You were supposed to support conservatives in order to achieve certain ends, like rolling back abortion laws and curtailing the welfare state. By the Bush years, this means justifies the end claim was front and center in the pitch from neoconservatives.

The reason for this, of course, is millions of conservatives had voted for Bush and the Republicans thinking they would do what they promised. The GOP had both house of Congress and the White House. They expected conservative governance. Instead, they got Lyndon Johnson. They had to accept this result, you see, because conservatism is a process, not a set of end results. As long as conservatives were defending the process, people needed to shut up and be happy.

The main reason for this rhetorical sleight of hand was to trick rank and file conservatives into supporting a president that was the opposite of what conservatives expected from a conservative president. The neocons wanted to continue their bloody war against Islam and they needed a second term from Bush. In the 2000’s, they had started to infest the other side of the political class but the take over of the foreign policy establishment was not complete.

This was possible because of a flaw within conservatism. From the beginning, the Buckley people focused on defending the constitutional order. They were the guys talking about interpreting the Constitution as written. They were defending the system against both distortions and changes from the Left. They magnanimously accepted adverse results as long as the constitutional order was followed. This fetish for defending process is what the neocons exploited.

This points to a much larger problem with conservatism. They were never willing to appeal to authority to justify their claims. The closest they got was originalism in the law, which claimed the written constitution as authority. This has two problems. One was that the Left rejected this claim in favor of a living constitution. The other is the Left kept tinkering with document through judicial rulings which became precedents. The result of originalism was a defense of left-wing gains in court.

This is why conservatism is in collapse. In fact, it is fair to say that conservatism is dead as hardly anyone bothers with the term. The only people using the term are those still working the hustle on their aging donor class. Otherwise, the only people considered to be on the Right use the term is when criticizing the old conservative movement for not having conserved anything. It turns out that winning the process war meant nothing to those conservative constituencies.

The elephant in the room is authority. Fundamental to any human organization is a clear understanding as to who decides. Iran is an Islamic state with laws based in the sect of the ruling class. It is the religious elite that is the ultimate decider. The Russian people are the leaders of the Russian Federation and Vladimir Putin is the leader of the Russian people, so he is the final authority in the Russian Federation. This is clear to everyone who lives within the Russian Federation.

In the case of Iran, authority for this arrangement, the thing that legitimizes it in the minds of the people, is the Koran and their religious traditions. The text of their holy book, the traditions of their people and the moral hierarchy is the authority for their political arrangements. In the Russian Federation, it is the long history of these people and their relationship to one another that forms the basis of authority. Its perseverance through communism is proof of this natural order.

This is where we see “common good conservatism” trying to fill the void left by the collapse of Buckley conservatism and the departure of neoconservatism. They want to move away from individual rights as the center piece of conservatism toward a vague sense of collective interests. Instead of focusing on what provides the individual with the least amount of government coercion, they want to focus on what provides the most amount of common good.

In simple terms, disputes over rights will be decided in favor of the interests of society as a whole, rather than abstract principles about individual liberty. If someone complains about prayer in school, the courts should ignore their complaint because prayer in school provides more social benefit than that one person’s desire to be free of the religious sentiments of the community. Homosexual marriage would be banned, because it harms marriage, which harms society.

This may sound good and feel like a step in the dissident direction, but it suffers from the same defect as Buckley conservatism. That is, there is little mention of who decides and upon what authority they make these decisions. Some talk about the Church providing authority and others mention the administrative state. Mostly this is just a way to avoid speaking directly to the issue of authority. It is just assumed that once people think in terms of the common good, everything falls into place.

This is the same error conservatives have always made. Their chanting of the phrase “ideas have consequences” was mostly about the belief that all they had to do was win the argument and the rest would take care of itself. History makes clear that force and determination can conquer the soundest logic. The Bolshevik program was nonsensical and dangerous, but they wanted it more so they carried the day and controlled Russia for three quarters of a century.

Human society is based around a series of questions. Who we are? What are the rules that define us? Who decides? What is the process for enforcing the rules? It is only the last question that conservatives bothered to answer, which left the other questions to whoever wanted to answer them. This is why conservatism failed and any alternative will fail if it refuses to address the questions that come before debating the process by which rules are enforced.

The great trick of liberal democracy is in convincing people it exists. The narrow elite that controls Western societies decides because they control the managerial class, which in turn controls the administrative state. Their authority rests on their will to power and the delusions of the people, who steadfastly insist they decide public policy through the ballot box. It is a devilish trick by a devilish people, but until an alternative questions this arrangement directly, it will persist.


If you like my work and wish to kick in a few bucks, you can buy me a beer. You can sign up for a SubscribeStar subscription and get some extra content. You can donate via PayPal. My crypto addresses are here for those who prefer that option. You can send gold bars to: Z Media LLC P.O. Box 432 Cockeysville, MD 21030-0432. Thank you for your support!


Promotions: We have a new addition to the list. Havamal Soap Works is the maker of natural, handmade soap and bath products. If you are looking to reduce the volume of man-made chemicals in your life, all-natural personal products are a good start. If you use this link you get 15% off of your purchase.

The good folks at Alaska Chaga are offering a ten percent discount to readers of this site. You just click on the this link and they take care of the rest. About a year ago they sent me some of their stuff. Up until that point, I had never heard of chaga, but I gave a try and it is very good. It is a tea, but it has a mild flavor. It’s autumn here in Lagos, so it is my daily beverage now.

Minter & Richter Designs makes high-quality, hand-made by one guy in Boston, titanium wedding rings for men and women and they are now offering readers a fifteen percent discount on purchases if you use this link. If you are headed to Boston, they are also offering my readers 20% off their 5-star rated Airbnb.  Just email them directly to book at sales@minterandrichterdesigns.com.


149 Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Dinothedoxie
Dinothedoxie
2 years ago

The fundamental problem for American conservatism originates with the nation’s founding.

And by founding I mean the reason that people immigrated here, not the theory behind the constitution. People came here for two reasons. First to get rich and quick. Secondly to build or later live in a godly community. The latter impulse has been completely subverted by progressives.

So the only things for American conservatives to conserve are material prosperity and progressive advances.

3g4me
3g4me
2 years ago

Totally off topic Zman, and I know this isn’t really your purview, but: There have been about a dozen highly suspicious fires at US food producers/warehouses over the past 4-6 weeks. There have been some in Europe as well, and some on fertilizer plants both there and in America, but the majority of the fires have been in the US. Potato processing plants in Maine and Oregon, Taylor and Azure Farms, etc. Just added tonight (and reported on by Tucker Carlson – my husband was watching him online) – plane crashed into General Mills warehouse in Georgia. Highly coordinated coincidences… Read more »

Drew
Drew
2 years ago

“Nomen est omen.”

-Roman saying

IAmTheWalrus
IAmTheWalrus
2 years ago

Speaking of process fetishism: Is the 22nd Amendment long for this world? I could see some kind of “foreign policy” emergency that puts Obama back in there in 2024. During his reign there were those who commented on his diffidence i.e. laziness when it came to the “work” part of the POTUS job description, which mainly consists of cajoling Senators on the phone (Bill Clinton was a famously “hard worker” by this metric). But running as the outside-the-box “black FDR” might be the kindling of motivation this guy needs to light a fire under his Hawaiian keister. The project of… Read more »

trumpton
trumpton
2 years ago

Talking of needing to develop alternative authorities and the lying liars from yesterday.

