ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2016 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Sunday, February 05, 2017

Why conservatives always lose

John Wright pens a long and thoughtful piece on why conservatives always lose. He contemplates the perspective of a hypothetical Rip van Conservative, a conservative who fell asleep in 1945 and awoke 72 years later, in 2017, only to discover that all many of the victories he thought won had been lost in the meantime:
One main reason why a Last Crusade must be called is that Conservatism, while perfectly sound when facing Commies in a Cold War, Nazis in a World War, or Slavers in a Civil War, has no defense to offer when the fascistic cultural Marxism seeps peacefully into the ivory tower, the theater, the press, the halls of power.... Now, as a conservative, you point out that all these things are simply illogical, paradoxes even a schoolboy could see cannot possibly be true. A thing cannot be itself and be the opposite of itself at the same time. A sentence that contradicts the same idea it affirms is a self-refuting sentence. Reality cannot be unreal.

You are answered that modern progress has proven that truth is untrue, for all things are matters of mere opinion that each man decides for himself. To say truth is truth offends the liberty of each man to invent his own truth.

You are answered that modern progress has proven that logic is merely a social adaptation mechanism formed by evolution, and has no authority to compel men to obey it. To say that logic is logical offends the liberty of each man to enjoy whichever of the personal and invented truths he sees fit.

You are answered that modern progress has proven that morality consists of the single rule that all must toleration any abridgement of morality anyone sees fit, aside, of course, from hate speech and badthink. Avoiding badthink is an absolute moral prohibition applied to all rightwing angloamerican white male heterosexual Christians. To say that morals cannot be defined as immorality is badthink. It offends the liberty of men to be evil, condone evil, promote evil, and worship evil.

You are answered with a fullthroated defense of unreality so complete that even Buddha would be shamed. The Progressive thinks that all life is an illusion, but that the illusion can be peaceful and pleasing, or the opposite, depending on the discipline and disposition of the subjective observer. You make your own reality.

This reality is called “a Narrative.” It is not based on fact, nor meant to be. It is based on emotion, whim, psychological defense mechanism.

Unlike the Buddhist, the Progressive seeks not to escape the illusion. There is nothing outside the illusion, no reality, no nirvana, to which to escape. There is no red pill to take.

The Narrative is an all encompassing world of illusion. It is an empire of lies.

And the first lie in the empire of lies is the lie that the Narrative does not exist. Only truths, as told by conservatives and anyone else looking at reality, are called Narratives.

Now, at the end of these answers, Rip van Conservative realizes that debate is impossible with a creature who cannot and will not speak in a coherent sentence, cannot and will not think a logical thought, and whose sole verbal reply to any criticism, no matter how true and trenchant, is merely to accuse his accuser of the flaws he himself possesses.

The stupid calls his smarter critic stupid. The fool calls his wiser critic foolish. The bigot calls his open-minded critic bigoted. The fascist calls his freedom loving critic a fascist. And on and on ad nauseam.

And so the conservative loses every battle. Why?

When conservativism is not only obvious, but self-evident, why does it falter?

When conservatism is not only a self-evident position, but the sole position seen not to contradict itself, why does it lose the field?

If all positions other than the conservative one are not merely incorrect, but immoral, illogical and insane, how is it that conservatism is soundly swept from the field, and no one polite society dares utter a word in its defense?

Conservatism falters, fails, and finds itself utterly effaced because and only because it fights the wrong battle on the wrong battlefield.
Now, I do not disagree with John here in the slightest, except to observe that there are competing explanations for the reason why conservatives are always fighting the wrong battle on the wrong battlefield. My explanation is the Alt-Right one, which is that immigrants wielding identity politics against an unsuspecting America have misled conservatives into believing false history and defending imaginary philosophical ground rather than defending their national interests. Of course, I expect John, being dubious about identity politics, would tend to disagree. At no little length.

Which is fine. Because regardless of why conservativism fights the wrong battle on the wrong battlefield, this piece serves as an informative illustration explaining why conservativism has so reliably failed to provide a philosophical bulwark against the Left, and why it will continue to do so. The more conservatives understand that more conservatism is not the answer, the more the winning will continue.

Labels: , ,

128 Comments:

Blogger Jose February 05, 2017 1:21 PM  

VD vs JCW: "why conservatives are always fighting the wrong battle on the wrong battlefield"

IMNSHO, it's not so much the wrong battle in the wrong battlefield, it's much more that there's a network of fields where the war is waged on the right, and victory in one of these fields is quickly overturned by actions on other fields.

This is the concept recently popularized by a Chinese PLA white paper called "unrestricted warfare," which is a pretty good description of what's going on between the left and the right, with the left playing the side of PLA and right the side of target country.

So, it's not that JCW or VD explanations are alternatives, they're components of a much much larger story.

Anonymous karsten February 05, 2017 1:22 PM  

Stopped reading at, "fascistic cultural Marxism."

::headdesk::

Besides that being as oxymoronic a concoction as is "Judeo-Christian values," he either doesn't realize, or won't acknowledge, that this sort of "Dems are the real racists!" approach is emblematic of the very same, failed conservatism that he is purportedly criticizing.

Blogger VD February 05, 2017 1:27 PM  

Besides that being as oxymoronic a concoction as is "Judeo-Christian values," he either doesn't realize, or won't acknowledge, that this sort of "Dems are the real racists!" approach is emblematic of the very same, failed conservatism that he is purportedly criticizing.

One step at a time, Karsten. One of the many reasons the Swastika brigade choked on their own panties was that they believed, wrongly, that hitting people over the head with a lead pipe is the best way to convince them of anything.

An honest man will always seek the truth, sooner or later. But each man walks the path at a different rate. The only important question is whether each step leads him closer to, or further from, the observable truth.

Blogger frigger611 February 05, 2017 1:32 PM  

I consider both you and the redoubtable Mr Wright highly intelligent and competent, and I enjoy observing your occasional disagreements and diversions, because it sparks lively, (and respectful) debate.

I used to call myself a conservative a long time ago; gave it up because I realized that it was a non-philosophy whose camp was filled with an agony of weak men. It was a somewhat painful admission to make to myself. One of the many reasons I (and many others) have gravitated toward Alt-Rt blogs and websites.

This is the first time that I have noticed a bit of a change in tone in Mr Wright's outlook on conservatism, in favor of a more Alt-Rt view of the current state of our culture.

Blogger Harry Cassandra February 05, 2017 1:35 PM  

John might be accused of being a cuck, but we will not do it because he is far too great a writer and thinker to disrespect and shame with that term, even if his conservatism is, in fact, problematic. Kid gloves and open dialogue is needed to persuade him that Vox's explanation for why conservatism fails is correct; Mr. Wright is far too great an ally and man to alienate with name calling.

Slightly OT, Bloggers I read come and go. Vox Day is the only blogger I've read every day for 11 years. His opinions and my own tend to converge, almost perfectly. Is that because I've been programmed by his views; or have I kept reading him because he articulates a perspective that I already agreed with but could not figure out on my own?

Blogger yoghi.llama February 05, 2017 1:38 PM  

It's good for the most part but I do get bored when the culture warriors waffle on about their Gnostic heresy conspiracy theories.

I suspect none of them have ever actually read anything by Kurt Rudolph nor are able to quote a single line of Pistis Sophia.

Blogger praetorian February 05, 2017 1:42 PM  

Conservatism, while perfectly sound when facing Commies in a Cold War, Nazis in a World War, or Slavers in a Civil War

Um, John... I have some bad news on that last one...

Blogger Koanic February 05, 2017 1:44 PM  

Conservative K-selected altruism and environmental mastery lead to a decline in the harsh selective pressure which forged and maintained the white races of Europe.

The culture sags before the epigenome before the genome.

The longer the culling is suspended, the more the founding race is debased.

Civilization is self-terminating.

