The “Let ‘Em Burn” Doctrine

I was initially uncertain of whether to publish this, until I saw a recent post by Boxer in which he made an observation within the context of our post-modern feminism culture, that explains much of what I’ve wanted to say regarding the current political situation:

At this stage of our historical development, we should be working alone and in small groups, rather than trying to take political power for ourselves. In time, the tides of history will shift, the weltgeist will take a new shape, and we can come together and reclaim what’s ours. Until then, my boys, you are partisans. Your job is not to show yourselves in the open. Your job is not to do big stuff. Your job is to do small things, which will prepare the way for those who will come later. (bold emphasis added).

This is sound advice, and the reason why should be evident to anyone watching the Hollywood sexual harassment scandal and #metoo campaign unfold.

In years past, I’ve engaged in some real life political activism and attended a few rallies, but I never held great fondness for them. The main reason had to do with practicality. Having personally witnessed the birth and fall of the Tea Party movement, I understand the futility of grass roots activism that ultimately centers on winning elections. I’ve also found them somewhat emasculating; unless these rallies lead to direct action, much of it feels like grandstanding.

Now, some might argue that they serve a useful purpose in allowing people to meet and network in real life rather than talk pointlessly online. Fair enough.

However, I also believe these rallies and protests give the enemy ideal opportunity to cause trouble, and place participants in potentially dangerous scenarios. It’s where leftists can engage in a bait-and-switch tactic most frequently used by Antifa in which they try to goad you into attacking them while remaining close enough to get a sucker punch in if the opportunity arises before they quickly vanish into their crowd of fellow basement dwellers.

As Charlottesville proved, activism puts a bull’s eye on your chest and provides an excuse for persecution. As General Gates learned in The Patriot and Eamon De Valera in Michael Collins, you don’t openly confront a stronger, superior force and expect to triumph.

With this in mind, consider what is taking place within Hollywood (and spreading swiftly into other venues). It wasn’t an alternative media source that triggered this; it was the New York Times, the epitome of mainstream media, running a piece on Harvey Weinstein. The destruction of the careers of numerous actors, directors, producers, and other bigwigs were carried out mainly by their peers.

In other words, Hollywood is collapsing due to its own unstable, corrupt nature by elements all within the post-feminist ideology.

It is a similar situation with many other institutions in the country. Whether it’s the national debt, the student loan bubble, the mass importation of immigrants that consume more than they produce, marriage 2.0, trillions in unfunded liabilities, an aging national infrastructure, their current trajectories are not sustainable.

Sooner or later, they will collapse on their own, whether there is anyone there “opposing” them or not.

This makes a strong case for individual and local activity among those such as myself, and in many ways that is what I have been doing for a while. I’ve been focused on wholly nonpolitical interests and hobbies. I’ve placed myself in an environment so that if bad things happen, they’re happening elsewhere.

There is nothing to gain by sticking one’s head above the trench to get it blown off by a sniper if you know that the enemy line will eventually break due to poor morale and internal squabbling.

I certainly have my opinions still intact, but I don’t concern myself with what is going on unless it affects me directly and there is something I can do to avoid the damage.

At some point this same sort of institutional collapse will occur with other entities, whether it’s higher education, the U.S. economy or even the military and the federal government. They don’t need my involvement for that to happen.

The Reckoning is already set in stone; the only question to be answered is when it will occur, and nobody can know that for certain.

With that in mind, perhaps it’s wise to keep a low profile and avoid attracting attention and, if possible, let the political battle be fought by others who either won’t or are unable to withdraw.

The fire has been kindled. Things fall apart. The center cannot hold.

But don’t shoot. Let ’em burn.

 

 

Advertisements
Posted in civil war, communism, conservativism, Culture, doom and gloom, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | 1 Comment

The Death of Civic Nationalism

Jeff Deist comes out with the hammer on why the Democrats won in Virginia.

National Review seems to think the recent election in Virginia was about Trump, when in fact it was entirely about demographics…..Northern Virginia is also full of immigrants from Central America, South America, and Asia….and while immigrants and their children may have little in common with the patent attorney living just a mile or two away, in the vast majority of cases both lean heavily Democrat. Immigrant non-citizens may not be able to vote, but their children certainly will.”