Here is a clip of the Aussie PM and Health minister saying any side effects from the jabs are ultimately the person’s own fault as there was informed consent.

This in a country where no jab no job was an official policy.

https://nitter.net/VictoryDay_Hope/status/1516004178744819716

Seems this will be the official line as the side effect numbers become larger and larger.

How are these cocksuckers not strung up?

The Wild Geese Howard
The Wild Geese Howard
Reply to  trumpton
2 years ago

My gut told me they were going to do this precise flip-flop as the true nature of the jabs was revealed.

Similar statements are being made by some sort of German corporation.

Steve
Steve
Reply to  The Wild Geese Howard
2 years ago

But of course. I’m surprised they went for this get out clause so quickly. I expected a few more years at least of “young athletes have always died of heart attacks” or “rising sea levels lead to myocarditis”. I still have a sneaky feeling that no excuse will save these people from the noose.

Hokkoda
Member
Reply to  The Wild Geese Howard
2 years ago

They’ll wind up blaming the side effects on “long Covid”…

Oh, you had a heart attack jogging at the age of 27 with no prior health problems or family history? Two days after the shot? Must be “long Covid”…

Bartleby the Scrivner
Bartleby the Scrivner
Reply to  trumpton
2 years ago

Give it time.

As I’ve said before, when you give people nothing to lose, they act like they have nothing to lose.

Vizzini
Member
2 years ago

Currently in a Pennsylvania public school, an afternoon Satan Club is trying to get approval. The school board has voted it down, but the Satanists are considering legal action and with the processes that exist, it is hard to see how the Satanists’ argument can be contested: “Members from the Satanic Temple said the debate is far from over and said they’re considering legal action. “The Satanic Temple’s co-founder says the school board does not have the authority to decide which religious organizations can hold after-school clubs.” https://www.nbc29.com/2022/04/21/after-school-satan-club-voted-down-by-school-board/ This is just the same thing decades down the line from cases… Read more »

Vizzini
Member
Reply to  Vizzini
2 years ago

I just read that the local foot soldier for Satan parent that is proposing the club is named Samantha Groome.

Can you get any more on-the-nose?

Drew
Drew
Reply to  Vizzini
2 years ago

“Nomen est omen.”

-Roman saying

Compsci
Compsci
Reply to  Vizzini
2 years ago

We’ve been through this before. I’ve always suspected that these attempts to equate religious freedom with, say, the opposite—Satan worship—was not an attempt for equality, but rather an elimination of choice for either! At least that’s how it has worked out in the past as the schools have simply banned all such organizations from use of campus facilities. Can’t take “sides” now can we, but also can’t allow such use of public facilities for Satanists—not yet anyway.

Vizzini
Member
Reply to  Compsci
2 years ago

When you ban traditional religion from a sphere, you don’t get no religion, you get secular religion.

manc
manc
Reply to  Vizzini
2 years ago

“Satan Clubs in schools are a blessing of liberty.”–David French

Good ol' Rebel
Good ol' Rebel
Reply to  manc
2 years ago

Literally coming soon: “The conservative case for the Synagogue of Satan”

Steve
Steve
Reply to  Vizzini
2 years ago

Yep. All the East coast snots with bow ties who called them conservatives ever did was set up some inconsequential debate clubs. Meanwhile, the Evil Left were actually DOING things like getting their people in place, indoctrinating our kids and passing laws to allow perverts to marry each other. And nothing has changed. We still love announcing what we are going to do, rather than actually doing it. We won’t win until we fight by the same rules as the psychopaths.

Ben the Layabout
Ben the Layabout
Reply to  Vizzini
2 years ago

It may not do much to assuage the concerns of fundamental Christians here, but allow me to speak as a former teenager, if not a practicing Satanist. It is almost certain that the kids are doing it to test the limits. I suppose it’s possible that there really are Satanists (Anton Levey’s for instance) but they should be no more feared than, say, a local Wicca (Witch) coven. I would bet good money that the kids in the supposed “Satanist” club don’t know the first thing about the real thing. A more interesting, but alas purely theoretical question should be… Read more »

Dennis Roe
Dennis Roe
Reply to  Ben the Layabout
2 years ago

Go fuck yourself.

A.B Prosper
A.B Prosper
Reply to  Dennis Roe
2 years ago

He isn’t wrong on any factual level. Orthodox LaVeyan Satanism is just Ayn Rand Objectivism mixed with Crowley with imagery lifted from Gothic Witchcraft Temple of Set adds more snakes basically. Actual Satanist do come in scary evil guy mode too. I’ve met them . Yikes. That said if you want to enforce Christianity at gun point , be honest about it . Just understand that a lot of people who are Right Wing these days aren’t Christian and some of those consider to be a little hat import that we no longer need. In the eyes of many its… Read more »

Ostei Kozelskii
Member
Reply to  A.B Prosper
2 years ago

Not being a Christian is not quite the same thing as worshiping Satan. Capisce?

A.B Prosper
A.B Prosper
Reply to  A.B Prosper
2 years ago

Sure Ostei . People who actually worship Satan as a deity are typically Christians themselves . Most though do not and most are not religious at all. I don’t frankly care about it, there aren’t enough out there to make a difference though its quite concerning the elite seemed to glomed onto it or at least the trappings c.f Marina Abramović but again why should you care what people think or do. Jefferson didn’t “It does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no god. It neither picks my pocket, nor breaks my leg.”… Read more »

LineInTheSand
LineInTheSand
Reply to  Ben the Layabout
2 years ago

“If people are free to practice the religion of their choice…”

That’s the problem right there. Freedom, while good, is not the highest good.

“Freedom” is too vague a concept to base a society on. Thomas Jefferson thought “freedom” meant being a self-sufficient agrarian. NPR listeners, for example, thinks “freedom” is encouraging children to be
mutilated trannies.

We want to live in homogeneous societies. In such so communities, freedom is a secondary good.

A.B Prosper
A.B Prosper
Reply to  LineInTheSand
2 years ago

Its a sound view but trying to make it may prove pretty challenging.

Again its a scaling problem. You are not getting CONUS as there are too many grillers and non complainants

You are going to have to take by force a piece of the US, ethnically cleanse it and keep it.

It might be possible but to black pill a bit, it won’t be the West do to the drought so choose wisely.

Ostei Kozelskii
Member
Reply to  Ben the Layabout
2 years ago

Didn’t you get the point Z was making? Process (or principle) kills. If freedom of religion produces Satanism in the schools, what good is the principle?

In Whiteopia, Satanism will be expressly forbidden, and freedom of religion will be circumscribed.

LineInTheSand
LineInTheSand
Reply to  Ostei Kozelskii
2 years ago

Ostei, you made my point more effectively. Nicely done

Vizzini
Member
Reply to  Ben the Layabout
2 years ago

1. It isn’t the kids doing this, it’s parent-sponsored.

2. If it had been sponsored by kids, it should be made clear they’ve gone past the limits they’re testing.

3. “If people are free to practice the religion of their choice, no matter how odd, what business is it of mine or yours?” It’s my business because you’re chiseling cracks in my homogenous society. “I don’t have to let Satanists set up shop in my kids’ school” is a fundamental principle of mine. I feel no need to explain it or moderate it.