Blogger rcocean February 05, 2017 1:44 PM  

Why do conservatives lose? Simple. Most of them don't want to fight and give up the second they've won a short-term victory. Meanwhile, the left loves "the sting of battle". they are advancing constantly and fight among themselves when they can't fight the enemy.

Blogger rcocean February 05, 2017 1:47 PM  

A lot of conservatives also tend to be philosophical windbags, addicted to grand principles - which are completely useless against an enemy that has no principles except the will to power. I'm always amazed how uninterested conservatives are in political reality and how to accomplish things in the REAL World. Instead they wish to put on powdered wigs and have a jolly good discussion about Burke or re-fight the reformation.

Blogger Brick Mudge February 05, 2017 1:50 PM  

Very intriguing and ridiculous at the same time. Must be a pretty smart libturd!

Blogger pyrrhus February 05, 2017 1:53 PM  

Conservatives don't lose battles, they surrender before the battle happens....But the crucial hill-to-die-on was and is "blank slate" egalitarianism, completely refuted by science and known to be a lie for thousands of years, yet somehow ascendant in Academia, the MSM, and politics....Yet John Wright, Sara Hoyt, and many other Buckley "conservatives" buy into this insanity....

Blogger tz February 05, 2017 1:56 PM  

The antifas seem to be getting somewhere with argumentem ad balaculum.

But the answer to Wright's question was answered by Mel Brooks years ago.

Blogger Gapeseed February 05, 2017 1:56 PM  

Conservatism works when people act in good faith. Indeed, it is an expression of good faith and is highly consistent with Christian principles of goodwill towards all. Such good faith is harder to muster for and by people outside the homogeneity of race, sexuality and creed, and as American has become more polyglot, conservatism has increasingly become more the losing proposition.

Blogger pyrrhus February 05, 2017 2:01 PM  

It's not a level playing field..The Frankfurt School of cultural marxists successfully infiltrated Academia and the media while conservatives were dozing, and they have simply prevented the teaching of conservative ideas and even basic science that would threaten the Blank Slate propaganda.

Blogger tz February 05, 2017 2:05 PM  

I think it was Reagan that instituted De-institutionalization. Before we offered them asylum.
Now, at the end of these answers, Rip van Conservative realizes that debate is impossible with a creature who cannot and will not speak in a coherent sentence, cannot and will not think a logical thought, and whose sole verbal reply to any criticism, no matter how true and trenchant, is merely to accuse his accuser of the flaws he himself possesses.

Blogger James February 05, 2017 2:08 PM  

I responded to a comment over at John C Wright's blog as follows, and I'm wondering if I went too far and came on too strong. I've been saying it for a long time now, though.

Tom Simon > Mark Moncrieff • 2 hours ago

As nearly as I can determine, the only principle of the Alt-Right is that they are everything the Left accuses them of being, and they are proud of it.

James > Tom Simon • a few seconds ago

What you misunderstand is that the good guys have to resort to violence when the bad guys are being violent. The good guys have to fight under the rules imposed on them by the enemy. If the bad guys obey the Marquess of Queensbury, then so can the good guys. If no holds are barred and no quarter is being given, then, only a very stupid idiotic fool expects that any quarter can be taken, comma, dummy. Libertarians have been extremely foolish in assuming that they could ever achieve a secure libertarian society without violence, just because they abhor violence. Liberty is achieved the same way that tyranny is achieved: by destroying its enemies. The tyrant imposes his tyrannical will by threatening and committing violence against those who resist his tyranny. Well, dumbass, liberty can only exist when those who resist liberty are violently destroyed. If you want liberty you will never get it until you have the power to cram it forcefully down the throats of all those who don't want you to have your precious liberty. It all comes down to violence, which I can understand is a paradox and an enigma and an impenetrable mystery to the gentle and peace loving libertarians. But it is human reality in this shitty rotten fallen sinful world, so, we might as well get used to it.


Anonymous BBGKB February 05, 2017 2:12 PM  

They lose because they don't realize shitlibs have never argued in good faith.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-02-03/un-official-admits-global-warming-agenda-really-about-destroying-capitalism

Besides that being as oxymoronic a concoction as is "Judeo-Christian values," he either doesn't realize

JCW was awarded a black belt in Judo Christ, it's not fake he can wear it with a top hat. So what if it says "Made in Israel inspected by Mossad #6,000,000"

Blogger tz February 05, 2017 2:14 PM  

The problem with Wright's article is NOT that Rip van Con waked up in 2017. Had he awakened in 1987, he would have found the first stock market bubble, Raging abortion, AIDS which we couldn't stop because it was homophobic to close the bath-houses, and no-fault divorce and the other poisons of feminism already doing their damage. And the 1986 "amnesty" - Simpson Mizzoli (Wyomingites are too trusting - we got the amnesty but not the border security). You already had media and academia (Reed Irvine original "Accuracy in" both) veering far left, EMTALA - emergency rooms had to treat people even if they couldn't pay (good idea, people died and you can't tell if they have insurance in the ambulance, bad implementation).

Had Rip van Con awakened then there would be little difference, but I was there looking for anyone else to stand with me in that gap that required not a mass of humanity, but a small crowd to fill. And found no one.

GHWB was the original cuck, but too many people thought the GOP was still conservative in SPIRIT. Gingrich folded like a cheap suit when Tom Brokaw, Peter Jennings, and Dan Rather were mean to him while I and millions of others were cheering the government shutdown. And felt snookered by the "contract with America" - Oh, we just said we'd vote, not attach it to veto-proof bills, so most passed, but Senator Ethanol watered them down, and Clinton vetoed much, but technically, if you read the mouseprint, "we kept our promise". I won't bother with Dubya except noting Joseph Farah in 2004 had one more "lesser evil moment" but had buyers remorse within one year.

Anonymous Sharrukin February 05, 2017 2:17 PM  

12. pyrrhus

Conservatives don't lose battles, they surrender before the battle happens...

This

Conservatives always accept the leftist framing of disputes and the leftists always frame things in such a way that their victory is inevitable.

Trying to engage the question "have you beaten your wife today" without refuting the premise is doomed to failure.

Blogger Some Dude February 05, 2017 2:18 PM  

Conservatism is not coherent as a set of principles without something to conserve or defend. The reactionary principles of Burke against change in the abstract sense is not emotionally charged without images like a 1950s family sitting around a tv, a class of young americans pledging thea allegiance. The sooner Conservatives cotton on that the battle is won in rhetoric and more insidiously, carminic - allusions, psychological conditioning, NLP - the sooner Scott Adams ideas about persuasion come closer. Even Scott is loathe to mention how hypnosis should be used by the 'good guys'. He just keeps pointing out how Zion uses it. But thats not enough. In a streetfight, you have to have a knife as well. But its a tawdry affair, counter brainwashing. A prememptive brainwashing. Nobody is going to win the Mother Teresa award by the time the war is over. Everybody will have blood on their aprons.

Blogger Joshua Sinistar February 05, 2017 2:19 PM  

Geez, what a long-winded pile of crap. Cut to the chase.

EVIL ONLY SUCCEEDS WHEN GOOD MEN DO NOTHING. Conservatives are guarding the "progress" they say they abhor. They aren't on your side. Lincoln's Log Cabin Boys are PREVENTING GOOD MEN FROM ACTING.

Blogger tz February 05, 2017 2:20 PM  

Look at the utter abandonment of any attempt of the Antichrist’s party to reason, or to settle differences of opinion peacefully.

Look at the war. Conservativism is too short a blade to reach the foe. A crusade, based on Christian faith, Christian metaphysics, and a sound and rational philosophy is needed. Sheathe your knives. Let the cannons roar.


But I thought AntiChrists could coexist with Christians in our "propositional nation".

(I say that ironically noting in a previous post I posited most of the Antifas, and the immigrant alien hordes might be actually demon possessed - Except I would not want to confront them, I'd try the experiment with a supersoaker loaded with holy-water and see if they reacted as if they were maced; no, I'm damned as in eternally dead serious).

