Monday, September 07, 2015

#NRORevolt

"The current purge the Trump phenomenon and "icky people to my right" Red State actions are nothing new... and they will be repeated again."
That is the line I ended a rundown on Erick Erickson's attempted purge of the Trump supporters. I also explained the long, post-New Deal tradition of the right's media with special attention to William F. Buckley's history at National Review. I did not have to wait one month. Jonah Goldberg wrote his G-file for the Labor Day Weekend (a seasoned actor's great sense of timing) saying that "No Movement That Embraces Trump Can Call Itself Conservative". I won't link to it. The Trumpers are bad, icky people. This set off what we call #NRORevolt. It's already getting a response.

No, not just the blockings and weak debates with the media division of professional GOP. I still read Goldberg to keep a pulse on Establishment GOP, so blocking me was blocking a long time reader. There was more. We had a little note from PJ Media written by Susan L.M. Goldberg (I'm not making that name up) about the seedy underbelly revealed by the #NRORevolt hashtag. Don't bother clicking the link. Automatically smears #NRORevolt as antisemitic.... like the Left would do. This is similar to last time where they went from cuckservative being about immigration and setting your advocacy to the "other" rather than your own (pathological altruism in a sense) straight to porno involving interracial. Always with a black-white contrast when in reality this is about 3rd world importation of incredibly different cultures with a special focus on Mexico. They want to turn this into an antisemitic thing, when it is not about that.

This is about National Review acting as if they are the arbiter of what is right wing in America. Just as the media (leftwing division) can soft censor out the Planned Parenthood baby parts market or the Obama administration running guns to Mexican drug gangs, you fellows can soft censor out coverage and focus on the right as well. By giving into standards of debate set by the left despite supposedly representing 50% or more of the nation, you can pick what we can even discuss as what we want as policy and what not. "Jump", "How high?" and you are the false opposition.

For example, you all fall into their framing and allow them to drive the debate. You are the handmaidens to their broadswords to American and Western culture. Jonah Goldberg himself lamented how gay marriage had been cemented and oh woah is he, the ship had sailed on going down the civil unions path. That is absolute bullshit. 

Civil unions were a terrific compromise that you could have fought hard on religious and cultural grounds. Not the Bible simply tells me so, but the concept that marriage is an institution from one's religion, government can recognize it, but without that recognition we would give you the same rights but call it a civil union. If they pushed, fuck the Left but give them civil unions. A majority of people supported that anyway, so you could've looked good for once and still protected religious freedom. In fact, you should have funded those motions where possible and talked sense into the Christian Right. "It is just a word; same rights. Get over it, you're 2% of the population. Civil Unions in all 50 states!" End of pitch.

You didn't. Anther loss. Cthulu swims left, so where to next? Because in our dumb society, the Left will next push on churches to have to perform them. You fell into their yes or no false choice trap. You cannot be that dumb, and now you let your supposed base be called bigots and have their religion mocked. Their nation, their religion that our nation was founded on. Now it is shit on. What did you conserve there?

It is not just through subjects. This is through that water carrying for the Left by purging many thinkers past and present. I had covered some in the last essay, but not just the long gone Birchers, but men like Steve Sailer, John Derbyshire, Ann Coulter and Mark Steyn. These people are great voices that explain what you see today.  Look at Obama's HUD proposal and how it will probably be an issue pressed on the next president. This is a Sailer specialty. Who is your guy on this? No one, so the Left will get their way. Hell, we might as well be living in a prequel to Steyn's book America Alone. You deny a platform and shrink the potential audience and silly approval by association legitimacy to someone who could see through the machinations.

And how quick have all of you been to jump on the hicks, skinheads, and other insults the Left throws at flyover America? To paraphrase Tyler Durden in Fight Club.
Look, the people you are after are the people you depend on. We cook your meals, we haul your trash, we connect your calls, we drive your ambulances. We guard you while you sleep. Do not... fuck with us.
Do the interests of the elite align with the population it supposedly represents? This is why immigration is so critical. This is simple population replacement and importation of completely different peoples, religions, thedes, tribes, etc. This isn't simple, send enough people to college and you'll brainwash everyone to 1970s Alan Alda. Think of how long the Irish were in America, and the JFK election was the resolution of that. That's over 100 years. Diversity + Proximity = War. We're expaning the diversity in all measures and increasing proximity. 