A.B Prosper
A.B Prosper
Reply to  Vizzini
2 years ago

How about no religion in public schools ? That is how we did it before and it worked OK

Now sure if you want a new Constitution/ If you can take the power and land go for it.

To be clear I’m not pro Satanist but I am also not pro New Christendom either . Given a Hobbesian Choice, Christianity is the only sound one but the alternatives of “no religion in public schools” or even “no public schools” are both viable.

Ostei Kozelskii
Member
2 years ago

As I see it, authority doesn’t rest on “will to power” or some amorphous “managerial class.” Instead, it springs from individual human beings, “experts” whose accomplishments justify quasi-worship. Experts gain their authority through their position in society (professor, general, CEO, prelate, artist, author, etc.), their accomplishments (books published, honorary doctorates, wealth, etc.), and their putative intelligence. The New Left rallied around authorities such as Foucault, Derrida, Lyotard, Barthes, etc., conquered society’s institutions, constituted themselves as the new authorities, and wielded that authority as a cudgel to browbeat the masses into bowing to their authority. The Right, on the other hand,… Read more »

Jack Dobson
Jack Dobson
Reply to  Ostei Kozelskii
2 years ago

This is spot-on. The post-modernists did not have to fight too hard to dominate the institutions since they had been largely abandoned about the time they arrived; the Long March really wasn’t much of a march or all that long. We are now watching the mop-up operation in the realm the Right foolishly believed mattered the most, the corporate sector. Anyone with a modicum of historical knowledge should have known true authority is vested in the intellectual class. Like politics, business also is downstream of the culture.

The Wild Geese Howard
The Wild Geese Howard
Reply to  Jack Dobson
2 years ago

The two best, most recent examples of business existing downstream from culture are the Floydian insurrection and the Coof-o-caust.

3g4me
3g4me
Reply to  Ostei Kozelskii
2 years ago

Ostei: I’d go back even further, to the ultimate moral authority. When the West abandoned every shred and echo of its Christian heritage, it fell to evil. This was prompted by those same people who demanded tolerance and acceptance and special exemptions and then provided a template for every successive group of “exceptions” to follow. These special rules and holidays trace back to the American revolution – a uncle can still marry his niece legally in Rhode Island, Washington’s nod to the Sephardic money-lenders who helped him in time of need. Anyone can challenge a human authority and prove him… Read more »

Steve
Steve
Reply to  3g4me
2 years ago

It also just how civilizations go. They start off strong and vibrant, then start to rot internally as the people who create them die off. As for Christianity, it has failed miserably. Look at how churches have behaved these last two years. They rewrote Jesus’s call to grant to Caesar only what belongs to him as “Give Caesar the whole darned thing”! I’m no fan of Islam, but the muslims I know showed far more backbone in all this than 99% of Christians. Their attitude was “force me to do things against my beliefs and I’m going to have to… Read more »

Ostei Kozelskii
Member
Reply to  Steve
2 years ago

When the pomos conquered the institutions, they conquered the churches as well. And insofar as all of the institutions and the churches fell with equal ease to pomo transgressivism, I have to believe the weakness and vulnerability were societal rather than Christian-specific.

Ostei Kozelskii
Member
Reply to  3g4me
2 years ago

Christian recrudescence and the creation of the Right canon are not mutually exclusive. In fact, they are complimentary inasmuch as the vast majority of right intellectuals were also, at least notionally, Christian. Nietzsche, obviously, is the great counter-example.

Ben the Layabout
Ben the Layabout
Reply to  3g4me
2 years ago

According to Wikipedia, “Everything which is not forbidden is allowed” is a legal maxim. So I see the point with your Dostoevsky quote.

I first heard a variation of the term applied to the sciences (apparently Quantum Mechanics).

If it’s any consolation, the laws of Nature will not be abrogated, no matter how powerful a man may be. 🙂

IAmTheWalrus
IAmTheWalrus
Reply to  Ostei Kozelskii
2 years ago

The priest-like aspect of modern experts who were more often than not thought of as dweebs and pinheads (-D. Letterman) is something to behold. I just met a street beggar today, pretty well-dressed, approaching to ask for gas money who described himself as an OB/GYN (his car got broken into; he has no office; something something). It was a throwback imposture because I think the smart set hates children now, esp. the masked & gagged younger ones, so if he wanted to keep with the times he’d have to pitch himself as a data scientist or disinformation counter-strategist. Hayek used… Read more »

c matt
c matt
Reply to  IAmTheWalrus
2 years ago

Nothing wrong with real experts. Problem is most experts aren’t.

Good ol' Rebel
Good ol' Rebel
Reply to  Ostei Kozelskii
2 years ago

Ostei said: “The Right, on the other hand, never really appealed to expert authority. Instead, authority, such as it was, was rooted in tradition, and the wisdom of the folk and the common man.” Never in my life had this been true. It might have been true back before the Vietnam war. At best, conservatives appealed to a Burkean legalism of slowing down change and following stare decisis. George Will et al did not bother to hide their disdain for the “common man” or his traditions. “Creative destruction” and “learn to code” came from the center-right in the 1990’s. By… Read more »

Ostei Kozelskii
Member
Reply to  Good ol' Rebel
2 years ago

Burke himself was the preeminent modern philosophical exponent of reliance upon grass-roots tradition and eschewing top-down nostrums for governing and shaping society. Burke believed that millions of tiny decisions made by common folk over the course of centuries produced better outcomes than eggheads coming up with “solutions” to problems in their symposia and imposing them on the common man. What’s more, Burke, along with Adam Smith, was probably the most popular conservative intellectual for the American right during the 20th century. Even many neocons made bows toward Burkean traditionalism. The neglect of Burke only occurred after the conclusion of the… Read more »

Synthetic Gold
Synthetic Gold
Reply to  Ostei Kozelskii
2 years ago

… the “Right” decided that the only things worth arguing–not fighting–for were low taxes, gun rights, and opposition to abortion. Especially opposition to abortion. Self-styled conservatives acted (and continue to act) as if abortion was the worst thing in the world, an evil without parallel. The analogy with the Holocaust industry is glaring. So no discourse or moderate position was possible toward with those who believed differently. Nobody’s making “the conservative case for abortion rights” (although they legitimately could if they weren’t blinded by ideology). Maybe even militant pro-choicers took their cue from the conservatives: if these people are so… Read more »

A.B Prosper
A.B Prosper
Reply to  Ostei Kozelskii
2 years ago

Conceptually fine but what a bizarre haphazard list. Its like you picked a bunch of random things you liked and expect everyone to respect them.