Blogger Michael Maier February 05, 2017 2:21 PM  

Wright thinks men landed on the moon?

Blogger Some Dude February 05, 2017 2:25 PM  

Liberty is achieved the same way that tyranny is achieved: by destroying its enemies. The tyrant imposes his tyrannical will by threatening and committing violence against those who resist his tyranny. Well, dumbass, liberty can only exist when those who resist liberty are violently destroyed. If you want liberty you will never get it until you have the power to cram it forcefully down the throats of all those who don't want you to have your precious liberty. It all comes down to violence, which I can understand is a paradox and an enigma and an impenetrable mystery to the gentle and peace loving libertarians. But it is human reality in this shitty rotten fallen sinful world, so, we might as well get used to it.

Yes. This.

But not just violence.

The mind control rays found in your children's textbooks, their tv shows, their cartoons and the mass media need to be replaced...but not necessarily with truth.

The lady truth cannot withstand the gropings of the gamma cabal.

Notice the way Hitler, Stalin and so on simply returned mud with mud. Hitler counter brainwashed. Likewise the Chinese and Russians today aren't exactly handmaidens of truth.

Its a sad fact that intellectual openness is not tenable with a tribal, concertive and unrelenting enemy.

Popper spent so much time thinking about the Open Society. When in fact, our greatest opponents to an Open Society of ideas was always the Jew, in an intellectual sense.

Blogger olaf lee February 05, 2017 2:26 PM  

It is Vox and the very definition of digging in and giving no ground that read Vox and that is where he diverges from John. It is the nature of cause and effect of not meeting your enemy with superior fire power and giving up the high ground endlessly. That is why John and Vox spar. Like it or not the enemy defined this a long time ago, and we can either see it or give up. I have taken to calling the opposition the new confederacy in that their goal is subjugation of weaker and minority populations. They are as blind as the conservatives in that they do not realize that they will bring about their own demise with their multicultural mindset but we have to draw a line in sand and stand. Vox is more of prophet and often so far ahead of the curve that most do not see the truth in what he says til it is too late.

Blogger tz February 05, 2017 2:27 PM  

Wright also errs in that Man has been Abolished. It was also the same attempt that Molyneux has been trying for the last few years

Christian metaphysics, and a sound and rational philosophy is needed.

C. S. Lewis diagnosed the problem:

They probably have some vague notion (I will examine it in my next lecture) that valour and good faith and justice could be sufficiently commended to the pupil on what they would call 'rational' or 'biological' or 'modern' grounds, if it should ever become necessary. In the meantime, they leave the matter alone and get on with the business of debunking. But this course, though less inhuman, is not less disastrous than the opposite alternative of cynical propaganda. Let us suppose for a moment that the harder virtues could really be theoretically justified with no appeal to objective value. It still remains true that no justification of virtue will enable a man to be virtuous. Without the aid of trained emotions the intellect is powerless against the animal organism. I had sooner play cards against a man who was quite sceptical about ethics, but bred to believe that 'a gentleman does not cheat', than against an irreproachable moral philosopher who had been brought up among sharpers. In battle it is not syllogisms that will keep the reluctant nerves and muscles to their post in the third hour of the bombardment. The crudest sentimentalism (such as Gaius and Titius would wince at) about a flag or a country or a regiment will be of more use. We were told it all long ago by Plato. As the king governs by his executive, so Reason in man must rule the mere appetites by means of the 'spirited element'. "The head rules the belly through the chest — the seat, as Alanus tells us, of Magnanimity," of emotions organized by trained habit into stable sentiments. The Chest-Magnanimity-Sentiment — these are the indispensable liaison officers between cerebral man and visceral man. It may even be said that it is by this middle element that man is man: for by his intellect he is mere spirit and by his appetite mere animal.

The problem is not lack of reason, but disordered passions, what I call "the virtue stack". Dross is valued above gold. Empathy over reason. If you don't feel a passion for truth, all this metaphysics is only good for answering trivia questions.

Blogger frigger611 February 05, 2017 2:28 PM  

@17 James

Agreed. Magruder's Law, described:

http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2006/08/a_warning_to_islamofascist_ter.html

Blogger tz February 05, 2017 2:28 PM  

Put differently, the person who said the pen is mightier than the sword has never encountered a bear or a lion.

Blogger tz February 05, 2017 2:30 PM  

I'll also double down

Christian metaphysics, and a sound and rational philosophy is needed.

That will only work after a proper and complete exorcism.

His imagined worlds are closer to the truth than even he knows.

Blogger Robert Browning February 05, 2017 2:30 PM  

Blood and soil is all that matters.

Blogger VD February 05, 2017 2:32 PM  

I'm wondering if I went too far and came on too strong.

You can't be with Simon. That dialogue about the moderate in Cuckservative was written for the likes of him.

Blogger Some Dude February 05, 2017 2:35 PM  

In the end all of our troubles are a lot less complicated than you think to be honest. This is all reducible to Trotsky inventing the term 'racist' and then the popularisation of the Blank Slate in the 1940s in Frankfurt.

In a sense, just like Pharoah, the Ottomans, Pontius Pilate, Tsar Alexander, Martin Luther and so on, we are rediscovering a problem that has haunted civilisation for centuries.

I know people get tired of how I keep reducing the problem to the actions, ideas and will of the chosen ones. But it is unmistakeable in my mind that all of America's social problems are as a result of Zion.

Blacks lived much kore K selected lives before the 1960s in America. Asians and hispanics were assimilated. Stenihem feminism was like swinging to most people.

The rage of the gamma will never be quelled. To prevent Europe and America being liquidated by marauders, Zion wil ultimately have to be confronted I'm afraid. There's no way around it. The CIA, media, SJWs, Evan McMullins, Cuckservatives are all manifestations of the Necromancer's schemes. Its not a pattern - its a well thought out conspiracy.

Blogger Chris Mallory February 05, 2017 2:58 PM  

praetorian wrote: Conservatism, while perfectly sound when facing Commies in a Cold War, Nazis in a World War, or Slavers in a Civil War

Um, John... I have some bad news on that last one...


Exactly, the Yankee leadership was made up of progressives, Marxists, and atheists. There was nothing "conservative" about them. I really get tired of the "Muh Lincoln" and "Muh MLK" from the "conservatives"

Blogger Some Dude February 05, 2017 3:13 PM  

The ban injunction is going to the supreme court.

That will be the most important case in American's history. If Hilary had won, there is not doubt in my mind, the court would have eventually extended american citizenship to the whole world. She would have nominated Garland or some other Jew most likely.

The conspiracy is now fairly transparent with the miscegenation adverts, affirmative action where jews outnumber whites at harvard, complete media control and Wall Street wealth predation from industry and consumers.

Will Rome foist the parasite in time? Europe won't without america. Talking about jews here will get you in prison and destroy your career. We even opened the border to muslims after all the (ongoing) terror attacks.

They want complete liquidation. Its obvious.

Blogger Sean Carnegie February 05, 2017 3:20 PM  

I really get tired of the "Muh Lincoln" and "Muh MLK" from the "conservatives"

Indeed. Should one ever grow enough stones to fight like Lincoln did (unconstitutionally, sure, but fought), he'd be forced to disavow himself by the 5pm news.

Anonymous Jack Amok February 05, 2017 3:20 PM  

The more I think about it, the more I realize the problem with Conservatism is that it cherry-picks it's moments from our history and says "let's conserve that!" It looks at the brief windows of prosperity and social stability that come after relentless men have violently put down the latest r-tide bloom, and advocates for that time, but forgets what was necessary to bring it about.

They wish to conserve a thing while denouncing what caused it to be in the first place. They are children proud of their inherited wealth but ashamed of what their grandfather did to acquire it.