Libertarians can talk all they want that it’s “ultimately” about culture, not race, but this is like saying it ultimately doesn’t matter whether your child is biologically yours, as long as the kid behaves the way you want them to.

As is the case with Ronald Reagan Jr. and Michael Reagan, sometimes a stepchild does in fact emulate their adopted parents better than the biological child.

But this is an exception, not the rule. A family that has been in America since the Pilgrims will see the Constitution and the Bill of Rights as an extension of their ethnic heritage and consequently have a greater stake in preserving them. A family from the Horn of Africa looks at the Founding Fathers and sees a bunch of foreign men writing about stuff that is utterly alien to their native culture.

Making policy or philosophical theories based on the outlying margins is a fool’s errand.

One of the problems with libertarians is they often tend to think individualistically on everything, and so accurate generalizations and bell curve discussions bother them. They want to take the micro and apply it at a macro level. It means they will ignore trends and clear patterns of behavior.

You may think race doesn’t matter or affect politics, but sadly that makes your view irrelevant to the discussion. Not only is it not true, but those involved don’t believe it, either.

If it weren’t the case, those who love Big Government wouldn’t be so obsessed with the ethnic breakdown of immigration trends and ensuring certain races are given preferential treatment over others for entering the country.

Our current immigration policy does not prioritize single Nordic beauties in their early twenties, and were they to form a mass migration wave headed towards this nation, you can bet your bottom dollar that all those today screeching to keep our borders as wide open as a hooker’s legs would eagerly sacrifice their first-born gender-neutral child as mortar for the Great Wall built to keep those lasses out.

Also, note that nowhere has civic nationalism, i.e. “culture matters” crowd, proven their point through the electorate. There are no examples of “natural conservatives” maintaining the legacy of the original American people. With every new immigration wave, America’s government has grown larger and larger. This isn’t to say they are solely responsible for the situation, but it shows that a culture devoid of the race that created it, is doomed.

One of the reasons America is dying is because the ethnic stock that once comprised a majority of the nation is dwindling.

Culture and race are separate, but they’re intertwined. Don’t tell me Japan would remain as culturally “Japanese” as it is today, if ethnic Japanese became minorities and whites were an equal percentage of the population.

So don’t be surprised when America isn’t American when all the real Americans are replaced with foreigners who seek to replace its Anglo-Saxon Protestant heritage with magic dirty proposition nation drivel that forms a modern godless civic religion.

Posted in borders, Central Government, conservativism, constitution, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , | 2 Comments

Egalitarian Elitism

A New Elitism

When you were kids, you all admired the champion marble shooter, the fastest runner, the big-league ball players and the toughest boxers. Americans love a winner and will not tolerate a loser. Americans play to win all the time. That’s why Americans have never lost and will never lose a war. The very thought of losing is hateful to Americans.

Patton said this eighty years ago. It perhaps represented the values of America during his time.

To the modern ear, they are deeply offensive and immoral. Say it in the wrong setting, and you can get a visit from the HR lady.

We truly live in Bizarre world.

A common saying is that your group is only as strong as your weakest member. The spirit of this adage is that a group should raise the weak, through strength. The top elite had a moral duty to improve the overall health of their organization.

For the aristocracy, this was known as nobles obliges. They had a responsibility to set an example in their own life for their social inferiors, born of inferior circumstances, and then enforce those rules.

It wasn’t a perfect system, and it had its flaws, but in principle it was sound. The strong take care of the weak, but nobody wants to be weak. The intelligent assist the dumb, yet nobody desires to be the imbecile.

Today, in the West, we believe the opposite. We’re only as weak as our strongest member. Elitism that admired the best, the greatest man could achieve, is considered a great evil.

Egalitarianism is one of many religions we are forced to obey, even if we don’t believe in it, and it is the basis for the new elitism. However, since it is impossible to make everyone as equally great as the best, we bring everyone down to the lowest common denominator. It’s Harrison Bergeron writ large. The cronies of the Handicapper General are everywhere.

Summarized appropriately, its battle cry is “you ain’t no gooder than me!”

What this means is that all the traditional traits of a healthy, functioning society – strength, dominance, competence, intelligence, and drive – have been replaced with new civic virtues; weakness, stupidity, foolishness, ineptness, dependency, and laziness.