Alzaebo
Alzaebo
2 years ago

Re authority, “(Intellectuals are) easier to dupe with propaganda because it only had to include some reference to authority.” How are the smarties duped? Older than written speech, or speech itself, is another language: status. No matter how much capacity to correlate data sets one has, human social needs- gaining praise or standing, avoiding anger or contempt- come first. The intellect can be merely what tools one possesses to achieve the more primal social desires. The difference between conservatives and wokies is the milieu in which they compete in and display for status. Conservatives prefer a more masculine milieu, asking,… Read more »

OrangeFrog
OrangeFrog
2 years ago

Whilst laws are quite good for handling the transfer of a property, or dealing with murder and other serious crimes, those who follow the law to the letter are always teeing themselves up to be manipulated by wokists. As you say, they want to ‘lose magnanimously’ even as their daughter has been forced to swallow tranny agendae because of ‘following the law’. Some laws are good. But for the preservation of the healthy morals of a society, we ought to appeal not to law, but to “Because I say so.” (mark you, this requires wielding power, or convincing others you… Read more »

Stranger in a Strange Land
Stranger in a Strange Land
Reply to  OrangeFrog
2 years ago

“Because I said so”… (with a tag line) “and sit down and stfu”.
On the day those words can be uttered and actually have the intended effect – that’s when I’d know the wind has changed direction.

Paintersforms
Paintersforms
Reply to  Stranger in a Strange Land
2 years ago

The step between “yes, Master” and “because I said so” is “make me”

Mow Noname
Mow Noname
Reply to  OrangeFrog
2 years ago

The science fiction writer Larry Niven is credited with saying that some things “are illegal, but not immoral, like forgetting to feed the parking meter.” The Boy Scouts, before they became extra fake and gay, were encouraged to follow the law and work within the system to change those laws which were unjust. Unfortunately, we no longer live in a world of law. In the post-Covid / post-Trump regime, I see all attempts by our rulers to “enforce” “recommendations” “guidelines” and “mandates” (sorry, but my computer does not have enough ” “) as nothing but tyranny. My response to all… Read more »

Ben the Layabout
Ben the Layabout
Reply to  Mow Noname
2 years ago

There is also the concept [from where? Multiple traditions?] that an unjust law need not be obeyed. The Jews have a version of that: It is not a sin to refuse to pay an “unjust tax.” (I recall that from a class.) It bears repeating: All (human created) laws, morals, ethics, and so on are based upon some standard (feel free to decorate it with adjectives like “absolute” or “God’s law” if you please). But if you examine the matter honestly, you will have to agree that the standard was based at some point, upon one human being (or a… Read more »

Crabe-Tambour
Crabe-Tambour
Reply to  Mow Noname
2 years ago

Yup, we live under the Law of Rules–chickensh*t.

A.B Prosper
A.B Prosper
Reply to  Mow Noname
2 years ago

Reality 101 — Power is truth.

Reality 202 — You have only the rights that either everyone agrees on, powerful people permit or you can force people to respect

Reality 303 If you won’t take power and use it for you ends, someone else will. Power abhors a vacuum

Ostei Kozelskii
Member
Reply to  OrangeFrog
2 years ago

A willingness to break or ignore the law when necessary, is a sign of manhood. Georges Bataille, of all people, said as much. In breaking the law, one actuates the self. He is no longer limpwristedly beholden to whatever arrangements society has erected to constrain him. He crashes through the barriers and lives as a truly autonomous and whole man. Put another way, he ceases being a supine pussy. And this is why I feel a raging contempt for grown men who continue wearing the face diaper. These are not men. They are ignominious examples of how to be pathetic… Read more »

Anonymous White Male
Anonymous White Male
2 years ago

I remember the common refrain from many of the usual “conservative” champions: “That’s not who we are!” Its a shame no one actually responded, “It should be!” A knowledge of history shows that this was not a “melting pot” or a “great experiment” when this country was founded. The federal Constitution never specified who was a citizen because people were citizens of their States, not the united (notice lower case u) States. The State Constitutions provided the definition of their own citizens, which was usually White. The First Immigration and Naturalization Act also specified that only Whites could immigrate and… Read more »

Ben the Layabout
Ben the Layabout
Reply to  Anonymous White Male
2 years ago

+1. Libertarian-ish science fiction writer Kurt Vonnegut in (I think) “Starship Troopers” posited a nation where one was a Legal Resident but did not gain full rights of citizenship unless meeting certain standards (military service, maybe?) I would fully support such a world. Details to be worked out of course. For example, perhaps an acid test would be “Did this person pay significant taxes in the past year?” That might be a necessary, but not sufficient, qualification to be a Citizen who’d enjoy full rights — and responsibilities — thereof.

A.B Prosper
A.B Prosper
Reply to  Ben the Layabout
2 years ago

Starship Troopers was Robert Heinlein and his politics went from Social Democrat to Republican but always sexually libertine.

How our founding fathers restricted the franchise was sound, men only , must own property 21+

Also letting states select senators helped

We could try that but our society has grown too complex and diverse to make such a system designed for an Anglo-Saxon Yeomanry work

JR Wirth
JR Wirth
2 years ago

During each Supreme Court hearing stare decisis usually comes up as a major issue. The Senators in the room gauge the level of respect the candidate has for it. The definition of stare decisis should be – “when judges make sh t up out of thin air to please the rapacious ruling elite, which has been going on for a hundred years, and the newest judge on the bench signs on to protect the hundred year old three card monte game.” If you think about it, on the Supreme Court level, stare decisis is the antithesis of their jobs, as… Read more »

Alzaebo
Alzaebo
Reply to  JR Wirth
2 years ago

So stare decisis is the judicial way of saying, “No you can’t…because I said so.”

Here’s hoping the citizens of the free states of Whiteland and Honky use stare decisis repeatedly, with armed force.

c matt
c matt
Reply to  JR Wirth
2 years ago

That’s not exactly the co center of stare decisis. Like any other legal concept it has its uses and limits. Stability and predictability are not to be cast aside lightly, but that does not mean they can never be cast aside. Our current problem is the installation of dullards and cowards at all levels of government, SCROTUS included.

c matt
c matt
Reply to  c matt
2 years ago

That should be concept

Outdoorspro
Outdoorspro
2 years ago

“Who decides?” Slightly amusing story: Many, many years ago, while in college behind the “Redwood Curtain”, I was sitting with my then-girlfriend and a few others having deep conversation. We were talking about actions and consequences and how there ought to be some, when one of us, with that haughtiness of a college student asks, “Well, who will make those decisions?” After a moment of silence I finally said, “Fine, I’ll do it.” It got a few laughs. Flash forward about 10-15 years. My former girlfriend is a full-professor of neuroscience at a different university. We happen to meet up… Read more »

Citizen of a Silly Country
Citizen of a Silly Country
2 years ago

In the long run, authority rests on legitimacy. Raw power can only take you so far. As some point, the people need to accept that you deserve your role as ruler. A king’s authority was based on his power, but his legitimacy was based on his ability to protect the peasants from even worse people than him and his henchmen. A liberal democracy’s legitimacy is based on the willingness of individuals to submit the majority rule. But a liberal democracy runs into serious problems in a multi-racial society. If groups within the democracy don’t feel enough connection to other groups,… Read more »

Jack Dobson
Jack Dobson
Reply to  Citizen of a Silly Country
2 years ago

A successful Elite needs to be both feared and loved. Ours hasn’t been loved for a long time and the fear factor is diminishing. Legitimacy rests of both broad support and the fear of a new Elite shooting and missing the king.

Citizen of a Silly Country
Citizen of a Silly Country
Reply to  Jack Dobson
2 years ago

Our elites are relying on conservative whites’ nostalgia and patriotism for a country that no longer exists. So long as flyover whites still feel love in their heart instead of anger at the playing of the national anthem, our elites are probably safe.