Anonymous Tipsy February 05, 2017 3:26 PM  

Also C.S. Lewis on fighting the wrong battle:

“The use of Fashions in thought is to distract the attention of men from their real dangers. We direct the fashionable outcry of each generation against those vices of which it is least in danger and fix its approval on the virtue nearest to that vice which we are trying to make endemic. The game is to have them all running about with fire extinguishers whenever there is a flood, and all crowding to that side of the boat which is already nearly gunwale under. Thus we make it fashionable to expose the dangers of enthusiasm at the very moment when they are all really becoming worldly and lukewarm; a century later, when we are really making them all Byronic and drunk with emotion, the fashionable outcry is directed against the dangers of mere ‘understanding.’ Cruel ages are put on their guard against Sentimentality, feckless and idle ones against Respectability, lecherous ones against Puritanism.”

C. S. Lewis, The Screwtape Letters, Letter XXV.

Blogger dc.sunsets February 05, 2017 3:27 PM  

tl;dr version:

All people are secret kings in the morality play of their minds. All people herd. Mix the two with whatever social mood prevails (a maniacally high one launched in 1981-2) and voila, you'll have exactly the folie a plusiers extant.

This, too, shall pass.

Blogger dc.sunsets February 05, 2017 3:35 PM  

Western societies were riding the Gnostic Heresy Highway for centuries. Rapidly rising living standards stayed ahead of people's expectations for long stretches of the last 300 years, fueling embrace of the "we can do anything, even eliminate want, hate & the conflict they bring."

Conservatives were just as embedded in this delusion as everyone else. Who could argue we live in a world of LIMITED resources when all acts of debt creation were wealth creation?

It was a great run.

Anyone who knew the truth was like Mises & Socialism. He published the fundamental truth in 1922 but the USSR outlived him.

Blogger pyrrhus February 05, 2017 3:36 PM  

Upon further reflection, the bottom line problem with honorable conservatives like John Wright is that much of what they believe about human beings is simply false, and has been shown to be such by massive amounts of science and history. And Wright is not really amenable to learning, as one can readily see by spending some time on his blog.....I don't really think there is a cure for such....

Blogger Quilp February 05, 2017 3:43 PM  

"Conservatism falters, fails, and finds itself utterly effaced because and only because it fights the wrong battle on the wrong battlefield."

When Jonah Goldberg came out last week and claimed Milo was enjoying the riots in Berkeley, basically absolving the actual rioters by singling out Milo instead, I realized the Cucks will always allow the progressives physical spaces (like Berkeley), and ideological issues/ spaces (like immigration, race, poverty) that they will side with the left if those spaces are violated, even by someone of their own cuckservative clan. Not only that, there are NO sacred spaces they will defend. No values they wont accept the left has no right to attack. No Cathedral the left may not have a right to desecrate. But life isn't football, you cannot score while on defense

I am so sick of hearing people claim the behavior at these riots is only going to drive more people to the polls! Well maybe, but the point of these riots is to make those election results meaningless. The visuals may drive some to the right, but they also excite those on the left to the possibilities of violence.

Blogger dc.sunsets February 05, 2017 3:47 PM  

@ tz, GHWB was the CIA openly planting its flag atop the US Capital. It was the Eye of Sauron put in place and Washington DC openly declared Mordor-on-the-Potomac.

Even the Dulles Brothers would never agree to so brazenly declare sovereignty.

Blogger dc.sunsets February 05, 2017 3:51 PM  

Quilp, such acts are just signposts. They show us where we are on the map, and we can guess where the path leads. That's all they do. It's not a feedback loop.

Blogger Baloo February 05, 2017 4:14 PM  

Karsten, you are right. See:
http://ex-army.blogspot.com/2017/02/communist-street-thugs.html

Anonymous Jack Amok February 05, 2017 4:20 PM  

OT but timely, UsaToday has a site where you can vote on SuperBowl commercials and monkeywrench the narrative. There are all sorts of execrable ads. Audi has that reprehensible "grrl power" soapbox commercial. Lumber84 has one that appears to celebrate illegal immigrants. There's one for Hulu's A Handmaid's Tale adaptation. Oh yeah, and Budweiser's fake pro-immigration story about their founder.

Blogger Doom February 05, 2017 4:22 PM  

From what I gathered, I am guilty as charged. Even if I have been leaving the fold for some time now, I still catch myself, from time to time, going the wrong way. I see it in others around me, ostensibly on the same side. Though I noted long ago, that one of the problems, if also a feature, of conservatives is that we aren't, and don't go, in lockstep. Yes, for good and for ill.

I, for my part, will continue to choose not to be in lockstep as a general rule. Yeah, maybe I'm missing your point, or not. As to winning this thing? I don't think either side will win until nearing Armageddon. This has been the crux of all wars since the fall of man. I might easily be wrong, I just don't think so.

Blogger Retrenched February 05, 2017 4:25 PM  

A conservative is never happier than when he is losing everything he claims to hold dear... on principle.

Take his freedom, his property, his country, his children, everything he claims to cherish. Just let him keep his principles and he will die with a smile on his face.

Anonymous Napoleon 12pdr February 05, 2017 4:42 PM  

#47: Concur.

The Orthodox "conservatives" have a martyr complex. They regard defeat as a proof of their purity of character and nobility of spirit. As Vince Lombardi is reputed to have said, "Show me a good loser, and I'll show you a loser."

Blogger Orville February 05, 2017 4:47 PM  

John is moving in the right direction when he says that conservatives bring a knife to a gunfight. Even talking of a holy crusade is a step. Where I see him still needing clarity is this chivalrous war idea. It seems to be a big part of his thinking and writing in the Count To.. and Moth series which I love. But war is ugly and brutal. You firebomb the Dresdens and nuke the Hiroshimas of your implacable enemies.

Anonymous Roundtine February 05, 2017 4:55 PM  

Liberty versus Equality is the best book I've read on the subject. Either you are for liberty or you are for equality, you cannot have both. Once you abandon equality and work to preserve negative rights (liberty), you become a total shitlord. You are still a conservative if you haven't at least entertained the thought that the Revolution was a bad idea.

Blogger Doom February 05, 2017 4:57 PM  

Orville,

Hiroshima was required, Dresden was just being ass... and from something the Allies started. We hit civilians first, if that is how war happens often enough. Though with Churchill, and some of ours, it might have been on purpose. FDR was a wholly loathsome specimen of a man too. Still, it often goes that way even sometimes with mostly decent men in charge. Just saying, it is as often choice as not.

Blogger tz February 05, 2017 5:13 PM  

@38 This too, shall pass
Like a kidney stone.

Blogger tz February 05, 2017 5:18 PM  

@51 - Hiroshima wasn't "required" but the alternative would require spilling a lot of Ally blood.

This is my point of the Rip van Con in 1987 and the idiot cucks giving the devil 30 years of free reign.

In 1987, we could at little but not insignificant cost won forever, especially 1990 after the Berlin Wall fell. Instead we let Satan run and infiltrate into things.

Here in 2017, I doubt there are enough men (with chests as per Lewis, Abolition) left to avoid using a Hiroshima solution.

I expect it, sadly. The cancer has been left to metastasize and the medicines have been left to expire.

The gangrenous left coast limb is best amputated. The alternatives will be more painful and expensive.

Blogger tz February 05, 2017 5:20 PM  

@49 - One can bring a rosary to a gunfight. Nuns can stop tanks. But if you are going the way of weapons, then the error is to bring an insufficient weapon or play by rules the opposition isn't.

Blogger bob kek mando ( Death To The Boor-geois, Keks To The Lol-etariat ) February 05, 2017 5:28 PM  

where is the "Why the Falcons always lose" thread?

Anonymous Sharrukin February 05, 2017 5:29 PM  

54. tz

Nuns can stop tanks.

No they can't.

They can restrain already decent men.

Against the indecent they are just fresh meat.