We do not want this, but you do. You are mimicking the Left who led on this, so you're false opposition as you do their bidding. You guys make fun of Russia and Putin. Here is how Putin's patron Berezovsky explained.
Berezovsky also had another brilliant idea, which to his regret Putin did not grasp: creating a fake two-party system, with Putin at the head of a socialist-democrat sort of party and Berezovsky leading a neoconservative one, or the other way around.
Gee, we have the same thing here. Democracy! What a sham! Putin serves the Russian Deep State, and if you look at it, it is the old security state. We get that it is why you hate him. That is the battle of today, nationalists vs. globalists. You neocons, who run NRO, are the globalists. Buckley made sure to make it happen. You are all that is left.

Why? Who writes the checks? Similar donors as the other side and hey, some even have overlapping interests. As I wrote before, you conserved nothing, but hey, war (MI Complex donors), tax cuts (Asset Bubbles since 1980) and debt spending (corporatism) did get accomplished along the lines of donor desires. We know this, so you're not betraying us, but we want others to know this. Trump's supporters are not conservative! Trump supports taxing hedge funds! The horror! Who said it was consevative? Deeper, what make up the conservative principles? Hard to deny the charge of being only about tax cuts and selling out your supposed base demographically if you protect low taxes non-stop (deem it proper conservative) and witch hunt on any type of group protection (deem it not conservative). 

Jesus Christ what is worth conserving? You keep immigration rates where they are, there will be no "2nd Amendment Debate". Conserving a people, a culture, an area are all worth preserving. Spengler was right, blood will defeat money. We live in a FIRE economy that has staggering wealth inequality with a 1% unaligned with the suppose fellow citizens. They are erasing Jefferson and Jackson names off of public spaces. "Democrats", heh, in name, but the very men who built the nation. Our 1% are global citizens like in Christopher Lasch's "Revolt of the Elite". Even then, what and who does the conservative movement represent? Please, keep yelling how "Democrats are the real racists" and mention the old Southern Democrats who supported segregation. All you are bringing up is that the GOP used to be the socially liberal party and then switched when the Democrats who had been the socially conservative party but were swallowed whole by the progressives who run things now. 

Parties swap who they represent. The New Left brought in minorities and shifted working and middle class whites to the GOP. Bill Clinton acted as the DLC's nice, white "Middle America Boy Done Good" mask for the New Left that had usurped cultural power. Whites entering identity politics could not be allowed to not occur. You guys have to snuff this out now as the leaders of the Outer Party. You must snuff it out because if whites go into the identity politics game, it is going to be harsh times for the Left in our sham democracy. This is why the academia-media complex would throw racist out immediately on any type of white consciousness. They have to make it untouchable by the bloc that would be able to root them out through votes. Yes, voting doesn't matter much but how many know that, forget accept it? If voting continuously and winning but not seeing anything really change, then people would get upset with democracy and junk it... and the commies don't want that (America is a communist country). 

For those unaware, you were suppose to represent our interests in this sham of a democracy. I fell for it too. You shouldn't have lost a guy like me. An Alex P. Keaton '80s Reagan kid. Shouldn't have. You did, but it is not about me. It's not even about guys like me who are younger. It's the guys Nixon brought in and Reagan Hoovered in with the Autumn in America patriotism and faith in the America we envisioned that won World War two. Guys replaced by imported workers. Manufacturing guys tossed out for outsourcing due to economic policies with little regard for the secondary consequences. Guys who saw their hometowns turn to Fishtowns. People who cannot afford to move when the immigrants, asylum seekers or section 8 get stuffed into their area. Those are the Trump supporters.

Purge the Trump supporters. Do it. Nothing new. It will not be the last. Do not smear this #NRORevolt as antisemitic, but we should look deeply into why Israel's border policies are good for Israel but not for America. You can never answer that, but you will purge anyone who will. This is for Sailer, Sobran, Coulter, Derbyshire, Steyn, Rushton and the Culture War speech Icarus, the pundit who dared to speak to our worries on campaign trails and run for Americans, Pat Buchanan. We know why they were kicked out. When you're done kicking anyone who defies you out, who are you going to have left?

More are seeing the sham. Wooo, big win in November 2014. What has happened since? Anything go right for the right? No. Any cultural expunging? Yes, down south who carried you all for decades. Is there a potential race war breaking out (that the media censors and shades one way) or floods from the Third World (including from war zones you all advocated for)? Yes! The Left's dealing with this stuff too, but their people get pacified by freebies and have special kickers in the bureacratic and legal system. This base is realizing this. These people are getting angry. They will want to know who pretended to be their friend, and they will look for you first.

Maybe I am being harsh. Maybe the National Review deserves to be the standard bearer for conservativism. Maybe this is all evil antisemitism. Maybe NRO earned leadership. Maybe... maybe I just need to look at the juxtaposition of the two headlined essays at NRO to see that they have no claim to the American right wing at all.

16 comments:

Laguna Beach Fogey said...

"You shouldn't have lost a guy like me. An Alex P. Keaton '80s Reagan kid."

Yes, that's me. As I've written elsewhere, I actually met some of these guys back in the early '90s. Met David Brooks at a 'Vile Bodies' party in Manhattan, where various 'conservative' types--too many of them jews--camped it up pretending to be British aristocrats. It's a class issue; Conservatism, Inc. is very much an aspirational brand. It's all about bourgeois pseudo-intellectuals earnestly signalling their superiority over regular Whites. American Conservatism is pedestrian middle-class snobbery dressed-up as right-wing elitism.

Portlander said...

Awesome. Needs nailed to a door if you ask me.

My only regret is I don't get those annual asks for financial help anymore. They finally stopped sending them after I wrote back sorry, but I sent my contribution to Derb. I'd really like to send one back telling them I'm setting it aside for Trump come the general.

Orthodox said...

Alex P. Keaton Reagan baby here too. Conservatives used to like to point out how people like George Gilder accurately predicted the future results of the sexual revolution (Sexual Suicide, 1973), but for some reason they refuse to look at the accurate predictions of people who are anti-immigration. In 1992, Brimelow has a cover story in NR. Is anything he wrote disproven by history? Richwine?

All the evidence is there, clear as day. Demographics is destiny. Identity politics is the ruling ideology in America. The native population and the historically and globally unique American conservatism handed down from the Founding Fathers is being wiped out by the crudest of methods. The Democrats have no new ideas (except trannies and stuff), they are putting up Sanders as the voice of change. They are winning because they are bringing in more voters who want socialism. Conservatives don't control the schools or media and have no plan to take them over, but they're going to convince voters who don't listen to them. How do they expect to assimilate anyone? The exact opposite of conservativism's "grand strategy" is unfolding.

Scott's Bluff said...

When did NRO/Conservative Inc. began to appear old, sickly and false or when it was officially dead to you? “Lost you”? For me it couldn’t be clearer: Romney losing to Obummer when supposedly his chance to win was set in stone (“no president has ever been reelected w/unemployment this high” or some such) and the soon-to-follow bicker fest on FOX NEWS about tax levels going up for the wealthy by whatever miniscule amount at the end of the year.

Since discovering MPC and TRS, have your viewpoints been altered more greatly than at other points in your past?

Did not see the Hitler-esque skeleton in Ron Paul's closet. Whoa, some of those newsletters from the 90s where he attacks Jews are awful.

