The irrelevance of conservatism

James Guiran explains why nationalism is necessary at Jacobite:

Establishment conservatism, it seems, is doubling down on its refusal to reckon with the realities of the American political landscape. It’s true that the ascendant left wants to revoke religious liberty, with the goal of subordinating Christianity (specifically Christianity) to the whims of the woke state; but this is only one facet of its platform. It also promotes a view of white Americans reminiscent of the ethnic hatred stoked against market-dominant minorities in certain countries in the 20th century (never mind that white Americans aren’t even the richest demographic!); claims that our country is fundamentally illegitimate; calls for the destruction of our borders; pushes for a credentialist economy in which no one can succeed without first obtaining permission from a committee of progressive priests, who will dispense it based more on loyalty to the cause than on any apolitical notion of merit; advocates for the abolition of the nation-state in favor of a tightly controlled and managed ‘inclusive society’ in which the inevitable ethnic conflict will provide the ruling structure with a bottomless well of opportunities to justify its own expansion; and seeks to subordinate everything, from colleges to corporations to open-source software organizations to knitting groups, to an arbitrary and intentionally byzantine code of conduct, in order to purge infidels from the whole of society. This is not ‘libertine,’ it is totalitarian. And the totality of that agenda must be opposed.

The conservative debate thus far has been premised on the idea that the proper response to Trump, the proper way forward, is to simply revitalize the platform of the Moral Majority. Not only does this fail to address many of the problems facing our country today ⁠— it has little, if anything, to say about immigration, which is necessarily the most pressing issue because its effects are permanent and irreversible  —  it offers little potential for attaining true hegemony.

If, at this juncture, you are still describing yourself as a “conservative” instead of a “nationalist”, you are completely failing to grasp the nature of the cultural conflict. Conservatism can no more save America than Churchianity can save your soul.

A true CON

Just in case you weren’t convinced that Jonah Goldberg is also a fraud:

Will Chamberlain@willchamberlain




It’s true, as it turns out. From now on, I doubt I will never think of him again as anything but “Two-time Pulitzer nominee Jonah Goldberg”. And speaking of the CON game:

David French@DavidAFrench
There’s something grossly entitled about claiming you should have government-mandated access to a social media platform you didn’t create, maintained by people you oppose, and that you should have that access for free.

Kurt Schlichter@KurtSchlichter
What have I told you?

Every single time, liberals and their collaborators will find a reason to justify silencing actual conservatives.

Always a reason.

Always some excuse.

Always another principle.

But the end result is always that you will be silenced.


But at least they have Jonah Goldberg’s fake Pulitzer nominations. These unprincipled losers are so desperate for liberal approval, they’ll even fake it if need be.

They just love freedom so much

That’s why Africans are now crossing Mexico just to become Real Americans just as American as you or George Washington:

Border authorities nabbed a group of 116 illegal immigrants from Africa this week, saying it’s the first time they’ve found Africans taking advantage of the large-group tactic Central American migrants have learned to abuse.

The Africans were caught Thursday night near the border crossing in Del Rio, Texas — though instead of presenting themselves at the port of entry, they jumped the border, an official told reporters.

Like Central American groups, this one was comprised of children and families, and appeared to be attempting to exploit the same loopholes the Central Americans discovered they could use to gain an illegal foothold in the U.S. and escape deportation.

“Bring a child, get released,” said a Customs and Border Protection official.

CBP said the group included people from Angola, Cameroon and Congo. Other African migrants have previously benefitted from the family loophole, but never in such a single large group.

At this point, I think it is abundantly clear that the only correct response to the average conservative, Republican, or civic nationalist who insists on babbling about “a nation of immigrants”, the “melting pot”, or “hard-working people in search of a better life for their children” is a straightforward punch in the face.

These idiots are literally too stupid to understand anything else. That, or they are willing to sell out their nation, their country, and their children in order to virtue-signal, which is considerably worse.

Yes, conservatives and Republicans, I am speaking directly to YOU. All of you. You were stupid. You were wrong. You have aided and abetted and assisted in the destruction of the USA. It is not and it was NEVER about the illegality, it was ALWAYS about the quantity of the immigration.

There is not a single argument that you have made in defense of Mexican immigrants that cannot be made on behalf of African and Chinese and Indian immigrants. And while there are only 130 million people in Mexico, there are 4 billion people in Africa, China, and India.

You were, and are, literally too stupid to keep your country. Even the Eastern Bloc communists, for all their economic illiteracy, have turned out to be smarter than you. I just wonder what it is going to take for you to finally admit that you’re wrong, the cannibals next door spit-roasting neighborhood children on an open fire in their front yard?