Blogger VD February 05, 2017 5:33 PM  

Hiroshima was required

FFS, we've covered this before. It was absolutely not required. Japan had already offered to surrender with terms very similar to the final ones.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash February 05, 2017 5:37 PM  

Doctor Alt-Wright: I'm sorry to have to tell you this Mr Con, but you have lung cancer.

Mr Conseravtive: Not, that's not possible. I just have a cold or something.

Doctor Alt-Wright:No, it's definitely cancer. See, here on the MRI, this is a tumor.

Mr Conservative:Okay maybe there's a problem. Surely it's not as drastic as all that. How about I exercise. That's good for you. And maybe some nutritional supplements. I'm sure if I just take some mega-doses of Vitamin C, I'll be all right.

Doctor Alt-Wright: No, this is cancer. It will expand until it takes over your left lung, and spread through your body, destroying your organs until you die in agony.

Mr Conservative: It's part of my own body. I'm sure if we give it time and the right encouragement, it'll settle in and assimilate.

Doctor Alt-Wright:IT'S FUCKING CANCER, YOU MORON, IT WILL KILL YOU UNLESS YOU CUT IT OUT!

Mr Conservative: Remove it? Cut it out? What is wrong with you? Are you some sort of vivsectionist! Do you get off on torturing animals? You can't do that! You're just like an NKVD torturer!
It's simply not possible. You'd have to cut me o[pen, and that's assault with a deadly weapon. That's a crime! How dare you!

Doctor Alt-Wright: Mr. C, we have to get the tumor out immediately, then use chemotherapy and radiation treatments to kill the remaining cancer cells. If we do all that, and immediately, you maybe have a 40 or 50% chance of surviving the next 5 years. If we do nothing you will die, and not pleasantly.

Mr Conservative: Radiation? Radiation causes cancer! Are you trying to give me cancer? You evil bastard! And what's this about klilling my cells? Those cells are part of my own body. You can't just kill them. Why are you trying to kill me?
I certainly don't see the need for surgery and radiation. Using them would make you as bad as the cancer.

Doctor Alt-Wright: Look, just make out your will. Like right now. When you're ready to take this seriously come back. Don't wait too long though, because every single day makes it harder to treat.
Now get out.

Mr Conservative: I'm reporting you to the AMA and the state licensing board, you quack!

Blogger Jose February 05, 2017 5:41 PM  

Orville wrote:You firebomb the Dresdens and nuke the Hiroshimas of your implacable enemies.

The small problem being, within this metaphor, that the Dresden is inseparable from New York and Hiroshima is inseparable from Houston. In fact, for almost everyone, the enemy has already established beachheads and defensive positions inside their minds.

There's a bit of positional warfare thinking in that Dresden/Hiroshima metaphor. The Pentagon does a lot of that, positional warfare thinking (2GW); I hear they have the Flanders trench-digging all planned out for when the next war happens.

I can't support VD's recommendation of reading Lind's 4GW book enough, though I think that's only a very small part of the problem.

(Obviously Lind knows the difference, but many people reading the book conflate guerrilla with terrorism, not understanding the fundamental differences between these types of warfare; the book is a bit unclear on that, to be fair to readers.)

Blogger Doom February 05, 2017 5:45 PM  

VD,

"Hiroshima was required

FFS, we've covered this before. It was absolutely not required. Japan had already offered to surrender with terms very similar to the final ones."


We may have discussed it. We did not agree. You really have to get that straight. I never agreed with your assessment, nor did I agree with their terms. Although I think the last city was hit because it was Catholic as much as because it was Japanese. Other than targeting, I never agreed that it was wrong. Hell, they were trying to figure out how to murder the Allied general staff at the surrender, which is why it was held on a carrier. Fuckers. Bomb them again!

Blogger Jose February 05, 2017 5:48 PM  

Doom wrote:Hell, they were trying to figure out how to murder the Allied general staff at the surrender, which is why it was held on a carrier.

I think you mean the Iowa-class battleship Missouri.

Blogger Mr.MantraMan February 05, 2017 5:49 PM  

Ask a conservative what "ism", "ist" or "phobia" they take seriously. Hint, it's a trap question, and since conservatives by nature are literally half wits its best you 2x4 them with a clue bat, repeatedly if necessary when they answer in the affirmative.

So gently I ask a good man, Mr. Wright which of the above do you take seriously?

Anonymous carminoreal33 February 05, 2017 5:54 PM  

Fight fire with fire...

1. Gloria Steinem wants to "register" as a Muslim in the non-existent registry that exists only in the Left's collective mind? Double blue pill her, relentless memes, trolling, discussion podding...

#BurkaforCommittedMuslimGloriaSteinem

2. Keith Ellison? Push hard for his DNC Chairmanship...then let him know: "Mr. Ellison, when are you going to step up and start demanding we get reparations from these white folk?"

Get that discussion out there, often and big.

3. Alt-Lite/West and Right are (rightly) observing / complaining about the Leftists burning shit at Berkeley...screw that.

#WhyNotSherman@Berkeley
#BurnItAllDownYaleNext

4. Wanna use innuendo to insult/implicate the Left ("It might have actually been alt-righters that caused the problems") go full Matt Forney-style (and Roosh)...questions become top Google search results...

"Is **Insert name of Leftist** a pedophile masking his sickness by attacking regular Americans for protecting free speech at Berkeley?"

Btw, where are the list of names of those arrested, and has the guy who hit Spencer been identified yet?

Remember Los Pepes...

Blogger Stilicho February 05, 2017 6:21 PM  

Tldr: don't bring a political philosophy to a religious war... you might as well bring a knife to a gunfight. As Wright says, put down your knives and let the cannons roar!

Blogger tz February 05, 2017 6:27 PM  

@56 - Nuns stopped tanks sent by Ferdinand Marcos. That is the point of Fourth generation war. It is won at the moral level. Nuns tend to have lots of moral capital.

@58 - That is the 1987-1991 diagnosis, but I enjoyed the post.
Mr Conservative: I'm reporting you to the AMA and the state licensing board, you quack!
Cucks also will quack or make whatever noise.

Anonymous Jack February 05, 2017 6:28 PM  

"You are answered that modern progress has proven that truth is untrue, for all things are matters of mere opinion that each man decides for himself."

I think Scott Adams' analysis of Trump in terms of persuasion is essentially correct. If just speaking the truth could win an election, then Ron Paul would have won in a landslide in 2008. But it can't. Trump speaks the truth (sometimes) but he does more than that. He speaks unspeakable truths that carry emotional weight, and the emotion is what persuades. I wish it were otherwise, but it's not.

Oswald Spengler's notion of Caesarism at the penultimate stage of civilization goes a way towards explaining Trump.

"Now, as a conservative, you point out that all these things are simply illogical, paradoxes even a schoolboy could see cannot possibly be true."

Is this not the error that Vox identified as trying to speak dialectic to someone who only understands rhetoric? This is why conservatives always lose, because George Will and his little bowtie reciting facts is simply not persuasive.

The Right needs both dialectic and rhetoric. It needs people who accurately perceive reality (to the degree that humans can do that, through a glass darkly, as it were) AND it needs shitlords who understand how to persuade.

Blogger tz February 05, 2017 6:29 PM  

The error with Hiroshima and Dresden is that civilized Men can usually recognize the hierarchy and settle and submit (without dishonor).
Both Hitler and Tojo wanted to fight to the death, which is gamma.
Once a war is lost, it is better to surrender.

Blogger Doom February 05, 2017 6:42 PM  

tz,

Gamma and the feminine. Kali comes to mind. The reason a true God would never put a woman in charge of war. Any such corruption has to be fixed.

Anonymous A Most Deplorable Paradigm Is More Than Twenty Cents February 05, 2017 6:51 PM  

Conservatives always fight to preserve what libtards won 20 years previously. That is why they cannot even conserve the little girls bathroom, and why they always lose. Because they always accept the libtard premises at the start.

Really, conservatives are like someone trying to drive down a freeway by staring at the rear view mirror.