LOL that’s you talking brah. The contrast is interesting. Lately I’ve heard multiple cases of hang over and hurt feelings directed at mainstream conservatism and lolbertarians from people who have guided themselves further toward the bad think elements of conservatism over the past few years; the Obummer years. Just think back to 2007. What I see now would be unimaginable then. And it wouldn’t make sense or be appealing. Not to say the carnage in Iraq was not worth serious thinking, but the political mood now seems even more serious. Like we’re not in light and airy times anymore.

There’s an old saying that fits this circumstance, “The orgasm that broke the catamite’s back”. I think Conservatism Inc. is just shy of their demise. (not sure if that makes sense, just my own flailing attempt at wit)

Why are you an Alex P Keaton and not a Bart Simpson? Did Alex appeal to a deeply held trait of yours or was he just the right character model for the right time (Bart was more 90s )? Only curious. After watching a few clips of Family Ties on YouTube, I find the milieu for this show surprisingly alien. Even if it’s all scripted and on a TV set, it still seems quaint. Actually, all sitcoms are weird like that.

Dystopia Max said...

The PJ Media piece has the highest rated comments attacking Goldberg/supporting Trump, plus the most recent comment calls her "a phony non-practicing, out of touch Jew."

Glorious to behold.

peterike said...

Good stuff. You know, back in the 60s and thereabouts folks like James Burnham and Malcolm Muggeridge were speaking out about how Liberalism was a "death wish." By that they meant it hadn't the spine to stand up to political Marxism. They were right about that, but things turned out quite differently.

Did anybody back then foresee that political Marxism would morph into Cultural Marxism? In hindsight, it seems this must have been in the cards all along. But first political power was needed. Way back when, this was done through labor movements, which were typically Communist up and down. As the Communists/Progressives/Liberals increased their real political power and increasingly became part of the banking/industrial/war complex, and as the Gramscian march picked up steam, things shifted more and more from all that messy political Marxism to the cultural kind. Political Marxism was cast aside, or at least left on the respirator long enough to keep the Conservatives distracted and focused on anti-Communism as Job One, while the culture was perverted and debased around them.

It's all been quite brilliantly achieved. What I wonder now is that the Progs haven't imbibed their own wine so deeply that they really can't see what they're bringing about. Then again, I return to James Burnham's bon mot that "The difference between a Liberal and a Communist is that the Communist knows what he's doing."

I suspect this is still true, and for every Communist like George Soros or Bill Ayers there are a million Liberals.

Anyway, in retrospect National Review was actually quite a tool for the Prog movement. Eyes off the prize and all that.

Goodness, we live in despairing times.

Anonymous said...

Had the honor meeting Joe Sobran at NR offices in 80s. Funny and gentlemanly. Then WFB decided he wanted to continue to be invited to all the posh parties and tossed him under the bus. All downhill since over on East 35th. The current claque of red-diaper wannabes are just fulfilling their role as controlled opposition. They conserve nothing. Goldberg caved on queer marriage because he didn't want to be spat on everytime he stepped outside his apartment. They respond to queer fascism because where they live there's no threat of the other kind. The cucks know who the real enemies are: Real Americans.

Toddy Cat said...

During the Chinese Civil War, the Nationalists outnumbered the Communists, had better equipment, and the backing of the United States. The actually won several significant victories against the Communists, but somehow, this never was translated in to victory. Somehow, they just kept losing, until finally, they were driven off the mainland, onto Taiwan, where they still are. For decades, thoughtful historians pondered this occurrence, and posited their theories; the Nationalists were "corrupt" (as if the Communists weren't; Mao enjoyed the support of the peasants (whom he hated, and mass-murdered the first chance he got); etc. etc. As a young anti-Communist in the 1970's , I pondered all these theories but none seemed to make sense. It was a mystery, all right...

And then I read Jung Chang's biography of Mao, and suddenly it all made sense. As it turns out many the top Nationalist generals were communist sympathizers, in some cases even on Mao's payroll, and the U.S. Secretary of State, George Marshall intervened repeatedly to save the Communists from certain defeat, time and time again. Of course the Commies won; the Communist leadership was trying to defeat the Nationalists, and so was a large part of the Nationalist leadership, and at least a portion of the Nationalists "friends" in America. Mystery solved.

The Trump phenomenon can be explained by American conservatives suddenly realizing, thanks to the immigration question, that they are in a position similar to those poor deluded Nationalist soldiers in 1947. Despite the fact that they win battle after battle, they never get closer to victory, because their gains are surrendered by their leaders. They are cursed with a leadership that is essentially serving the other side, they are being led to destruction by a cynical elite who hopes to be rewarded by the eventual winners for their treason. The rank and file of a portion of conservative "army" has realized what is going on, and is rightly infuriated. They see Trump, for all his faults, as a general who actually wants to lead them to victory, and they have rallied to his standard. Meanwhile, the traitors scream that their new general is mad, that he's screwing up the Secret Winning Strategy, and that he's actually the traitor...

But it's not working. The realization that the old leadership are traitors is powerful, because it explains so much that was obscure before. In 2004, the Republicans controlled everything - why didn't the country move to the right? 80% of the American people want immigration limitation - why doesn't it happen? Almost no one in America want's another Middle Eastern War - why are we constantly pulled in that direction? The fact that the leadership of the Republican party is playing it's own game explains so much.

Once the treason has been seen, it can't be unseen. A large portion of the Republican rank and file has seen it, and more see it every day. They are infuriated, and they see that victory is still, barely, possible, if they move now....

Interesting times, my friends, interesting times.

peterike said...

In 2004, the Republicans controlled everything - why didn't the country move to the right?

Indeed, I think this began to open people's eyes. That amazing Republican victory! Yet where was the immigration limitation? Where was the "smaller government"? Where was the reduction in spending? Instead, the Republicans fed like pigs at the trough, and actually made the Democrats look like the party of fiscal responsibility. Boosh gave us multiple new shiny government programs, education spending exploded (how about getting rid of the Department of Education? ohhh, yeah....), and so forth.

It was a most curious time, as well, in terms of CIA and State. They were clearly trying to undermine Bush in Iraq, yet aren't they all part of the Deep State? I never quite understood that. Sure, the Dems would undermine for political advantage, but why would CIA and State try to weaken Bush? Wasn't he doing the proper bidding of the elites and fighting the good neocon-Zionist fight? Was Bush resisting even further adventurism, like Obama gave us in Libya, Syria, etc.?

It's a puzzle, but not one I'm very interested in sorting out. My entire Middle East strategy can be summed up as "mind your own damn business." So a pox on all their houses.

Portlander said...

"Despite the fact that they win battle after battle, they never get closer to victory, because their gains are surrendered by their leaders... In 2004, the Republicans controlled everything - why didn't the country move to the right?"

This.

By 2000 I'd lost all respect for the GOP. By 2004 I'd lost all respect for NR. Between Lowery & Lopez, it's obvious they don't care. Well then, why should I.

Nathan Cook said...

It took me about two minutes to work out that the hashtag was created by someone who intensely dislikes Jews. Animus against Goldberg had to have been on his mind when he started it. It's still a good hashtag. Naturally, holding these two beliefs at the same time is way too hard for a movement conservative.

Anonymous said...

It might be enough to interview one of these cucks and let them tell you what conservative positions they would take after winning solid power. There will be a surprised silence and a change of topic.

Alexandros HoMegas said...

"Was Bush resisting even further adventurism, like Obama gave us in Libya, Syria, etc.? "

Bush resisted in attacking Iran and Syria, he also didn't escalated with Russia during the Georgia-Russia War of 2008.

I'm a proud anti-semite and the first go to the oven would the Kikeservatives.

Anonymous said...

Revilo Oliver was right.

icr said...

WFB, Jr. called Oliver "the single most erudite man I have ever met." IIRC, RPO was also best man at Buckley's wedding.

Anonymous said...

Forced (and government funded) diversity, open borders, redefining the definition of what marriage and family is...at what point does this end? Nothing is off limits to these liberals and the worst part about this is that the people who claim to be on our side are letting this happen.