The losers are the heroes of our system. The hideous both physically and within their soul are touted. Those who can’t provide for themselves, who’ve made terrible choices, who rely on others to survive – they are the champions, my friends.

Our society celebrates the ugly as beautiful, corrupt as pure, the deranged as the new normal, and the dysfunction as the future.

In backwoods rural America, schoolroom teachers once demanded their students speak and pronounce English properly. Look at any historic school textbook or rules.

Slowly, the standards were dumbed down and finally replaced with ideology. Do I have to tell you what would happen if they did this in an elite private school?

This decline in excellence and quality can be seen nearly everywhere. Compare modern art and architecture to, say, art deco in the 1930s and 1940s. Or, go back to the Baroque period. When have you ever looked at a new building and marveled at its majestic appearance?

Buildings were once designed for more than their literal intent. They were works of art meant to inspire and celebrate culture. Victor Hugo may have exaggerated when he said the printing press killed architecture, which prior to mass literary was used to tell stories and educate, but in retrospect his apprehensions were well-grounded.

Today, we build soulless boxes as simplistic in their aesthetics as a caveman’s dwelling and call it “progress.”

Books have suffered, too. It may shock you to know that Shakespeare’s plays were written and performed for the illiterate working-class rabble of London, the lowest stratum of the society. Today, only English majors or the more cultured read them, let alone understand them or know more than a handful of titles by name. The rest of Westerners have their eyes glued to 50 Shades of It’s-Not-Rape-If-He’s-Really-Rich-And-Hawt, while full grown adults shamelessly consume and quote Harry Potter, a children’s book series that masks petty juvenile school drama behind a shroud of magic and left-wing politics.

Or, they don’t read at all.

The stupidity can be seen in the public’s inability to grasp blatant irony or satire. Jonathan Swift’s A Modest Proposal called for the Irish to eat their own babies to survive the Potato Famine. The average British subject understood his point, because they had a level of sophistication we do not.

A few years back, Roosh V wrote a similarly ironic essay titled “How to stop rape,” in which he advocated legalizing rape on private property as a way to encourage women to be more careful about whom they associated with.

Rather than critique the point made, that women bear some responsibility for their own safety, the mass media and shrieking pearl-clutchers insisted the article was serious. Our clickbait-driven media interpreted piece literally, and most people accepted that narrative no matter how absurd it sounded.

It’s also why modern philosophical writes such as Quintus Curtius continually have privileged elite brats nipping at their heel. Through his examination of classical history, Quintus advocates character and virtue. Self-improvement like that is intolerable among those who lack the capacity or the will to better themselves and who see everyone as equal, regardless of effort or merit.

Nowhere is the promotion of loserdom as a virtue more self-evident than in the anti-Western propaganda inundating educational institutions. When it comes to achievements, the West stands alone in terms of sheer volume, from scientific discoveries to military innovation, literature and poetry, as well as inventions that have raised living standards for not only Western nations, but the entire world.

So how does an anti-Westerner confront this? By arguing that failure is a moral good.

This is an actual quote from an article citing an actual book (h/t Tom Woods)

In The Queer Art of Failure, Judith Halberstam argues that “Under certain circumstances failing, losing, forgetting, unmaking, undoing, unbecoming, not knowing may in fact offer more creative, more cooperative, more surprising ways of being in the world.” I draw on this idea to propose a queer science of failure that is focused on the ways that failing, unmaking, undoing, and not knowing science may lead to a more just world.

Needless to say, this assault on reality will prove deadly. The natural law dictates it. The best armies conquer, not the most diverse and inclusive.Electrical engineering and plumbing don’t care about ideology. Buildings relies on engineers who accept math and physics, who acknowledge the idea of structural integrity. Those who do not will build ones doomed to collapse. Gravity will not be mocked.

The same could be said for our political, cultural, religious, and social institutions that ignore similar truths about their own nature.

Posted in cultural marxism, Culture, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , | 2 Comments

The Not-So-Great Divorce

Fred Reed’s latest column about how much the peoples of the USA hate each other but won’t separate is worth a gander.

I just want to add two quick thoughts as to why the Left and Right won’t quit each other.

For the Left, it’s the same reason a borderline personality disorder girlfriend won’t leave you, even though “I hate you!” comes out of her mouth on a daily basis (not that I would know from my own dating experience).

Just as that same girl, five minutes later, will plead “don’t leave me!” for all the talk the Left says about how conservatives are the problem in this country, they aren’t keen on setting up their own governments. Live and let live is not quite their actual motto.

Part of this has to do with the fact that, as General Jessup thought in A Few Good Men, the Left actually needs the Right. They don’t just need productive people who create surplus wealth to take and give to others. They also need people with differing values and political views to blame for when their own ideas, when implemented, turn into disasters.

 

This is why Calexit was and will always be nothing but talk. It’s akin to a child threatening to pack up their teddy bear and take their Linus-style blanket with them and leave home for good, forever….only to come back inside the house after walking to the end of the block and realizing everything that they would have to give up.

It’s why I suspect that, even when it comes more and more Hispanic, its people won’t want to leave the Union. Their parents and grandparents didn’t come to California just on the spur of the moment or or kicks.

As for the Right, they don’t want to separate for very different reasons. One is nostalgia. They still think of America as it was in another era – perhaps one that never actually existed. One Nation, Under God is their slogan.

Such nationalist rhetoric may offend the libertarian ear, but understand that this is because for many Americans, there is no other identity to cling to, which leads me to my next point.

Aside from ethnicity, Americans have no other identity.

Jack Donovan touched on this a while ago, but much of America is far too young to have their own distinct identity as a people. The South, New England, and perhaps Texas are exceptions (the latter having been its own nation for almost a decade). Those who live in Nevada, Oregon, Washington, or Idaho may identify with their home state in a cultural sense, but it is often vague and only skin-deep.

If the USA fell apart tomorrow, what would these people call themselves? How would they describe themselves to others? How would “we” be different from “them?”

At some point, all those questions would get answered. But it would be a process, and a struggle, few seem willing to undergo or even comprehend.

So onward we go, into the wild blue yonder of dysfunction.

 

Posted in borders, Central Government, central planning, civil war, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | 2 Comments

Never-ending Political Journey

If you grew up in the 1990s, you probably at one time or another played Super Mario 64 – or enviously watched your friend play it on the Nintendo 64 your parents wouldn’t buy you.

Most of the game is centered around the castle; inside, there is a staircase leading up to the top of the main tower and the final level against Bowser. However, if the player hasn’t earned enough stars, acquired by completing other levels throughout the castle, the stairway goes on forever. The player can have Mario run up it forever, and though it seems like he is making progress, in reality it is a never-ending journey up a flight of stairs.

This same concept applies to the leftist mentality.

Tom Woods once summarized leftism as perpetual revolution via the state. This means there is no stopping point. There is no final objective in mind, and if there is, like Mario trying to get to the top of the tower without the required stars, it’s an unreachable goal.

We see this in the way they speak on any of their pet issues, whether it be racism, sexism, homophobia, xenophobia, or the latest fashionable trend, transgenderism.

“We’ve come so far, but we still have a long way to go before reaching true (fill in the blank).”

Ever hear someone say that?

In a way, it is an absolutely brilliant strategy, because no matter what gains they make, no matter how much they uproot or unravel tradition, custom, heritage, and morals, they successfully convince society that it’s still not enough, and that little has been accomplished, by continually moving the goalposts – and few dare to call them out on it.

But there is another reason for why it’s a never-ending political journey. As long as there is “work to be done,” they can still claim to be victims and in a state of disenfranchisement.

Feminism has completely saturated every stratum of our culture, yet as they would have you believe, woman are still horribly oppressed (because some people don’t want to be forced to subsidize women’s contraception’s via taxation). But what incentives do they have to admit it? What is their gain in doing so?

However, the truly vital part of this framing is that it allows them to set double standards for themselves and their enemies. This is where the disenfranchisement rationalizing comes in. Their enemies must adhere to a code of conduct that they don’t, because despite all the progress made, the enemy is “still in charge.” If feminists admitted or conceded that women have achieved more than the suffragettes of the 1920s could have any thought possible, then they would lose an incredible amount of power and moral superiority in the debate.