Anonymous Sharrukin February 05, 2017 6:52 PM  

67. tz

Once a war is lost, it is better to surrender.

Not to Muslims, blacks, or leftists it isn't.

Facing civilized or semi-civilized enemies, then yes, surrender can make sense.

Anonymous chedolf February 05, 2017 7:00 PM  

Wright - One main reason why a Last Crusade must be called is that Conservatism...has no defense to offer when the fascistic cultural Marxism...

"Marxists are the real fascists" is the new "Dems are the real racists."

Conservatives always lose because they start every fight by accepting the progressive frame.

Blogger JaimeInTexas February 05, 2017 7:31 PM  

He lost me at slavers.

Blogger JaimeInTexas February 05, 2017 7:32 PM  

Today, a conservative was the progressive of 35yrs ago.

Blogger James Dixon February 05, 2017 8:37 PM  

> Civilization is self-terminating.


“Barbarianism is the natural state of mankind. Civilization is unnatural. It is the whim of circumstance. And barbarianism must ultimately triumph”
― Robert E. Howard

> And Wright is not really amenable to learning...

Nobody over 40 throws away everything they have discerned to be true over the years casually or on a whim. It takes careful thought and quite a bit of time to correct the errors they've built up over they years. But as long as they're dedicated to the truth, they'll do so. John is dedicated to the truth.

Anonymous Sharrukin February 05, 2017 8:50 PM  

John Wright does make a very good point in his article about how leftism is a semi-religious movement that for reasons of dogma is immune to logic.

I have always wondered/suspected if ideology is the modern replacement for religion, some more so than others?

I mean the idea of equality is not rationally demonstrable, nor are the 'rights of man' actually self-evident. The reverse can easily be observed in nature and human interactions.

Blogger Doom February 05, 2017 9:06 PM  

JaimeInTexas,

"Today, a conservative was the progressive of 35yrs ago."

OUCH Maybe WOUCH Wait, 35? *mumbling and counting* Actually, yeah. Bitch. Still, fair enough. Then again, that is pretty much everyone, come to think about it. Everyone who can cross over that is. Cunts can't, of either sex. It do take a while for dem nuts to drop. But when they do? Watch your chin. Are you a woman? If not, scratch that. I hope. Fucking world, I hate it.

Blogger Doom February 05, 2017 9:08 PM  

James Dixon,

Life itself is an aberration. I do think that without a belief in God, the God of Abraham as I see things, then death is the only option for a god. The only truth. In time, life has to end, just on average. Shouldn't exist as is. hubba-hubba?

Blogger tz February 05, 2017 9:22 PM  

OT - Ursula LeGuin rejects the Scifi "box"

Anonymous chedolf February 05, 2017 10:51 PM  

Sharrukin - John Wright does make a very good point in his article about how leftism is a semi-religious movement that for reasons of dogma is immune to logic.

Stanley Kurtz, writing in National Review, figured this out back in 2001.

Blogger Orville February 05, 2017 10:53 PM  

@67 The error with Hiroshima and Dresden is that civilized Men can usually recognize the hierarchy and settle and submit (without dishonor). The opposition we are facing is not exactly civilized to our standards. At least one of you recognized I was using a metaphor with Dresden and Hiroshima, but the rest of you are way too literal minded.

No sane man wants this fight, but when when it comes don't be half-assed about it. They start it, you finish it.

Blogger beerme February 05, 2017 11:32 PM  

He lost me at slavers.
John Brown was the original antifa terrorist.

Blogger The Kurgan February 06, 2017 12:05 AM  

There are three problems:
1. MPAI ^3 (several of those who are not idiots are actively evil, and all are corrupt because fallen world)

2. The unwillingness to immediately and FORCEFULLY correct the very first hint of permitting a lie into the description of concrete, objective reality.

3. The unwillingness to use actual, instant, heavy and recurring violence on those who would lie to us (2 above) enslave or kill us.

Blogger Doom February 06, 2017 12:39 AM  

Orville,

Fair enough. I can see your point that way too. All good. Not sure, at this point and hour, I can go back and offer another response. But I think I catch your drift.

Blogger Resident Moron™ February 06, 2017 12:47 AM  

There's a text in scripture that warns against those who cry "Peace peace, when there is no peace."

A lot of people misunderstand it. It's not about timing (i.e. crying peace in a time of war). The basic truth is that we are born into a conflict that started long before we were born and will outlive most people who will ever live.

There is no peace!

The best we can achieve in this world is that men of honour and duty wield the sword.

Blogger Scott February 06, 2017 1:33 AM  

@praetorian
>>
Conservatism, while perfectly sound when facing Commies in a Cold War, Nazis in a World War, or Slavers in a Civil War

Um, John... I have some bad news on that last one...
<<

The irony.

Well at least all those "freed" slaves were gainfully employed afterward and lived long healthy lives. At least that makes up for the 600,000+ who were killed during the war and the untold hundreds of thousands who suffered and died horrible deaths following the war. And I'm positive it makes up for the utter destruction of the South. I mean there's no way Lincoln could have avoided total war, and he for sure didn't shit all over the constitution to start the war that he for sure didn't want.

OpenID anonymos-coward February 06, 2017 1:39 AM  


In 1987, we could at little but not insignificant cost won forever, especially 1990 after the Berlin Wall fell. Instead we let Satan run and infiltrate into things.


Who's "we"? The USA was more leftist than the USSR ever was. There were no good guys in this fight.

Blogger John Wright February 06, 2017 1:47 AM  

" all of the victories he thought won had been lost in the meantime"

No false advertising please. I did not say or imply that any part of our victories over Nazism and communism have been lost. In fact they had not been.
Since fascism is dead and communism is reduced to a ghost of its former self, the conservative victories are real enough and obvious enough for anyone with eyes to see.

Please do not put words in my mouth in implying that I believe something that I do not believe and that in fact is the opposite of what I said.

Blogger Buybuydandavis February 06, 2017 1:47 AM  

Conservatives have lost because they have held muh principles as out of context absolutes, instead of a contract demanding reciprocity.

One way cease fire is suicide
One way rule of law is subjection
One way civility is submission

Blogger John Wright February 06, 2017 1:58 AM  

@12
"Yet John Wright, Sara Hoyt, and many other Buckley "conservatives" buy into this insanity " of " blank slate egalitarianism "

Please do not put words in my mouth, especially when you are saying something that is a direct and diametric opposites of what I actually believe and have said on many an occasion.

Life is to short for me to repeat myself endlessly to people who invent make believe caricatures of me inside thier heads.

I do not believe in blank slate egalitarianism. I also do not believe that the government should establish rank in society based on birth. Can you comprehend the difference between the two, my dear sir? If not, you are too dense for this debate. If so, too dishonest.

Blogger John Wright February 06, 2017 2:08 AM  

@26
" Wright also errs in that Man has been Abolished."

Do I write in some form of cryptic hieroglyphics you are unable to decipher, sir? That is the main point of the column. I said it and repeated it.

You and I agree on this point. I am blowing the trumpet as loudly as lungs can blow on this point.

What in the world does the column say or imply that makes you think otherwise? I am curious.

Blogger Tuatha February 06, 2017 2:23 AM  

"Kill the christian and save the man," saith the only light on this blog.

Blogger Tuatha February 06, 2017 2:32 AM  

"I mean the idea of equality is not rationally demonstrable, nor are the 'rights of man' actually self-evident. The reverse can easily be observed in nature and human interactions."

Good point. Maybe we can start beating some of the beta boys' on this site so they will never return to a computer ever again. I am starving for some kickass time punching the other-turned cheek.

Blogger The Overgrown Hobbit February 06, 2017 3:14 AM  

Of course, I expect John, being dubious about identity politics,

Un-GAFIAT-ing long enough to make a correction. Neither John nor I have a problem with identity politics.

Our identity is Christian.

The problem comes when you want us to pick other identities to trump that one.