“Conservative” is a “sensibility”

That’s literally the title of George Will’s new book, The Conservative Sensibility, which in the 2019 post-American, post-Christian USA is less relevant than a book about the Manchu invasion of China:

Government needs to get back to basics. The political class, defined broadly to include persons actively engaged in electoral politics and policymaking along with those who report and comment on civic life, is more united by a class characteristic than it is divided by philosophic differences. The characteristic is a tendency to overestimate the importance of public policies, from which the political class derives its sense of importance. This is especially so regarding economic and social inequalities. These, the political class tends to believe, are largely the result of public policies and are therefore susceptible to decisive amelioration by better government actions. In the argument about which is primary, nature or nurture, the former receives an emphatic affirmation from the Founding Fathers’ philosophy. Beneath the myriad patinas of culture, there is a fixed human nature that neither improves nor regresses. What does change for the better is the capacity of certain portions of humanity to improve the legal, institutional and social structures for coping with the constants of human nature. And to do so without diluting America’s foundational commitment to take its bearings from the individual.

I used to admire George Will. Now, I marvel at his utter and complete cluelessness in the face of the conquest of the Land of the Free and the fearful, submissive state of a people who once considered themselves to be the Brave.

In Cuckservative, I told you that conservatism is not an ideology or a political philosophy, it’s just an attitude and a pose. Perhaps those who could not accept that reality coming from me will accept it from this leading conservative figure.

The terminal phase

The decline and eventual collapse of the United States is rapidly becoming apparent to more and more observers:

The United States has entered its terminal phase and most of its citizens are as blithely unaware of this reality as they were of the impending dissolution of the Soviet system in the late 1980’s. On the surface each one projects its hegemony and influence far beyond their limitations through a combination of propaganda and threats. Both systems were thoroughly corrupted, perhaps from their inception, but certainly and absolutely as they neared their nadir, yet both systems affected a nonchalance that soon- very soon, every knee would bend before their majesty and morally superior aspirations.

For the USSR it was based upon the trite concept that everyone should share equally of the labors of others when no such possibility ever existed during mankind’s reign over the Earth. In America it was the equally vapid and hollow claim that all men are created equal when no such thing had ever been so at any time, nor could it ever be possible. To base an entire national mythos on pure sophistry is a guarantee of failure and yet their remains an eternal optimism rooted in these fanciful phrases that distorted and diffused before our eyes.

The elites always managed somehow, regardless of the system and its ideals, to rise above equality and find a toehold in a neo-aristocracy, where rather than blood-ties, loyalties were developed in the institutions and secret societies; Ivy League universities, Intelligence agencies, International banking cartels, Media conglomerates and Corporate boardrooms. The differences between the Politburo under Gorbachev and the current Congress are more noticeable in attire and decor rather than in behavior and outcomes.

In America today here is a complete symbiosis between the organs of information- the MSM- and the political parties and their apparatchiks, and it is used solely for the control of the populations and the promotion of The Narrative rather than as a means of explaining the events of the day. Much in the same way that the Soviet Union new organizations Pravda (Truth) and Izvestia (News) were able to control information to such a degree that the people of the USSR joked that “there is no truth in Pravda and no news in Izvestia”, the current state of media in America is summed up in the equally derogatory slur. “Fake News”.

The populations are keenly aware that they are being misled, but are powerless – in their minds – to do anything about it. The problem of course isn’t that the populations fail to believe the lies, but that the elites of both systems have chosen falsehoods as their basic premise for rule. Any system predicated upon falsehoods cannot survive the exposure of those lies when reality comes knocking.

The cucks and cons are doubling down on their virtue-signaling and attacking the defenders of civilization in the vain hopes that the barbarians they have championed will barbecue them last while in the meantime the very ground beneath their feet is beginning to crumble.

They believed, wrongly, that civilization is an abstraction. They foolishly mistook Thomas Jefferson’s meaningless, high-flying political rhetoric for material reality and placed their faith in it. And in their sanctimonious refusal to defend civilization, they are very nearly as much to blame as the progressives who have been actively attempting to tear it down.

Every society comes to an end in time. And that end usually comes as a complete surprise to most of its inhabitants.

UPDATE: Oh sweet overturned statues of Thomas Jefferson…

I’m not a liberal conservative, but if we’re going to prevail it will be with David French and men like him.

Then you’re not going to prevail. Period.

This is what it sounds like

When cucks cry:

As I took part in a recent student leadership board meeting for the Department of Political Science at Boston University, a group that works to advise faculty on ways to improve, I offered some advice: the department could use more intellectual diversity.