What gives our elites legitimacy is the country’s past and its institutions. But that past isn’t remembered by young people and the institutions are quickly burning through their capital.

Ostei Kozelskii
Member
Reply to  Citizen of a Silly Country
2 years ago

“So long as flyover whites still feel love in their heart instead of anger at the playing of the national anthem, our elites are probably safe.”

If that’s the case–and I think it probably is–the rebellion is still a long ways off. Where I live, you’d run the risk of getting beaten for refusing to stand for the national anthem. And these are the same people who wouldn’t dream of dropping the N-bomb to describe a Hutu who raped his daughter.

Citizen of a Silly Country
Citizen of a Silly Country
Reply to  Ostei Kozelskii
2 years ago

Agree. Flyover whites are still incredibly patriotic. They can’t break the link between the country that they loved and the system that hates them.

It’s going to take a lot to make them realize that the United States of America in their mind is dead.

Ben the Layabout
Ben the Layabout
Reply to  Citizen of a Silly Country
2 years ago

Burning through the Capital….hmmmm…..has a nice ring to it. 😈

Or if you missed the pun, let me try it like this: when our national and personal moral, ethical, legal and financial capital has been burnt through, it is quite possible that Capitals and much else will be put to the torch as well.

Dennis Roe
Dennis Roe
Reply to  Jack Dobson
2 years ago

Integrity and honor is the foundation of leadership. As Americans we have to go back to JFK for any semblance of that. Schlomo shot him in the head, in broad daylight. This is who we’re dealing with, pure Evil.

Steve
Steve
Reply to  Citizen of a Silly Country
2 years ago

“A liberal democracy’s legitimacy is based on the willingness of individuals to submit the majority rule.” Absolutely, but you don’t have to live in a multi-racial society to have problems with liberal democracy. I live in Switzerland, where we are used to have referendums 4x a year on any issue we deem fit to vote on. In November 62% of my countrymen voted to deprive the unvaxxed (like me) of our rights and give the feds unlimited crisis powers till 2032. Our society is quite cohesive despite an interesting racial mix, but to me this vote was unacceptable. The Swiss… Read more »

3g4me
3g4me
Reply to  Steve
2 years ago

Steve: From outside observations, it appears Switzerland began to fall when it gave women the vote. Then follow gimmigrants, safety, compromise, group think, etc.

Steve
Steve
Reply to  3g4me
2 years ago

It may have been due to women voting. Immigration has been controlled pretty well. There are black people here but they aren’t allowed to stay apart and become ghetto-ised. Racially, things work pretty well. The problem more is that we still think in terms of national “character”. You know, those hardy Swiss William Tell types who value their referendums, etc. Unfortunately, the Swiss are no longer really Swiss; they are like every other nation. They are MODERN. That means that, whatever their culture, history and ethnic background, they have been seduced and corrupted by consumerism and leftism. Red America still… Read more »

Citizen of a Silly Country
Citizen of a Silly Country
Reply to  Steve
2 years ago

Quite true. It’s not just other races that make liberal democracy difficult, if not impossible. We see that in the US as well. Liberal whites and conservative whites have grown further and further apart culturally and religiously.

Plenty of civil wars between peoples of the same race and even ethnicity. Ireland, anyone? American Civil War? Etc.

But there’s still something especially angering about being told what to do by a guy who doesn’t look like you.

Crabe-Tambour
Crabe-Tambour
Reply to  Citizen of a Silly Country
2 years ago

Ireland’s quarrels were not over high theology; ethnicity and class were much more powerful. The “Irish Protestants” are for the most part descended from Presbyterians hailing from the Scottish Lowlands. Most of the rest are of Anglo-Irish descent, who tend to belong to the Church of Ireland (Anglican). There are also some Welsh-Irish Methodists to complete the roster. In Northern Ireland, there are two clashing nationalisms in (two-thirds of) the province of Ulster. Irish (Catholic) Republicanism, whose adherents are split into constitutional and revolutionary factions, and the Ulster Unionists, which have their splits, but are united in their desire for… Read more »

Severian
2 years ago

Hobbes said, “The power of the mighty hath no foundation, but in the opinion and belief of the people.” Ultimately ALL government is coercion, either voluntary or involuntary. The voluntary kind is voluntary because it’s hallowed by tradition, which is why guys like Sir Robert Filmer (an exact contemporary of Hobbes who wrestled with the same issues) tried to base the government on the family. But even Hobbes and Locke assumed a baseline of hallowed tradition — their version of voluntary coercion is the “social contract,” and as we’ve learned so painfully here in the Current Year, contracts (and, indeed,… Read more »

karl von hungus
karl von hungus
Reply to  Severian
2 years ago

proof that god has a sense of humour.

Alex
Alex
Reply to  Severian
2 years ago

And biology is upstream of culture so…

Chet Rollins
Chet Rollins
2 years ago

All this talk of constitutional originalism is sort of like watching a match where the two contenders are playing under different rules, with the ref brazenly taking the side of one of the contenders. It would be like two people coming into the ring, one with the thought it’s a boxing match and the other thinking it’s an MMA fight. The boxer is going to be quickly confused why the kicks and submission attempts of his opponent are not causing a disqualification, but the boxer quickly gets routed and the MMA fighter wins. Sure, the boxer can win some fights… Read more »

Alzaebo
Alzaebo
Reply to  thezman
2 years ago

So the Reconstruction Acts, then, were the original Civil Rights Act.

The black tax strikes again.
Africa always wins.

Xman
Xman
Reply to  thezman
2 years ago

Yep.

“Constitutional conservatives” who think the Constitution will protect their “rights” need to remember that this is the country that BANNED BEER. By constitutional amendment. 100% by the book… the “supreme law of the land.”

Jack Dobson
Jack Dobson
Reply to  Xman
2 years ago

For whatever reason, “Constitutional Conservatives” remind me of the Bette Davis character in WHATEVER HAPPENED TO BABY JANE.

Steve
Steve
Reply to  Xman
2 years ago

And our overlords need to remember that 70% of people ignored prohibition and drank alcohol anyway.

karl von hungus
karl von hungus
Reply to  thezman
2 years ago

war is like that. opens the door to all kinds of unexpected consequences.

Le Comte
Le Comte
Reply to  Chet Rollins
2 years ago

I asked a Japanese JJ/BJJ instructor who would win in a fight at their prime- Mike Tyson or Rickson Gracie. He said Gracie. I respect JJ very much and train in it, but, IMO, Tyson wins.

Anonymous White Male
Anonymous White Male
Reply to  Le Comte
2 years ago

You have to understand that boxing and JJ/BJJ have different rules. And given that in a competition, whoever takes down the other usually wins. There are no takedowns in boxing. There is also no kicking, joint locks, or choke holds. While the boxer could knock out his opponent, he is not trained to fight in an environment that is not punch oriented. I would have to go with the grapplers. But, in real life, if you takedown your opponent, you have to hope he doesn’t have a posse that will then begin to pummel you.

Alzaebo
Alzaebo
Reply to  Anonymous White Male
2 years ago

Jiu-jitsu, boxing jiu-jitsu (karate)?