Thus we get ideas like “institutional racism/sexism/patriarchy” used to justify standards based on one’s race and gender. And by the way, this is all stuff that cannot be quantified, measured, or adequately defined to satisfy the intellectual honesty or curious.

Anyone who has examined America from a century ago knows that the difference between then and now in terms of racial treatment of minorities is beyond comparison. Yet the Al Sharpton’s of the world would gladly surrender an arm or leg before admitting that America has removed restrictions in any meaningful way for African Americans or “peoples of color.”

Not because he and other activists care about the plight of minorities, but because then they would have to find another day job.

Now, some may argue that this mentality I describe applies to the Right as well, and in a way, they are correct. Organizations that are pro-life or fight for gun rights have a perverse incentive to maintain a delicate balance between winning actual political victories yet preserving the leftist threat that gets people to make a most generous donation that keeps these nonprofits running.

However, the difference is that the Right has, with a few exceptions, accomplished little besides slowing down the speed with which the Left has taken over institutions.

Ironically, they tend to move the goalposts, but backwards in order to make it seem as though the Left isn’t winning at every turn.

Lastly, I would say that leftism denies its status as the establishment, because to have power is to have responsibility. You can’t pass the buck if you’re in charge.

For example, it is laughable to think that right-wing puritans are responsible for the hookup culture and the disaster it has wrought on both men and women. Nevertheless, someone is at fault, someone encouraged the situation we have, and they must accept that their policy was deeply flawed. Who wants to do that?

So when someone says “we still have a long way to go,” know that they are referring to the top of a never-ending staircase.

Posted in cultural marxism, Culture, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , | 1 Comment

Taking a break

Some of you may have noticed I’ve been silent for a while. Unfortunately, aside from this short update, that situation is going to continue.

There are a lot of reasons I could list. The ones I will mention are one, I’ve run out of things to say; two, the emotional toll that discussing politics wreaks on a person. Having written here since 2014, I feel as though I’ve said nearly everything I can say on topics related to libertarianism. I still have a few essays I intend to publish when the time feels right, but to be honest many of the ideas are becoming more and more theoretical.

However, another part of me is growing increasingly uninterested in politics altogether. One of the reasons I took a break from writing is because I was more or less offline entirely, focused on other endeavors. That included the 24/7 news cycle.

It is difficult to describe the relief that this provided, to be able to focus on something without concerning myself with the latest petty media drama or cause celebre of which I am not involved in or have any control over. I’m far from adhering to the Serenity Prayer in any meaningful way, but this gave me a chance to experience what it’s like for the faithful, and the reduced stress was a welcome change.

Many years ago, I watched political affairs as a neutral spectator. I had my beliefs, but I didn’t spend time dwelling on who said what about whom, because I had other hobbies to occupy my attention. I look back on those days fondly.

Also, following the political scene has done nothing positive for my frame of mind. Something I want to improve is maintaining a healthier balance between remaining informed and educated about the realities of life around me, while not letting things beyond my influence distract me from things I can actually accomplish. Concentrating on these matters has too often merely inspired inaction and despair, a sense of helplessness.

As a side, always be wary of those who insist that you should emotionally invest in things, people, or causes that are outside of your power. If you’re not in charge, you’re not responsible.

Lastly, the older I get the more I feel as though I know too little to make wise judgement or observations. The Oracle of Delphi proclaimed Socrates the wisest of all, and the only reason he could figure for that was because “he knew he knew nothing.”

 

Posted in general political thoughts, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | 2 Comments

Godfather Death

Recently I’ve been reading a collection of the Brothers Grimm tales. In addition to being much more violent than the Disney animated film versions, they also contain many blunt truths of life.

An example is found in the tale “Godfather Death.” In it, a man is struggling to feed his twelve children when his wife has yet another child. In a panic, he runs out onto the road in the hopes of finding a godfather. After meeting God and the Devil, he comes across a third person.

“Who are you?” the man asked.

“I am Death, and I make all people equal.”

In a short scene and a handful of words, the Brothers Grimm convey the totality and end result of egalitarianism.

From the moment they are born up until their last breath, men are inherently and incontestably unequal, and the only way to alter that is through death itself. Any political philosophy that doesn’t acknowledge this truth, however unpleasant it may seem, is doomed from its inception.

Posted in cultural marxism, Culture, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | 4 Comments