If you were to go back in time to the 1980’s, scoop up a group of conservatives and show them this post from the National Conservatives, those retro-conservatives would be very confused. For starters. they would be puzzled as to why such a thing was even necessary in 2022. Surely by this late date everyone would know the general framework of the American Right. More important, it would be the general framework of the nation, given the trajectory of the conservative movement.
Once the present situation in America was explained to them, they would no doubt want to know what went wrong? Was there a horrible calamity that derailed conservatives and sent the nation reeling into authoritarian degeneracy? Did the Left stage a revolt and seize the country by force? Did we lose the Cold War? At this point, the room would fall silent as none of the signatories of that post could provide a coherent explanation for why things have gone so horribly wrong.
Many of them have been participating in a long running debate about what fills the void left by the implosion of Buckley conservatism. A few camps have formed up around various concepts. They all agree that Buckley-style conservatism was a failure, but there has not been much discussion about why it failed. In fact, they seem to think Buckley conservatism was fine, as they make clear in that document. Again, everything there was baseline conservatism in the 1980’s.
Those 1980’s conservatives would also be a bit puzzled by the names. Once they got their bearings, they would quickly figure out that many of their favorite conservatives in the 1980’s did not live to see 2022. New voices would have come along to fill those spots, but surely some would have made it. Which of these names are taking up the banner once held by Sam Francis, Pat Buchanan and Paul Gottfried? It seems like those guys were right about the direction of conservatism.
Imagine the shock when it was explained that those guys were not only purged from conservatism but pre-emptively purged from the new conservatism. Sure, this statement of principles is being posted in a magazine founded by Pat Buchanan, but not a single name on that list would want his name in the same sentence with Buchanan or any of the other guys from the 1980’s who turned out to be right. In fact, many have denounced the old paleos as immoral.
There is something to be said for getting back to basics in a time of stress, so this statement of principles makes sense for a group that largely seems dedicated to going back in time and starting over. By embracing what was standard issue conservatism in the 1980’s, they are hoping to reset the movement and install themselves at the top, with all the benefits that come from it. That means their central claim is that real conservatism has never been tried.
It is in that document, however, where you see the seeds of failure within the old Buckley-style conservatism. The first principle starts with “We wish to see a world of independent nations.” It finishes with “We endorse a policy of rearmament by independent self-governing nations and of defensive alliances whose purpose is to deter imperialist aggression.” The fact that this obvious contradiction was not obvious to the signers suggests they have leaned nothing from failure.
As George Washington explained in his farewell address, a nation cannot remain independent when it forms alliances with other nations. As history makes clear, when you agree to defend Poland from its enemies, you inherit the enemies of Poland, even if that contradicts the interests of your people. Washington correctly argued that “inveterate antipathies against particular nations, and passionate attachments for others, should be excluded.”
One can maybe debate this point within the larger debate about conservatism, but there is no debating the bit about deterring imperialist aggression. The sole source of imperialist aggression in the world today is the Global American Empire. By the reasoning in that first principle, the world should unite in opposition to the United States and perhaps even the collective West. You can be certain that not a single signer of that document would agree with that point.
Of course, it is the last point where they give the game away. This is surely the contribution of Yoram Hazony, who seems to lack even a high school level understanding of human biology. Instead, he just accepts the far-left claim that race is skin color and that biology is a social construct. Whether he really believes this is open to debate, given that he is an Israeli, but he makes a point of denying biological reality whenever the opportunity arises.
That last principle is worse than ignorant, it is traitorous. These are the guys claiming to defend the tradition, history and culture of the people. At the same time, they insist “The history of racialist ideology and oppression and its ongoing consequences require us to emphasize this truth.” Really? Who are those racist oppressors? Is it the guys whose statues lie in ruins? Is it the guys lying in graves desecrated by left-wing goons bellowing about the history of racialist ideology?
This gets to the failure of Buckley-style conservatism. At some point, Buckley figured out that he could enjoy the lifestyle he deserved by conceding the moral high ground to the people he claimed to oppose. Once he conceded that basic point, he condemned himself to a lifetime of performing as a useful idiot for the benefit of his masters on the Left and he condemned his movement to failure. There is simply no room for conservative ends within the left-wing moral framework.
A nation is a people, not a collection of abstract concepts. Within a nation there can be a fair degree of variance, but relative to other people the differences are tiny from the perspective of outsiders. To a Swede, a Finnish atheist is no different than a Finnish Lutheran or Finnish pagan. They are just Finns. On the other hand, no one, not even these egalitarian nationalists, would confuse a Finn for an African. That is because they are obviously different people.
Finally, what this and the larger discussion within the group debating the future conservatism reveals is they have learned nothing. That is because they have not bothered to think about why conservatism failed. Perhaps the danger that lies in such a project is the issue. Maybe they lack the intellectual firepower to tackle it. Either way, repeating the slogans of the past, hoping to recreate the past is called a cargo cult, not a serious political movement.
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 email@example.com.