Worst of all you aren't offering "rationalist" "space-princess geek" or "librarian" identities: You want us to pick dead boring Soc-jus identities like White Male.

It's not that we don't appreciate that the Soc-jus vileprogs are forcing these identities upon us.

But you seem to be asking us to revel in the ass-hattery.

It's no wonder any red-blooded American would grumble.

Anonymous Sharrukin February 06, 2017 3:30 AM  

93. The Overgrown Hobbit

Our identity is Christian.

So Uganda (85% Christian) would be a closer fit for you than the USA (70% Christian)?

Umm...Okay!

Blogger Resident Moron™ February 06, 2017 3:36 AM  


Why Conservative lose?


OpenID anonymos-coward February 06, 2017 4:20 AM  

So Uganda (85% Christian) would be a closer fit for you than the USA (70% Christian)?

A trick question, as only people who've been to Uganda can really answer.

Blogger John rockwell February 06, 2017 4:37 AM  



“My principles are only those that, before the French Revolution, every well-born person considered sane and normal.”
― Julius Evola

Said no conservative ever.

Blogger Pteronarcyd February 06, 2017 6:17 AM  

I am amused by all here who belittle Conservatism. The problem isn't Conservatism, but that those calling themselves Conservatives -- ie, the GOPe -- are not Conservative. The Alternative Right (the Alt Reich aside) is nothing more than rebranded Paleoconservatism, ie, authentic Conservatism -- movements in opposition of the Mainstream Left and the (relatively) new Alternative Left, Neoconservatism.

Rather than taking the inane position that we should abandon Conservatism, we should be reclaiming Conservatism from those subversives and cuckservatives who abandoned the ideology and appropriated the term.

We don't abandon and belittle Christianity because Jim Jones, an ordained Christian minister, ran a horrendously evil cult. We shouldn't pretend to abandon or belittle Conservatism because weak and unscrupulous men gained control of the GOP in the face of a cultural Marxist onslaught.

Blogger Doom February 06, 2017 6:45 AM  

Pteronarcyd,

I am a conservative. I usually try to differentiate, or take my dues, or just tell others to shove off if I disagree. Nothing fancy. I don't think I'm the only self-ascribing conservative here. Actually, while Vox denies conservative bones, in spite of being highly rated among conservative blogs, what he fails to realize is... most of us (to my way of thinking) are (or were when I was here more commonly) conservative.

Put out the cheese, pass around the wine, lecture, listen, and host all he wants, he is only part of the picture. Oh, I... test the banning waters from time to time. Now? I don't think so, but okay either way.

He knows I can quit a blog, if warned, and never go back. I'm not like the others. I won't even whine about it, if I might mention it with a chuckle.

Blogger VD February 06, 2017 7:01 AM  

Actually, while Vox denies conservative bones, in spite of being highly rated among conservative blogs, what he fails to realize is... most of us (to my way of thinking) are (or were when I was here more commonly) conservative.

Why on Earth would you think I fail to realize that? Did you forget all the polls where most of the readers here supported George W. Bush despite my constant warnings about him? I know perfectly well that most readers are conservative. That's why I address them so frequently. I'm not trying to reach National Review's columnists.

Blogger VD February 06, 2017 7:01 AM  

Rather than taking the inane position that we should abandon Conservatism, we should be reclaiming Conservatism from those subversives and cuckservatives who abandoned the ideology and appropriated the term.

You're wrong. Read Russell Kirk. Failing that, read Cuckservative.

Blogger VD February 06, 2017 7:02 AM  

Our identity is Christian.

That's not true. You have a political identity, and "Christian" is not a political identity. You also have a racial identity and "Christian" is not a race.

Blogger Resident Moron™ February 06, 2017 7:15 AM  

"... those calling themselves Conservatives -- ie, the GOPe -- are not Conservative."

The USSR was not real communism.
The USA is not real capitalism.
No true Scotsman ...

The thing is, both the concept and the label of Conservatism are discredited.

You can spend your time trying to re-animate the lifeless dessicated politico-philosophical corpse of Conservatism, or you can put that energy and commitment into something with a chance of not only surviving but thriving.

Winning.

You can call it, in your private conversations with yourself, whatever you like. But the Conservatives - National Review etc - are never going to accept you as one of them, never going to agree you're a conservative, once they know you're not afraid of being called an uncouth racist.

You see, you're either distinct from them, from their "brand" of conservatism, or you're not.

Your choice.

Blogger dc.sunsets February 06, 2017 8:04 AM  

Jose, I have Lind's book & look forward to adding its insights to how I will plan for the coming conflict. 4GW arrives just in time for a conflict between combatants so intermingled that the political state all but evaporates amidst the very battle begun.

Blogger dc.sunsets February 06, 2017 8:13 AM  

James Dixon, I theorize that civilization of the kind produced by Westerners requires approximately 99% acceptance (at the level of DNA) and anything less than that can at best produce conditions few now would call civilized (e.g., the tyrannical civilizations of antiquity.)

Black, even those in the USA with a reported mean 20% Caucasian genome, hit about 95% civilized so communities the form decline, as do those created by Mestizos.

Blogger VFM #7634 February 06, 2017 8:59 AM  

Our identity is Christian.

That's not true. You have a political identity, and "Christian" is not a political identity. You also have a racial identity and "Christian" is not a race.


@102 VD
I'd go further and point out that "Christian" CANNOT BE an identity because any human being can become a Christian. It's like "identifying" as a believer in 2+2 equalling 4.

Anonymous Bobthebuilder February 06, 2017 9:42 AM  

Why conservatives lose...

"conservatives" and society as a whole have lost their sense of balance, the western version of Yin & Yang. Over the last 100 years or so, as a society we have conditioned ourselves to not accept violence, to focus and how things "feel", this is a huge problem. How can you understand peace if you do not truly understand violence, emotion without reason... Any unbalanced position is ultimately an extremest and destructive position.
The progressives cannot be successfully counter expect by a body that has found its own balance. To counter progressives with an opposing unbalanced dogma is to replace one destructive dogma for another, you haven't really improved anything, only traded one demon for another.

Blogger Cail Corishev February 06, 2017 10:15 AM  

It's appropriate that there are as many theories for why conservatives lose as there are definitions of conservatism.

Blogger Pteronarcyd February 06, 2017 12:42 PM  

VD wrote:

"You're wrong. Read Russell Kirk. Failing that, read Cuckservative."

I've read Kirk. Which of his Ten Principles do you disavow? I am assuming none. I regard your 16 Points as a Paleocon manifesto. Which of your points are anti-Paleocon?

Anonymous Frank M. February 06, 2017 1:12 PM  

Let's just put it this way:

The same sick minds who believe in anti-semitism and Holocaust denial ...are the same crazies who believe in #PizzaGate conspiracies.

None are rational. None are conservative. None are sane.

Blogger Pteronarcyd February 06, 2017 1:13 PM  

Resident Moron wrote:

"The USSR was not real communism.
"The USA is not real capitalism.
"No true Scotsman ..."

Your appellation is apt.

"The thing is, both the concept and the label of Conservatism are discredited."

The label is certainly marred, but the concept is sound. After all, Authentic Conservatism = Paleoconservatism = Alternative Right (excluding the appropriators in the Alt Reich).

Jim Jones and many others have marred the label of Christianity. Do you think they have, as a result, successfully discredited Christianity? VD obviously doesn't think so.

"You can spend your time trying to re-animate the lifeless dessicated politico-philosophical corpse of Conservatism, or you can put that energy and commitment into something with a chance of not only surviving but thriving."

Such as the Alt Right (ie, Paleoconservatism).

"You can call it, in your private conversations with yourself, whatever you like. But the Conservatives - National Review etc - are never going to accept you as one of them, never going to agree you're a conservative, once they know you're not afraid of being called an uncouth racist."

You don't get it -- Nat Review is Neoconservative, ie, Alt Left. Neoconservatism is NOT Authentic Conservatism. Paleocons are anti-Neocon.