I suggested more debates in the classroom, as opposed to what I had witnessed in my three years at the school, that being an assumption during class that everyone agrees.

I broached my idea after I had sat and respectfully listened to the ideas of others for an hour, but my peers, and a professor and an administrator in the room, were not about to return the favor.

One student chided me that “debate” was too aggressive of a word, that I should use “discussion” instead. Another student, a College Democrat in the room, then compared me to a well-known peer from Boston University who is often regarded as a neo-Nazi and who went to the white supremacist rally in Charlottesville, noting “he has sat here in these seats asking for intellectual diversity as well.”

I felt shocked and insulted. I waited to see if either the professor or administrator or any of the other students in the room would defend me. None did. One student suggested conservatives shouldn’t major in political science at Boston University, as they’d have a hard time. The room erupted in laughter.

Dig if you will the picture
Of you and I engaged in debate.
Inept free speech dogma fails you.
Don’t you realize truth is merely hate?

Doesn’t flow quite right, but amusing nonetheless.

Why conservatives always lose

I know John Hawkins means well, but his diagnostic ineptitude here is simply off the charts.

Exhibit 1: The first step to getting our culture to go back in the right direction is understanding why conservatives are losing the culture wars.

Exhibit 2: The “old school” values that made America successful were Judeo-Christian values that people were immersed in from their childhood on, usually in church. 

When you can’t identify the enemy, you cannot defeat the enemy. And when you cannot defeat the enemy, you are destined to lose. There are no “Judeo-Christian values”. There are no “Islamo-Christian”, “Hindu-Christian”, or “Satano-Christian values”.

Conservatives are losing the culture wars because they rejected the central role that Christianity and the posterity nation played in traditional American culture. So they permit non-American, non-Christian opinion leaders to lead them straight into cultural defeat, time and time again.

There are two primary causal factors: immigration and immoralization. Deal with them or go down to defeat.

The conceptual weakness of conservativism

James Kirkpatrick explains why conservatives will never be able to even begin to successfully address the problem of corporate deplatforming:

Conservatism Inc. now at least recognizes deplatforming is an issue. Matt Schlapp of the American Conservative Union recently announced that a slot at CPAC will feature Senator Josh Hawley of Missouri, who “will talk about the growing concerns around big tech companies and what Congress needs to do about it.” Hawley has questioned whether large tech companies should continue to benefit from the Section 230 protection in the 1996 Communications Decency Act, which protects social media platforms from being sued for user content.

Yet the ironic result of taking away this protection could be the destruction of small internet startups, ensuring that Facebook, Twitter and other large companies are the only ones who can maintain a large user base. Big Tech, of course, is entirely governed by the Left.

The larger problem: Conservatism Inc.’s dogma is preventing it from doing anything productive. There are two critical issues.

  • Conservatism Inc. won’t defend its own;
  • It won’t attack corporate power, even when that power is used in service of the Left.

Conservatism Inc.’s tradition of “purges” and selling out its own is well known and is arguably the defining characteristic of the movement. Thus it was less than a month ago the entire Republican Party threw Congressman Steve King under the bus because he was misquoted by the New York Times.

With online censorship, the temptation is to remain silent as the “unrespectable” elements are gradually deplatformed. Indeed, those who are not deplatformed actually benefit from the lack of any competition to their Right. Certainly, the “Never Trump true conservative” types would have rejoiced if Donald Trump’s Facebook account had been purged in 2015, as the company was reportedly considering. Indeed, journalists enforcers are still crusading to get President Trump banned from Twitter even now.

Even more serious: conservatives, because of their attachment to “free market principles,” are ideologically incapable of confronting the Leftist corporate power structure now called “Woke Capital”. Thus, at a time when populism is on the rise globally, American conservatives are in the idiotic position of trying to defend companies like Amazon from socialists like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, even while Amazon continues a crackdown on conservative speech.

At this point, anyone who focuses their rhetorical attacks on the faceless, unidentified “Left” should be considered suspect at the very least. It is more likely that they are simply unwilling and unable to face the reality of identity politics for one reason or another. The common conflation of corporations with capitalism, which is an intrinsically false notion due to the obvious and undeniable fact that corporations are artificial constructions of the government, is a conceptual trap into which most conservatives have fallen.

How is it “conservative” in any way, what does it conserve, to defend the rights of artificial constructs while absolving them from any responsibility for their actions?

The irony is that the very phenomenon of corporate deplatforming demonstrates that capitalist imperatives are not priorities for the modern post-capitalist corporation, because they do not rely upon the interactions of supply and demand for its profits, but rather, politically-driven access to the government-financial pool of resources.

The cockroach media

The cuckservative media is rather like cockroaches. It doesn’t matter how much they fail, it doesn’t matter how often they are wrong, it doesn’t matter that no one reads them and they have no influence, they just don’t die off and disappear. The Week celebrates the news of Jonah Goldbergs new and entirely redundant publication as more of what people already don’t want.

What if we had a center-right publication, broadly in favor of globalized free trade and deregulation and hawkish on foreign policy, whose columnists really hated President Trump, even when he does things they otherwise agree with, like spit in Vladimir Putin’s face?

But The Washington Post already exists, you say. Exactly. Which is why I cannot figure who the audience for Steve Hayes and Jonah Goldberg’s new journalism project is supposed to be. According to Axios, the former editor of The Weekly Standard and the founder of National Review Online are “seeking investors” for “a reporting-driven, Trump-skeptical” conservative periodical.

Of course they are. “Generic white #NeverTrump conservative” is already the most overrepresented type in American media. There are approximately 200 of these people in the United States, and every single one of them has a column in a major newspaper and a book about why Drumpf is the logical and polar opposite of certain ideals supposedly embodied in whatever Tocqueville quotes their research assistants have just pulled up for them. They are the same people who have spent the last two decades insisting that all the things that actually keep people voting for the GOP against their own economics interests — opposition to abortion and same-sex marriage — are yucky. They are often referred to as “neocons,” but this appellation is insulting to the legacy of Irving Kristol and Christopher Lasch. A better one is “metro-conservatives,” i.e., think-tank grifters.

#NeverTrump types are desperate to convince readers that clichés about “entrepreneurship,” endless war, and moaning about the Founding Fathers are still cool. But nobody listens. They had their shot with roughly 15 other candidates in 2016, and the American people rejected all of them, one by one. If your ideas are so bad that social conservatives would rather vote for a twice-divorced serial philanderer than pull the lever for any of the indistinguishable blue-blazered frat boys who are mouthpieces for them, maybe you should rethink what you’re doing. If the Never Trumpers had gotten the candidate they wanted, Hillary Clinton would have won Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio, and Pennsylvania.

They know this. They also couldn’t care less. Why should they, when the paychecks continue to cash? They have been insulated from the badness of their ideas for decades; this isn’t going to change, probably ever.

The reason these cockroach media publications keep popping up as fast as they fail is that they are funded by corpocracy in order to gatekeep the Right. The Intellectual Dark Web, The Daily Wire, Bulwark, and Jonah Goldberg’s Nameless Project are all designed to keep conservatives and Christians on the globalist reservation.

Truth is not a Judeo-Christian value

Dennis Prager projects too much:

Truth is not a left-wing value.

I first discovered this as a graduate student studying the Soviet Union and left-wing ideologies at the Russian Institute of Columbia University School of International Affairs. Everything I have learned since has confirmed this view.

Individuals on both the left and right lie. Individuals on both the left and right tell the truth. And liberalism, unlike leftism, does value truth. But the further left one goes, the more one enters the world of the lie.

Why does the left lie?

There are two main reasons.

One is that leftists deem their goals more important than telling the truth. For example, every honest economist knows women do not earn 20 percent less money than men for the same work done for the same amount of hours under the same conditions. Yet leftists repeat the lie that women earn 78 cents for every dollar men earn. Why any employers would hire men when they could hire women and get the same amount of work done at the same level of excellence for the same number of hours while saving 20 cents on the dollar is a question only God or the sphinx could answer.

So, when New York Times columnists write this nonsense, do they believe it? The answer is they don’t ask themselves, “Is it true?” They ask themselves, “Does the claim help promote the left-wing doctrine that women are oppressed?” Whatever serves that end is morally justified.

The second reason is leftism is rooted in feelings, not reason or truth. From Karl Marx to Bernie Sanders, left-wing preference for socialism over capitalism is entirely rooted in emotion. Only capitalism creates wealth. Socialism merely spends what capitalism creates. Do leftists not know this? Even if they know it, the emotional pull of socialism prevails.

The Fake Right loves to whine about the Left. It’s all they ever talk about. And there is nothing they enjoy doing more than explaining the Left to the Right; that’s why this is taken from what is part six of Dennis Prager’s opus called Explaining the Left. Of course, if you pay sufficient attention, what you eventually realize is that the Fake Right is a part of the Left. Dennis Prager behaves in exactly the same manner he decries here, because he deems his goals more important than telling the truth and because his loyalty to his people rooted in feelings, not reason or truth.

Truth is not a Judeo-Christian value because Judeo-Christianity itself is a shameless, ahistorical, and anti-Christian lie.