Anta wa watashi wa Nihongo wakarimaska ne.

(“I don’t understand jack-sh*t in Japanese.”)

Eloi
Eloi
Reply to  Alzaebo
2 years ago

I would suggest there is a reason in MMA why you do not see simple “boxers”: they would get destroyed. BJJ absolutely trains to avoid punches, and then use that strike against the striker. I am not a BJJ practitioner, but I know some legitimate people involved in the discipline. It would not be even remotely close if the size of the combatants was roughly equal.

Forever Templar
Forever Templar
Reply to  Alzaebo
2 years ago

Watashi wa nihongo wakarimasen.

“Anata wa” means “you. “Watashi” means “me”, but men often say “boku” or lower class people (equivalent context of redneck) might use “ora”; “ore” if you want to sound a little badass.

karl von hungus
karl von hungus
Reply to  Anonymous White Male
2 years ago

if tyson manages to land a clean punch before being taken down, he might win. but he might miss and end up with a gracie wrapped around his arm…

Member
Reply to  karl von hungus
2 years ago

If Mike Tyson in his prime, without boxing gloves, lands a punch on another type of fighter, he probably kills him. You also have to factor in Iron Mike could revert to “Brooklyn street fighter” pretty damn quick. He, of all boxers, was mean enough and crazy enough to take on another style and win.

Wkathman
Wkathman
2 years ago

First Question: Who are we? The problem is that there is no “we.” Americans are a notoriously diverse bunch with no unifying culture or set of values. Somebody will have to carve out a “we” to even make that question answerable. The only way that such a “we” will be meaningful is if it excludes any and all who threaten the lasting cohesion of the group. And in the secular theocracy that is today’s America, EXCLUSION qualifies as one of the worst mortal sins that one can commit (unless, of course, you’re excluding White people — which is somehow perfectly… Read more »

Chet Rollins
Chet Rollins
Reply to  Wkathman
2 years ago

Looking at old school textbooks, you can see a successive diluting of what an American is. It used to be white, strictly protestant, with several different flavors of localism depending on where you lived. It slowly turned to white, deistic, with a much more monolithic culture. It then went full-on to “America is an idea” before going to it’s modern form “America is about diversity hating bad white people”

What’s interesting is America used to have a positive identity, but now has fallen to almost exclusively negative identity. Note diversity is not a positive identity, but an anti-identity.

Stranger in a Strange Land
Stranger in a Strange Land
Reply to  Chet Rollins
2 years ago

As the former WH resident was wont to say: that’s not who we are.
Never cared much about anything he said, let alone that specific statement, but always wondered if ‘that’s not who we are’, then just who are we?

Peabody
Peabody
Reply to  Stranger in a Strange Land
2 years ago

Who are we? At the moment pussified corrupt degenerate lemmings. Let the hard times roll.

Eloi
Eloi
Reply to  Wkathman
2 years ago

I agree with your assessment. Any movement needs to be based on a regional/ethnic/ religious line, which was the heart of the early American identity: regionalism with a loose confederacy between them. However, the problem with regionalism as a current model is the federal system is specifically designed to impede any regional quirk and any (white) ethnic identity as criminal.

Steve
Steve
Reply to  Eloi
2 years ago

Two years ago, I would have agreed that who we are depends on our ethnic, cultural and religious backgrounds. However, since Covid, I’ve seen people identical to me in all of these 3 areas become total Covid Nazis. By contrast, the handful of black people I know also refused to participate in the Covid hysteria, and the only doc I know who had the balls to speak out against the madness was a muslim. So today, sharing a religion, ethnic origin or culture with someone means nothing. My fellow “countrymen” are those who think in a similar way to me… Read more »

3g4me
3g4me
Reply to  Steve
2 years ago

Steve: One can find exceptions in every group. Pretending those unicorns represent the potential mean in a group is extremely unwise; making decisions and rules based on those unicorns is fatal.
Insisting that one’s ‘tribe’ is those who share beliefs/principles is what conservatards do. Ideas and principles are ever changing; race is forever.

Steve
Steve
Reply to  3g4me
2 years ago

3g, the last two years have taught me to put all theory aside and live or die by what I experience. I’ve learnt that my government hates me and that most people in my country want people like me in camps. The result of that painfully gained knowledge is that I trust only those people who think reasonably like me: they are against the death shots, they are against big government, they value liberty and they just what to be left alone by the crazies. I don’t care what those people’s skin colours are, what their ancestors did or where… Read more »

Eloi
Eloi
Reply to  Steve
2 years ago

But that would be my point – we do not share a culture or religious or ethnic background. To be clear, when I use those terms, I mean deep roots founded in a sense of “first family, then wider network.” I share no culture with the average white cellphone addict. They exist in a different region as well – they have no ties to the land; they are tied to the online world.

Ostei Kozelskii
Member
Reply to  Steve
2 years ago

There’s a bit more to this world than one’s response to Covid. As much as I loathe white Karens and Keegans, I still have much more in common with them than the Hutu who says, “Fuk dat sheet!” when told to wear the face diaper.

Steve
Steve
Reply to  Ostei Kozelskii
2 years ago

I’m not so sure, Kostei. A person’s response to the Covid hysteria is a key indicator of their personality. Rather like if they support homosexuals marrying or think Neil Young is a patriot. If their answers differ from mine, sure, we can make small talk about the weather, but we can never trust each other when another Covid type situation comes up again.

ArthurinCali
ArthurinCali
Reply to  Wkathman
2 years ago

Who are we?

Great question. As I currently sit in a healthcare office waiting room, the stark reality is that I have no connection to 99% of the people in this building. Not a common language, culture or ancestry shared between us.

The facility accepts Medi-Cal (California medical welfare) but does not accept Veteran medical insurance. Serving the “country” has less status than the noble act of procreation with abandon I guess.

This country is simply a global economic zone.

3g4me
3g4me
Reply to  ArthurinCali
2 years ago

ArthurinCali: Patel motel. Third-world shopping mall/flophouse. Plenty of similar appellations.

karl von hungus
karl von hungus
Reply to  Wkathman
2 years ago

i was born in ’56. things were very straight forward culturally until about ’68. then all hell broke loose.

Xman
Xman
2 years ago

“The narrow elite that controls Western societies decides because they control the managerial class, which in turn controls the administrative state. Their authority rests on their will to power and the delusions of the people, who steadfastly insist they decide public policy through the ballot box.” The problem is worse than that, because their power also rests upon the same Constitution that conservatives held in such high regard. The 14th Amendment gave the managerial class the ability to determine what is, or is not, “equal protection of the law.” A close reading of the 14th Amendment shows us that only… Read more »

Götterdamn-it-all
Götterdamn-it-all
Reply to  Xman
2 years ago

Don’t you just love Puritans?

imbroglio
imbroglio
2 years ago

In Federalist 2, John Jay, the first Chief Justice of the Supreme Court and later Governor of New York, wrote, “Providence has been pleased to give this one connected country to one united people — a people descended from the same ancestors, speaking the same language, professing the same religion, attached to the same principles of government, very similar in their manners and customs…” That “Who We Are” definition ended long ago. The comparison to Iran and Russia is a bit faulty as America, evolving into Amexica, is slowly but persistently changing so that, while there’s a common language and… Read more »

TomA
TomA
2 years ago

All true, as usual. Now connect the dots. Conservatives will keep losing the real battles until reality forces them to wake up. For example, most Normies are still circle jerking in anticipation of the upcoming elections because that is easier than rolling up your sleeves and getting serious (and your fat ass off the couch). When the new RINOs get into office early next year, there will be mass orgasms in the burbs as the posturing backstabbers start crowing about all the “investigations” they will be doing. This will, once again, become a drawn-out head fake that fools the normiecons… Read more »

karl von hungus
karl von hungus
Reply to  TomA
2 years ago

Bongino is being sponsored by a glutal-merkin company.

Steve
Steve
Reply to  TomA
2 years ago

Yep. DC is dead. Nothing will ever changed through that route. It’s going to have to come from the ground up.

G Lordon Giddy
G Lordon Giddy
2 years ago

It’s going to have to take a couple more election cycles of republicans winning and then doing little or nothing to turn the mind of the civic nationalist. I myself was disillusioned after the 2004 elections and the Bush years but the normal conservative has hung on to the ideas that voting will change the managerial system at the national level. Voting can help us especially at the local and state level, the national level on the other hand is going to become increasingly hopeless in my opinion. As for who we are? That’s another very difficult question in a… Read more »

Hun
Hun
Reply to  G Lordon Giddy
2 years ago

>It’s going to have to take a couple more election cycles of republicans winning and then doing little or nothing to turn the mind of the civic nationalist.

Most likely “That’s it, from now on I am voting Democrat!”

Member
Reply to  Hun
2 years ago

When the Republicans go the way of the Whig party, we’ll be getting somewhere.

Alzaebo
Alzaebo
Reply to  Hun
2 years ago

The Dominion machines hated Trump so much, he lost the House, Senate, and White House. They all voted for that other guy.

Ben the Layabout
Ben the Layabout
Reply to  G Lordon Giddy
2 years ago

I’m with TomA and similar baleful opinions: It is far too late to vote our way out of the hole Puritanism/Neoconism/Choose Your Favorite has brought us to. The good news is there are solutions. The bad news is there are probably no ethical, moral or legal solutions. Plan accordingly.

Anonymous White Male
Anonymous White Male
Reply to  Ben the Layabout
2 years ago

“The bad news is there are probably no ethical, moral or legal solutions.”

Oh, there are always legal solutions. And guess who determines that? As a matter of fact, there are always ethical (unethical) and moral (immoral) solutions.

BeAprepper
BeAprepper
Reply to  Ben the Layabout
2 years ago

I just finished a very well written fictional account of what happens after the economic collapse (hat tip John Derbyshire).

A new free state is established in Nevada, after much poverty and suffering.

The Mandibles, by Lionel Shiver. Her timetable looks pretty accurate too.

KGB
KGB
Reply to  BeAprepper
2 years ago

I hope one of their first acts was to stanch the flow of any and all water passing through their territory on its way to enemy land.

3g4me
3g4me
Reply to  BeAprepper
2 years ago

BeAprepper: That was a good read (no h/t on my part to Derbyshire; found it on my own). Can suggest a few others if you’re interested (good example is John Michael Greer’s “Retropia”).

Mow Noname
Mow Noname
Reply to  3g4me
2 years ago

Dan Simmons, “Flashback”

Still not sure if the book had a happy ending or not, but an excellent read.

3g4me
3g4me
Reply to  G Lordon Giddy
2 years ago

G Lordon Giddy: History repeatedly demonstrates that nothing will hold together a multicultural, multiracial entity. Empires, nations, pacts – they all fall to the same thing. I don’t believe any of us here want to live in a multiracial society; I certainly don’t support anything that’s supposed to help it hold together. And, as I’ve commented frequently, I don’t believe even local voting is worthwhile. If you first narrow it down by race (White only) and then regionally by culture and religion, there could easily exist a White federation of some sort. You will always need to restrain the extremists… Read more »

karl von hungus
karl von hungus
2 years ago

people of a certain stripe create a system. the system changes the nature of the people, over multiple generations. the changed people adapt the system to their wishes – creating a different kind of people in turn. the system, and its people, form a yin/yang relationship. it is pointless to try and thwart this process; not known for sure if there is any point in trying to guide it. just recognizing true reality might be the optimal personal plan. interesting point about russian people enduring through communism’s reign due to ethno-unity. AINO looks to have multiple such cultural nuclei; perhaps… Read more »

Jack Dobson
Jack Dobson
2 years ago

“The great trick of liberal democracy is in convincing people it exists.” This cannot be overemphasized. Someone here once commented that Western liberal democracy is neither Western, liberal nor democratic. To a large extent, that is true. People will tolerate autocracy as long as it seems to benefit them (Russia is a good current example). America and the remainder of the West always were an oligarchy–that’s hardly new, but it was tolerated and mostly embraced as long as the arrangement actually benefitted those not within the dominant class. Now that a hostile elite oppresses a dispossessed majority and seeks to… Read more »

Jack Dobson
Jack Dobson
Reply to  Jack Dobson
2 years ago

*I eschew the term “populism.” There is nothing wrong with populism, to be clear, but the term is employed in a derisivie way that can be summarized as follows:

1. When the oligarchy approves of a majority sentiment, that is labeled “democracy.”

2. When the oligarchy disapproves of a majority sentiment, that is labeled “populism.”

Those always align perfectly.

karl von hungus
karl von hungus
Reply to  Jack Dobson
2 years ago

we used to have regional oligarchies, keeping each other in check at the national level. now we have one set of national oligarchs, and that is crashing the system.

Jack Dobson
Jack Dobson
Reply to  karl von hungus
2 years ago

Lot of truth there, karl. Bigger is not better, and I have not thought of it in those terms.

3g4me
3g4me
Reply to  karl von hungus
2 years ago

karl: Excellent point. And the ‘private’ oligarchs are now in bed with the ‘public’ oligarchs – big tech collusion is vital to government intel agencies to maintain control.
https://greenwald.substack.com/p/former-intelligence-officials-citing?s=w

Hun
Hun
Reply to  Jack Dobson
2 years ago

>What’s the answer?

Elite rope for hostile elites.

Penitent Man
Penitent Man
Reply to  Hun
2 years ago

On Elites… yeah that. I’m sure someone here must’ve mentioned the amazing and weird interview between Tucker Carlson and Mendacious Moldbug. Yarvin quickly lays out their class lineage, Brahmin children of the Techno/Managerial class. You can see the wonderment on Carlson’s face as he realizes and accepts without dissent that these two are of a kind. The tall pale intelligent quintessentially American WASP and the small mouthy quickwitted narcissistic product of turn of the century immigrant socialist jews. For some reason, this pair are not only similar in their paternal governmental lineages but also that they are both from the… Read more »

Jack Dobson
Jack Dobson
Reply to  Penitent Man
2 years ago

I found Yarvin’s rosy picture of the managerial/technocratic elite appallingly rosy. Anyone who have brushed against these types knows they have severe issues themselves and their spawn…well, look at them. That out of the way, the bottom line to what Yarvin said actually is a good point. People burrowed into the system do have to be bought out (there are other methods, to be clear, but those should be avoided at all costs). That was my biggest take away from the interview, which was every bit as surreal as you wrote, and something that stuck with me. The price and… Read more »

Hun
Hun
Reply to  Penitent Man
2 years ago

Carlson already has a lucrative career. He is making $10 million a year and has one of the most popular shows on TV.

Yarvin, having released a large flood of verbal diarrhea containing some truths and interesting ideas and becoming popular in certain circles got to his head.

I saw that interview between them. Yarvin’s “class lineage” suggestion seemed a little desperate to me. Not sure if Tucker truly accepted it or just “accepted” it for the sake of the show.

Alzaebo
Alzaebo
Reply to  Jack Dobson
2 years ago

As a marginalized, underprivileged, oppressed minority, I wonder if we can get representation.

Anonymous Fake
Anonymous Fake
2 years ago

The best analogy is that government forms are just tools in a toolbox, including the constitution. The project they are meant to build, the meaning behind the tools, is “for ourselves and our posterity”.

Founding Freemasons being what they were, they never mentioned Christendom and tolerance for the pagans and inquisition for demon worshipers, but they never said otherwise no matter what some homosexual judge thinks. But we can.

Actual process, if neocons were honest, is controlled by elite law schools, not politicians. Their philosophy was bad and they were even failures with their own bad philosophy.

usNthem
usNthem
2 years ago

Sounds like we need a good, old fashioned king (DR of course) at the top to render final decisions. Our entire government has become nothing but a hyper ideological, minoritarian, money grubbing enterprise. The collective good means nothing anymore.

The population is so deracinated and getting more so by the day, we’re much closer to an “every man for himself” kind of culture. I’m not sure if, or how that ship can be righted.

KGB
KGB
Reply to  usNthem
2 years ago

I’m just getting into a book about life in England during 1066, written almost 50 years ago. The author is strikingly DR in tone, concluding that the political and religious hierarchies, along with the lifestyle of the people, created a society that was ideal for most people. Men and women, the intelligent and incapable, all tended to find their proper station and were respected accordingly.

3g4me
3g4me
Reply to  KGB
2 years ago

KGB: David Howarth’s “1066 Year of the Conquest”? Bought and read it when it came out in 1977. Still on my bookshelf. Excellent read.

karl von hungus
karl von hungus
Reply to  3g4me
2 years ago

read it when it came out. later, down the road, lived in Kent (near the place the normans came ashore); also a short drive to Dicken’s home town (Rochester) and Nelson’s home port (Cheltham). had a definite Wicker Man vibe to the place 😛

KGB
KGB
Reply to  3g4me
2 years ago

Yes ma’am. Checked it out of the library yesterday. One of the perks of living in a back water, Rust Belt city is that the library’s stock has been mostly frozen in place for decades.

Glad you liked it, that tells me it’s going to be worth it in the end.

3g4me
3g4me
Reply to  KGB
2 years ago

KGB: Thank you for the lovely compliment! And, fwiw, although I generally prefer fiction and social history and my husband prefers nonfiction and military history, he enjoyed the book too when he started reading some of my collection after we married.

Steve
Steve
Reply to  3g4me
2 years ago

Great book. How things in England would have been different if Harold and the Saxons had prevailed.

Barnard
Barnard
2 years ago

Andy McCarthy right on cue at National Review arguing the judge who struck down the mask requirement on planes overstepped her legal authority. I didn’t make anywhere near the end of this piece, but did get far enough to see he admits the left does it all the time, especially on immigration enforcement, but the right shouldn’t do it back to uphold the sacred Constitution or something.
Between this and Charlie Cooke begging Florida not to punish Disney yesterday word must have gone out at National Review it was time to defend their corporate donors.

https://www.nationalreview.com/2022/04/whats-wrong-and-whats-right-about-judge-mizelles-mask-mandate-decision/

Jack Dobson
Jack Dobson
Reply to  Barnard
2 years ago

The primary goal of (now degraded) institutions such as National Review is to maintain the status quo. It is in part why they have become irrelevant to political discourse.

KGB
KGB
Reply to  Barnard
2 years ago

It’s fun to watch Ace violently part ways with the squishes on the right. He had a long post on this yesterday and pointed out that what’s happening in Florida is exactly what the left would do, so why not the right?

Over at The Market Ticker, Karl was even more strident, saying that when you inflict damage on your opponent you have to administer a death blow or else you’ll continue fighting the same battle over and over. “Nope; you make them pay exactly as they intended to make you pay had they won.”

Steve
Steve
Reply to  KGB
2 years ago

Karl’s a shy guy, ain’t he? I wish sometimes he’d just come and say exactly what he thinks! 🙂

Tired Citizen
Tired Citizen
2 years ago

“Their authority rests on their will to power and the delusions of the people, who steadfastly insist they decide public policy through the ballot box.”

This is absolutely true. I can’t tell you how many “conservatives” I know who insist that “we” are taking back the house and senate. Not realizing you’re simply making a blood transfusion with more contaminated blood.

Leftists pull a gun, conservatives extend a handshake.

Wolf Barney
Wolf Barney
Reply to  Tired Citizen
2 years ago

All this talk about the GOP winning back the house and senate reminds me of Newt Gingrich and the 1994 “Contract with America” and their huge midterm win which resulted in…….not much.

Mow Noname
Mow Noname
Reply to  Wolf Barney
2 years ago

Now, now, don’t you remember when the Republicans in 1994 eliminated the Departments of Energy and Education, just like they promised? At least they had the excuse of Bill Clinton vetoing bills.

But why go that far back? Remember when the Republicans controlled the House and the Senate during Cheeto Hitler’s reign? …and then they did…stuff, you know…

Hemid
Hemid
Reply to  Mow Noname
2 years ago

Our guys forget, but that election was when the national media switched, on command from the first lady’s “spin” office, from partisan Democrat to anti-“angry white men.”

All else follows? Much else.

Of course Republicans give us nothing—but its *us* they give it to. That’s viscerally offensive.

Compsci
Compsci
Reply to  Mow Noname
2 years ago

Rep’s have way too many “RINO’s”. At a State level we see this here all the time. You need a great majority to pass anything abhorrent to the Dem’s. If the vote is along straight party lines—what isn’t there days—there are always a few Rep’s who cross over and vote with the Dem’s. The reverse, on close votes, never happens. Hell, we could not pass a State budget this year which was the exact same one as passed last year (inflation adjusted) due to several Rep’s voting against (they voted for last year). Politics is a dirty business. It can… Read more »

IAmTheWalrus
IAmTheWalrus
Reply to  Mow Noname
2 years ago

The ‘94 election was similar to 2016 because of how the media was really upset about it, but the Democrats back then didn’t adopt the upper-class suicide-bomber/jihadi attitude that we have seen in the past 5 years. It was kind of assumed that Clinton and the “Blue Dog” DLC types would by trial and error figure out a way to adapt to and co-opt it. Thus we had Dole and Clinton engaging issues like school uniforms and “urban enterprise zones” (this latter was an old Jack Kemp theme IIRC). I might have missed it, but I don’t remember the 2016-2020… Read more »

karl von hungus
karl von hungus
Reply to  Tired Citizen
2 years ago

Leftists pull a gun, conservatives offer a reach-around

there i fixed it for you.