Our Founders and Framers were Nationalists -- only free White men of good character were eligible to be citizens for most of our first century. No Authentic Conservatism is going to cower from being called a name:

Paleocon columnist, Sam Francis, defined Authentic Conservatism as "the survival and enhancement of a particular people and its institutionalized cultural expressions."

No one at Nat Review is doing that.

"You see, you're either distinct from them, from their "brand" of conservatism, or you're not.

"Your choice."

My choice is Paleoconservatism, which embraces Kirk's Ten Principles and VD's Sixteen Points.

By mindlessly demeaning Conservatism when you actually mean the Alt Left, Neoconservatism, you are merely being a useful tool of the Trotskyites.

As an Authentic Conservative I know that words mean things.

http://www.phawker.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/paleoconservative.jpg

Blogger szopen February 06, 2017 2:07 PM  

Here's a thing: as you know, Poland has not accepted refugees from the 3rd world. But our stronghold starts to to tremble: some smarter than usual leftist made a call to accept 10 orphaned children from Aleppo. Now, the fact-diggers found out that this is a pure PR move, as there is no possiblity to vet supposed children, no real orphaned who would want to get to Poland, nor real possibility to do it so safely if any child would be found by the good-doers. IT DOES NOT MATTER.

My Facebook feed is swamped by shrieks against those evil heartless fascists, who would be against bringing those poor children (and their legal custodians .. and maybe families, as the news actually said in fine print "some of them are orphaned"). Conservatism loses because reality is sometimes cruel, pointing the reality sometimes makes you look like a cold, blackhearted person, and people do not like cold bastards, nor they want to look like cold bastards. Who could be against bringing those poor children? I mean, it's just ten children, right?

Blogger Snidely Whiplash February 06, 2017 3:02 PM  

Pteronarcyd wrote:I've read Kirk. Which of his Ten Principles do you disavow? I am assuming none.

Kirk himself says that Conservatism is not an ideology, dumbshit.

Blogger PoseidonAwoke February 06, 2017 4:10 PM  

I see this 'wrong battlefield' as having to do with the preferred means of coercion of each group: The Left is female, method of coercion is voice. The Right is male, method of coercion is violence. Enter Hoppe's 'argumentation ethics', from Infogalactic: "Specifically, to argue that violence should be used to resolve conflicts (instead of argumentation) is a performative contradiction."

The Left's battlefield is voice. The Right's battlefield is a literal battlefield. Conservatism fails to advance the interests of the Right, because it accepts Hoppe's augmentation ethics and eschews violence against the Left. The Right must do what Trump does: Leave all bargaining chips on the table, even the nuclear option. A Right which is going to win is one which explicitly states that if it cannot come to agreement with the Left, then it will seek to force its submission, expulsion or extirpation. Only by moving the battle from voice to violence (or at least the credible threat of violence) does the Right take full advantage of all its bargaining chips.

There is no more complete display of the rejection of the Left's frame, than war. It must be clear that the Left's demands will only be met if their cost is less than the cost of the Right violently subjugating, expelling or exterminating the Left. Conservatives made it clear that there was no demand that would move them to war. The Alt-Right makes it clear that war is on the table if the Left demands too much: such as their current demands for the complete destruction of Western Civilization.

Blogger The Aardvark February 06, 2017 4:27 PM  

"Conservatism falters, fails, and finds itself utterly effaced because and only because it fights the wrong battle on the wrong battlefield."

And so the progressive has not only reliably moved the goalpost; he has relocated the entire field, dome and all.

Blogger tz February 06, 2017 4:44 PM  

@90 The prescription for a man, abolished, that is without a chest is different than one who still has one but is damaged. Based on the prescription, I disagree with the diagnosis.

If you assert that you agree you are dealing with men without chests, no amount of metaphysics will cure him and may make the problem worse.

Blogger PoseidonAwoke February 06, 2017 5:23 PM  

To put it another way, Conservatives are/were "hopeful" that the Left could be enticed with nothing more than the carrot (that they could be integrated into the system of production through libertarian systems of remuneration). The New Right (Alt-Right) is "resigned" (hopeless) to the reality that the Left must be ruled, that their harm must be limited, that their privileges must be curtailed to match their level of agency. The New Right understands the reality that Man is a beast, and that a human has transcended his animal form and that we must learn to distinguish the two and treat them accordingly: beasts as beasts, humans as humans.

Blogger John Wright February 06, 2017 5:25 PM  

@6

Your suspicion in this case is unfounded. Zama zama ōzza rachama ōzai (from Chap X of Pistis Sophia, the book of Faithful Wisdom).

Gnosticism has been a particular study of mine for several years. See COUNT TO A TRILLION for example.

I trust your tedium is not so deep as to prevent you from seeing the parallel between ancient Gnosticism and modern Leftism?

Blogger Resident Moron™ February 06, 2017 9:49 PM  

Pteronarcyd

A correction and a question;

1. I don't "mindlessly deride" conservatism. I note it's failure(s),

2. Do you know why taking the Lord's name is a sin?

Blogger Francis Parker Yockey February 07, 2017 2:47 AM  

"Both Hitler and Tojo wanted to fight to the death, which is gamma."

You are perhaps forgetting:
1. The refusal to discuss terms/ insistence on "unconditional surrender" and
2. The promulgation of the Morgenthau Plan to genocide the German people

The combination of the two does seem designed to push an enemy to "fight to the death," does it not?

Blogger Francis Parker Yockey February 07, 2017 2:51 AM  

@chedolf
"Marxists are the real fascists" is the new "Dems are the real racists."

Bingo. To accept the demonology of the Left is to accept their worldview; their frame. Do not fear or respect their gods, do not take their devils seriously.

Blogger Francis Parker Yockey February 07, 2017 3:01 AM  

@Sharrukin
"how leftism is a semi-religious movement that for reasons of dogma is immune to logic."

This is a good analysis of the internal workings of leftist/ PC "morality."

http://thoughtprison-pc.blogspot.com/2011/08/thought-prison-excerpts.html?m=1

Blogger Francis Parker Yockey February 07, 2017 3:04 AM  

@anonymos-coward
It's as if they believe (((communism))) and (((capitalism))) were really two separate entities, or something.

Blogger Pteronarcyd February 07, 2017 3:53 AM  

Snidely Whiplash emitted the following from his malodorous anal orifice:
"Kirk himself says that Conservatism is not an ideology, dumbshit."

That is correct. He calls it Conservatism a "body of opinion," a phrase that is effectively synonymous with ideology (ie, a system of ideas).

But, thanks for letting us know what cartoon characters are thinking.

Blogger Pteronarcyd February 07, 2017 3:57 AM  

Resident Moron wrote:
"1. I don't "mindlessly deride" conservatism. I note it's failure(s),"

You note the failures of self-described conservatives, not of conservatism itself. By mischaracterizing the former as the latter, you are guilty of being mindless.

"2. Do you know why taking the Lord's name is a sin?"

Yes, and I doubt you do.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash February 07, 2017 4:07 AM  

That is correct. He calls it Conservatism a "body of opinion," a phrase that is effectively synonymous with ideology (ie, a system of ideas).
Yeah, and that part where he describes it as the absence of ideology, we can just ignore that.
Well, goosld luck with your Conservatism Of One. What with every ineffective Conservative, every elected Conservative, every person described as a Conservative turning out to be a NotARealConservative, that leaves you, and JCW, and at least 250 other guys as TruConservatives(tm).

Have fun standing on Yoah Principles and sneering. We'll probably let you out of prison when we win. Unless you're dicks about it.

Blogger Resident Moron™ February 07, 2017 7:29 AM  

Well, let us in on the secret.

Surely you are the people and wisdom will die with you ...

Post a Comment

Rules of the blog
Please do not comment as "Anonymous". Comments by "Anonymous" will be spammed.

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts