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

Monday, February 22, 2016

A pernicious influence

Or so they say. This exchange over at Sarah Hoyt's is both illuminating and amusing. It even features a rare appearance by Dr. Jerry Pournelle. Anyhow, they're worrying about Donald Trump and America turning too far to the "right", by which it appears they mean an America that is genuinely nationalist, cognizant of its own interests, and concerned about its own survival:
accordingtohoyt
I speak enough with millenials in private to see even the left ones “turn” - ya’ll are going to end up like my generation in Portugal. They pushed leftism on us every chance. And we ran right as fast as we could.

Foxfier
That’s what worries me. Rand was right about what was wrong, but wrong about what was right. (Mangled Chesterton, there.) There are a lot of other directions besides “right.” Mostly just tired of getting kicked by the people who didn’t manage to stop this from happening because we haven’t magically fixed it before 35.

accordingtohoyt
Yeah, a lot of them are becoming like VD. “Everything the leftists say is a lie, so racism, sexism, etc. must have a point.” Head>desk.

Joe in PNG   
So, in order to avoid the ditch on the “Left” side of the road, they are aiming right straight at the ditch on the “Right” side of the road. Either way, you wind up with a totaled car.

overgrownhobbit
VD doesn’t go far enough. Everything the vileprogs advocate needs to be re-examined down to the ground-level assumptions. Stopping part way just leaves one with bits of prog stupid rattling round the mental furnishings and gumming up the philosophy. Like mistaking an is for an ought.

Still have hope for the guy. He’s got some sound foundations, and he’s right more often than wrong.
Now, I like Sarah and I think that her heart is in the right place, but I can only conclude that she has either failed to accurately observe the current situation or to think the matter through sufficiently.

What she, and many conservatives, have yet to grasp is that classical liberalism, conservatism, libertarianism, free trade, constitutionalism, and a whole host of other 18th century concepts that were largely theoretical as well as being near and dear to our hearts have fundamentally failed.

Technology and events have fundamentally changed the way we must now think about these things; the logical cases that were laid out by the various 18th century Enlightenment thinkers are now subject to the analysis of more than 200 years of readily available data. Let the cult of reason be silent when experience and history gainsay its conclusions.

I'm not reacting to the Left. I'm not a reactionary and I'm not reacting to anything except considerably more information than the likes of Smith, Ricardo, Jefferson, Voltaire, or even Mises, Friedman, and Rothbard ever had.

My thinking has changed dramatically because of what I have witnessed over the last four decades. We are still much the same humanity that we always were, but we live in a radically different world today. It was one thing to posture grandly about free trade and the free movement of peoples back in the 1800s, or even the 1970s, it is another to do so when a nation's entire industrial base can be dismantled or the population of an entire nations can literally pick up and move across a continent without anyone, anywhere, so much as lifting a finger to stop them.

Contra Sarah, Trump is neither the potential problem nor is he the solution. What he offers is one last chance to get it right. That's all. He will buy America a little more time to find itself again, to find itself and embrace the strong, self-confidence of White Anglo-Saxon Protestant American nationalism that made the USA a world power and turned it into a place to which people around the world wanted to come.

But they are on the verge of killing the golden goose because they are not, and they never will be, the kind of Americans who built America. Read Cuckservative: How "Conservatives" Betrayed America. Their ideas about America's history and America's founding are little more than romanticized fairy tales. They think they are extending and expanding on the founding concepts when in truth they have perverted them.

Race does matter. Sex does matter. Nationality does matter. Not because the Left lies about these things, but because they are materially and objectively significant. The romantic Right is outdated, ill-informed, and intellectually irrelevant. Here is a hint: if you're even mentioning the word "mercantilism", you are arguing against nationalist Frenchmen dead 300 years, not the nationalist Mil-Right of today.

Labels:

148 Comments:

Anonymous Michael Maier February 22, 2016 9:40 AM  

Seems to me that the Repuke cheerleaders love to feel superior because they read a book on economics once while most Democrats are functionally illiterate or have only read Obama's ghost-written autobiography.

Reading something intelligent is a good start... but it's just a start.

The 50s boom in the US was because we were the last developed nation standing that didn't get bombed half to Hell. And we played all the propaganda that we had just "saved the world".

Sure, it did wonders for the national spirit.

But it sowed the seeds for our destruction, too.

Anonymous Broken Arrow February 22, 2016 9:54 AM  

There are reasons the Alt-Right and Nationalism will accomplish things Libertarianism has not. The first is that culture is not neutral and everything I've read seems to indicate libertarians behave like it is, and second a political system being logical and internally consistent isn't enough to make it appealing.

The second galls libertarians, even myself when I considered myself aligned with the political philosophy. "Can't you see the beauty of the system?!?" No, most people either can't or don't care.

The Conservatives got the first part right, which is culture is not neutral which is why they are social conservatives. They don't have a second part is VD has pointed out, as they don't have a true political theory but rather a philosophy of Justice. This explains their rise to power and prominence as they got one half of it correct, and why they lose to the left who understand culture is not neutral while offering a political system even if it is terribly flawed.

Blogger Salt February 22, 2016 10:06 AM  

America became an open bar serving American drink and people traveled from halfway around the world to get their share. The clientele has changed and many demanded it be changed to accommodate the new arrivals, so now the menu is different from what brought them all here in the first place. Is it any wonder no one is happy?

Blogger Joshua_D February 22, 2016 10:06 AM  

It's pretty simply, really.

There is a limited amount of "fucking over" that people will tolerate. Some people tolerate more fucking over than others for various reasons, but most normal people will not tolerate a total fucking over. Most normal people will not just lie down while you steal all their shit, fuck their women, and try to make them feel happy about the fucking over they are receiving.

At the end of the day, self-interest trumps philosophy.

Blogger Josh February 22, 2016 10:09 AM  

Vox,

Any thoughts on an updated distributism as a way forward?

Blogger VD February 22, 2016 10:11 AM  

Any thoughts on an updated distributism as a way forward?

None at all. I have no idea what that is. As a general rule, I don't go in for anything that comes wrapped as a formal "ism".

Anonymous VFM #6306 February 22, 2016 10:12 AM  

Fewer than twenty men can now launch a major military attack on the U.S. believing that the militant right lack "numbers" is very short-sighted.

Congratulations on being problematic again.

Blogger Jimmy Glover February 22, 2016 10:16 AM  

I believe this election has an idealogical component as well. I believe, in at least my case, that the middle working class is rejecting a ruling class, and by extension, serfdom as a likely outcome.

Thus Trump, and no other. I also like the squalling that Trump will be a dictator. Where is the proof of that.

It's not just SJW's who project.

Blogger VD February 22, 2016 10:16 AM  

I've always been a negative Libertarian. By which I mean that the appeal of libertarianism was the way it was a system in which Man being wolf to Man was least catastrophic. Now that we've seen what quasi-open borders look like, I've been forced to reassess and reject that reasoning.

Blogger Josh February 22, 2016 10:16 AM  

None at all. I have no idea what that is. As a general rule, I don't go in for anything that comes wrapped as a formal "ism".

TL;DR it was developed by Chesterton and Belloc as an alternative to both the Big Business of Capitalism and the Big Government of Communism.

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/distributism-isnt-outdated/

Chesterton’s “distributist” project tried to chart a middle course (but not “Third Way”!) between laissez faire capitalism on the one side and state socialism on the other. The problem with the former, as Chesterton wrote in The Outline of Sanity 10 years after the Russian Revolution, was that “The practical tendency of all trade and business today is towards big commercial combinations, often more imperial, more impersonal, more international than many a communist commonwealth.” While of the alternative, Chesterton said, “the point about Communism is that it only reforms the pickpocket by forbidding pockets.”

Blogger Josh February 22, 2016 10:19 AM  

I've always been a negative Libertarian. By which I mean that the appeal of libertarianism was the way it was a system in which Man being wolf to Man was least catastrophic. Now that we've seen what quasi-open borders look like, I've been forced to reassess and reject that reasoning.

I think the difference between negative and positive libertarianism has been one of the main divides between the LvMI/Ron Paul/Rothbard wing and the Koch/Reason/Cato wing.

Blogger praetorian February 22, 2016 10:22 AM  

The production of small, homogenous and independent political units to foster intra-citizen solidarity seems, to me, to be the only way to reduce the damage of cheating on the prisoners dilemma of society. Discussing this with a co-worker the other day, we came to the conclusion that in our city state, violations of the public trust (property crime, bribery, and so on) would be capital offenses, because they destroyed social capital. (Yes, I have slowly been inserting the Putnam paper into the conversation as well. Red pilling takes time. Enjoy the process.)

Distributism can work. Socialism can work (maybe, for a time at least.) *Whatever* can work. What matters is strong social solidarity that makes up for the systemic failures of any given -ism. How to produce that solidarity in a humane way is the most pressing theoretical problem we face. (NB: this is less important if you have an entire continent to spread out over in front of you, or if you just destroyed the vast majority of the worlds manufacturing capacity and everyone is about to get tremendously rich.)

Blogger Sean February 22, 2016 10:25 AM  

One cannot be a conservative when there is nothing to conserve. Only in radicalism will there be victory for the right. The real value of Trumps isn't what he will or will not do. I believe he wont be able to accomplish much due to the very nature of the system. The real value of Trump is in his polarising nature and the dialectic he has begun. The overton window is shifting, and a new implicit politics of white nationalism has begun to ease into the mainstream.

Blogger Josh February 22, 2016 10:28 AM  

and a new implicit politics of white nationalism has begun to ease into the mainstream.

White nationalism is just as retarded of a starting point as multiculturalism or European nationalism.

Blogger Dexter February 22, 2016 10:31 AM  

Most normal people will not just lie down while you steal all their shit, fuck their women, and try to make them feel happy about the fucking over they are receiving.

The British, Germans, and Swedes (among other Europeans) are doing exactly that right now.

Some of them are grumbling a little bit (but not too loud, because they might get arrested for hatecrime) but fundamentally they are still lying down.

Blogger VD February 22, 2016 10:33 AM  

White nationalism is just as retarded of a starting point as multiculturalism or European nationalism.

No, it's not. You're making a mistake to conflate multiculturalism with nationalism. They are very, very different creeds with different challenges. The problem with white nationalism is that it is partially self-contradicted by the various European nationalisms. Indeed, "white nationalism" only makes sense in an a) American or b) defensive context.

That was the problem for the American Indian. There was no red nationalism, there were only the various Indian nations that were unable to band together in their collective self-interest. Whites now face the same challenge in America, but on a larger scale.

Blogger Joshua_D February 22, 2016 10:34 AM  

The British, Germans, and Swedes (among other Europeans) are doing exactly that right now.

Like I said, some people tolerate more than others, but the European resistance is growing. I mean, they are burning down refugee centers now.

Blogger VFM #7191 February 22, 2016 10:36 AM  

Dexter wrote:The British, Germans, and Swedes (among other Europeans) are doing exactly that right now.

Some of them are grumbling a little bit (but not too loud, because they might get arrested for hatecrime) but fundamentally they are still lying down.


They're doing more than Americans. I don't see Americans burning down section 8 housing projects set aside for imported Syrian "refugees."

Blogger Timmy3 February 22, 2016 10:37 AM  

This means Nationalism is the way forward for Trump is not a conservative and he is more obviously liberal and can negotiate with leftists. Trump will reset the country in his own image. That's the big unknown.

Blogger VD February 22, 2016 10:38 AM  

they are burning down refugee centers now.

The Germans alone burned down more than 1,000. The European peoples are defending themselves much more aggressively than Americans are. There has already been one assassination attempt on a pro-refugee politician.

Anonymous DT February 22, 2016 10:39 AM  

@15 - The British, Germans, and Swedes (among other Europeans) are doing exactly that right now.

Didn't the Germans burn down another announced refugee center just a day or two ago?

And didn't they stand around cheering while blocking police and firefighters from saving the building?

Blogger Josh February 22, 2016 10:40 AM  

The problem with white nationalism is that it is partially self-contradicted by the various European nationalisms. Indeed, "white nationalism" only makes sense in an a) American or b) defensive context.

That's my point. White nationalism is also partially self contradicted by the various American nationalisms.

Blogger VD February 22, 2016 10:41 AM  

Trump will reset the country in his own image. That's the big unknown.

Possibly. But the important thing is that there will likely BE a country.

Blogger VD February 22, 2016 10:43 AM  

That's my point. White nationalism is also partially self contradicted by the various American nationalisms.

Fair enough. But the fact that there are contradictions and complexities doesn't make it the incoherent nonsense that multiculturalism is. And European nationalisms have none of those issues; the EU "continentalism" is obviously a charade and a complete non-starter.

Blogger Josh February 22, 2016 10:45 AM  

And European nationalisms have none of those issues; the EU "continentalism" is obviously a charade and a complete non-starter.

Continentalism is what I meant by European nationalism. EU nationalism as opposed to French, German, Italian nationalism.

Anonymous Broken Arrow February 22, 2016 10:47 AM  

@21 White nationalism is also partially self contradicted by the various American nationalisms

Hence the likely breakup of the US if there is enough stress to the nation.

Blogger Gaiseric February 22, 2016 10:49 AM  

Just because the various "white nations" of America have never gelled into truly being One Nation Under God doesn't mean that they can't. And the existential threat posed by multiculturalism could do so; or at least create a situation in which they stand allied together, if not truly united into one nation.

Blogger Dexter February 22, 2016 10:50 AM  

Until the rapefugees are afraid to come to Europe - and until the politicians are afraid to let them in - it don't mean shit.

Taxpayer-funded refugee housing that is burned down will be rebuilt at taxpayer expense.

Anonymous The other robot February 22, 2016 10:50 AM  

America became an open bar serving American drink and people traveled from halfway around the world to get their share.

I think the reality is that a certain group of people hijacked the 'American' story and tried to sell the concept that it could be applied everywhere as a way to gain financial control of the rest of the world.

However, as Vox says: Race matters and some of them don't want that 'Democracy' snake oil.

OpenID denektenorsk February 22, 2016 10:52 AM  

Today I, as an average Joe can get on a plane and be pretty much anywhere on the planet in 24 hours. That was an unthinkable thought even 60 years ago. Our society, like our education system lags far behind cutting edge technology.

To think that any system born out of the age of enlightenment will work "as is" today is amusing.

Free Trade:
I live in Canada so we got a taste of what free trade does to a country long before the US (NAFTA).

We routinely have US companies sueing provincial/municipal governments over locally instituted laws. Loads of our manufacturing went south to states with cheaper labour. The only reason we have a few vestiges of manufacturing left in Canada is because the auto-unions are clever enough to see which way the wind is blowing and the federal political parties appease them for bloc votes. So we have laws that mandate the % of components that must be manufactured in Canada. Free trade indeed!

With the addition of Mexico to NAFTA we now see auto-worker jobs migrating south to Mexico. Shocking. Who could have ever predicted that?

It doesn't take a genius to see that a flood of cheap 3rd world labour is going to hurt your poor and middle class first. We routinely see that in the oil and gas industries. For that matter you also see it in minimum wage retail!

Open Borders:
To think that the western world can fit the entire planets population is amusing. To think that the western world has either the capacity or the desire to support the entire planet's population is downright stupid.

The west, for all of it's faults and detractors is where almost everyone wants to be. Even our working poor live like kings of 200 years ago (with indoor plumbing, readily available food and endless entertainment). Life is still hard for them, but it's a lot easier than it use to be.

The inevitable outcome of open borders is everyone except our political elites will be equally miserable. If I work for 40+ hours a week and half of my income is taken away then where is my incentive to work? Why not sit on my rear and be taken care of like the rest of the herd? Is that the income equality they seek? Who will support everyone?


I know some pretty left leaning people who advocate for all sorts of social entitlements. They also, wait for it, unironically moan about how high their taxes are. That these people cannot add 2+2 and yet are still allowed to vote is depressing.

Blogger Ron Winkleheimer February 22, 2016 10:53 AM  

I notice that a lot of Trump's critics, including the conservatives, accuse him and his supporters of being natavists. Well, here is the definition of natavism.

US
the policy of protecting the interests of native-born or established inhabitants against those of immigrants:

"a deep vein of xenophobia and nativism"

a return to or emphasis on traditional or local customs, in opposition to outside influences.


Notice the example sentence, Natavism is assumed to be wrong. But show any Trump follower those definitions and they are not going to assume that there is anything wrong with that.

And why should they?

Anonymous Nathanael February 22, 2016 10:56 AM  

This election cycle is about building the "Trump Republican" brand. That's why it's important to support Trump regardless of his imperfections because he's creating a platform for others without his personal problems to stand on and promote his immigration restrictionist, trade protectionist, America First foreign policy in years to come.

Blogger Achilles February 22, 2016 10:58 AM  

I love how electing Trump makes us instantly into Nazis. As if we'll wake up tomorrow in Hugo Boss and start rounding up Jews. It is ludicrous. We want a wall and laws enforced. That doesn't make us Hitler. Bill the Butcher maybe. But a little murderous rage ain't such a bad thing.

Anonymous The other robot February 22, 2016 11:00 AM  

And these are the benefits of diversity:

A black New Jersey man killed his own mother a little while after having served 30 years for killing a neighbor when he (the killer) was 15.

Blogger praetorian February 22, 2016 11:02 AM  

White Nationalist, no. White Nationalismist, yes. *Any* Nationalismist, yes.

The world suffers from too few independent political units, nations, built by nationalists. We need more of those things.

Anonymous The other robot February 22, 2016 11:02 AM  

Bill the Butcher maybe.

The Butcher's bill will be paid. The question is: How big will it be?

Blogger Jamie-R February 22, 2016 11:04 AM  

I've been observing your changes, Vox. It's why your still the most fascinating thinker I know. I guess I've changed too, 10 years ago when I still thought drinking was worth a damn I would have poorly rapped about that.

There's a lot to Marxism that people didn't even realise would be so effective in already successful nations, and there were in-built trojan horses, African-Americans for the USA has been disastrous for national solidarity, they'll take anything opposed to what whites were doing when they founded it. Hitler's abuse and scorched earth overreach of ethno-centric populism hasn't completely destroyed the concept of European nationhood, but it has set it back, it appears, close to 100 years. That said, some whites make you realise that without Christianity they're about as interesting or worth saving as Arabs.

Blogger Durandel Almiras February 22, 2016 11:09 AM  

A great follow up to Cuckservative would be a book on how the "Enlightenment" failed, since a lot of people need it spelled out for them how all of these ideas failed during the last 200-300 years. Still keep it rhetorically focused, no need for a textbook since dialectical treatments won't convince the majority in this current age of unreason, but oh what a delight it would be to gift such a book to my conservative friends.

Speaking of book gifting, when is Cuckservative coming out in paperback?

Blogger dc.sunsets February 22, 2016 11:22 AM  

I've always been a negative Libertarian. By which I mean that the appeal of libertarianism was the way it was a system in which Man being wolf to Man was least catastrophic. Now that we've seen what quasi-open borders look like, I've been forced to reassess and reject that reasoning.

Exactly. My conversion came when I recognized that while my Utopian statism would work for ME, I'm a very tiny minority.

Sallust stated the truth 2000 years ago: Most men are slaves who simply desire a just master. They don't want to run their own lives, in fact they feel categorically unqualified to do so (and are terrified of surviving on only the gifts that God gave them.)

A society entirely ordered by the market could work, only as long as a significant number of people didn't arise to clamor for a King. We know that such a group will always be with us.

Blogger dc.sunsets February 22, 2016 11:33 AM  

Ms. Hoyt simply is not thinking through the full sequence of inevitability now in play.

The Cathedral's Equalitarianism dogma charges the political system with an impossible quest, to equalize certain outcomes among unequal individuals and unequal groups. In doing so, under an ethic of unlimited power, it becomes the BOOT stomping on a human face, forever. This isn't some sort of positive good, it's a metaphysical perversion.

Anyone with the tiniest bit of sense should see that empowering a monopoly system staffed by renter-volunteers (in the sense that they seek office) to do whatever it takes to establish a moving target called "fairness" is the fast track to a completely totalitarian society.

This isn't Left vs Right. This is Total vs Limited, and the Left sees anything outside the scope of political control as a cesspool of evil. They cannot accept a society where anyone disagrees with them, because disagreement is blasphemy.

There can be no common ground when opposition is apostasy and the central dogma is leading to annihilation of the very civilization that yielded the modern world.

Blogger The Hammer February 22, 2016 11:33 AM  

To 2nd Josh's mention of distributism, my understanding is that they chose it out of necessity, and didn't necessarily like calling it an "ism" either because it involves not just the economic sphere.

More to the point, VD, this summary from the wiki below seems to suggest they did have some predictive success a century ago and saw the Enlightenment project as a problem.

As for its modern updating, Front Porch Republic and Distrubutist Review seem to be making headway there. I think it's also directly in-line or compatible with a small-government nationalism, depending on the writer one is reading.

"According to distributists, property ownership is a fundamental right, and the means of production should be spread as widely as possible, rather than being centralized under the control of the state (state socialism), a few individuals (plutocracy), or corporations (corporatocracy). Distributism, therefore, advocates a society marked by widespread property ownership.

Distributism has often been described in opposition to both socialism and capitalism, which distributists see as equally flawed and exploitive. Thomas Storck argues: 'both socialism and capitalism are products of the European Enlightenment and are thus modernizing and anti-traditional forces. Further, some distributists argue that socialism is the logical conclusion of capitalism as capitalism's concentrated powers eventually capture the state, resulting in a form of socialism. In contrast, distributism seeks to subordinate economic activity to human life as a whole, to our spiritual life, our intellectual life, our family life'.

Some have seen it more as an aspiration, which has been successfully realised in the short term by commitment to the principles of subsidiarityand solidarity (these being built into financially independent local cooperatives and small family businesses), though proponents also cite such periods as the Middle Ages as examples of the historical long-term viability of distributism. Particularly influential in the development of distributist theory were Catholic authors G.K. Chesterton and Hilaire Belloc, the Chesterbelloc, two of distributism's earliest and strongest proponents."

Blogger Mike February 22, 2016 11:39 AM  

It is hard not to view the modern republican/conservative party as a kind of cloistered religious sect sitting safe within the walls of their monastery arguing about marvelously esoteric questions, while hordes of barbarians ravage the world without.

Occasionally one of them will step out onto the balcony and chide the peasants below on their lack of enthusiasm for the TRUE FAITH.

Now they are vexed with us for, in their estimation, stupidly preferring a man on horseback as a protector instead of their chosen nominee.

Their argument may be true – it may be we are being deceived by Donald Trump, but if we are, it will simply be a continuation of a lifetime of being deceived, and their protests are only those of false prophets whose marks have left for a more appealing charlatan.

Of course there is a possibility we are not being deceived, and if the man can follow through on a tenth of a tenth what he’s promised, then their world comes tumbling down.

I am supporting Trump not because I think he offers any particular hope, but because I’m looking for a fight, and it is obvious the republican establishment has no stomach for it.

It is not that they are evil so much as they are worthless.

Blogger dc.sunsets February 22, 2016 11:46 AM  

I'm a rightist, in the sense that I believe those who run society should be those who have proven wisest via accomplishment, that rulers should have a direct and continuing interest in the capital value of society, and that the process for choosing rulers eliminates the voices of those whose narrow interests amount to basically political robbery.

Democracy produces rulers who behave like renters, so they have a positive incentive to strip-mine the value of their office during the temporary time they occupy it. Democracy divides society into dynamic factions whose primary purpose is to take from others what cannot be won in the market, honestly. From high to low, the richest people and firms to the poorest, everyone coalesces into factions seeking endless gibsmedats. We have a Hobbesian war of all against all, and today's politics is akin to everyone jockeying in a huge room trying to pick the pockets of the people in front of them, using their local politician-con-artist to help them.

America turned into a nation of renters, of whores and thieves and con artists, everyone seeking to concentrate benefits (tax loopholes, slavery reparations, NGO funding, endless well-paid offices, direct welfare, special treatment in courts, free loans, free college, etc.) and spread the costs out over everyone else.

Adam ends up getting $50,000 in benefits but paying a dollar per benefit for 60,000 other people, not one of which is big enough to make him pick up the phone to complain but in the aggregate he borrows the money he's short (actually, the US Treasury borrows it) and life goes on...until some day when this vast Ponzi scheme breaks down.

This system of mutual robbery has been disguised by borrowing on a scale never before imagined. Sooner or later, it must end. And it will end badly.

Blogger dc.sunsets February 22, 2016 11:50 AM  

@40 like all such Utopian systems, they slam onto the shoals of definitions. Who is to determine how property is to be distributed, who is to decide if property is concentrating too much, what is the mechanism for redistribution and how are such agencies populated?

If it walks like a duck (oligarchy), quacks like duck (social democracy) or otherwise exercises a territorial monopoly on ultimate decision-making (a state), calling it something else is just sophistry.

Anonymous RamBam Thank You Ma'am February 22, 2016 11:50 AM  

It matters not what -ism you decide to run your countries economy with, nor does it matter which -cy you have your political power vested in...as long as you allow the Banking system to practice usury, it matters not who makes the laws or wears the crown or gets the most votes. The controller of the monetary system and the leverage usury gives those controllers will always end with corruption and societal devolution as they use their Babylonian money-magic to gain control of the media and education systems to promote their ancient conspiracy to build the One Great Central Bank To Rule Them All.

The only true answer for Western Civilization is a worldwide end to the acceptance of usury, a return to Christian morality in WASP founded nations and expulsion of the usurious corrupters and all the immigrants they purposely imported to promote their multi-cult diversity to foment White genocide and to allow them to hide in plain site amongst the populace.

Blogger CarpeOro February 22, 2016 11:58 AM  

VD wrote:I've always been a negative Libertarian. By which I mean that the appeal of libertarianism was the way it was a system in which Man being wolf to Man was least catastrophic. Now that we've seen what quasi-open borders look like, I've been forced to reassess and reject that reasoning.

I have gone through a similar process. I was known as "Mr. Conservative" in college - when I was already drifting toward libertarianism. I guess I was confusing to others because I was strongly nationalistic also (or maybe just the fact I wasn't in favor of government involvement in much of anything). When NAFTA first came up, I was somewhat in favor of it (it was pitched as "fair trade amongst equals" after all), just having a caveat that it needed to actually be what they said it would be. Shockingly, it didn't live up to the billing.

Regarding the "Enlightenment" I had major doubts about it before I got to college. Read enough about the "enlightened" monarchs of Europe and even the propaganda that starts with the first time you hear it mentioned in school starts to wear thin.

Blogger guest February 22, 2016 11:59 AM  

No, no, no, no, no. There is nothing new under the sun. There is nothing "radically different." We are still called to follow the old paths. And we will not.

Anonymous VFM #6306 February 22, 2016 12:00 PM  

When conservatives think Dr. Pournelle hasn't thought the politics through...the resulting pretzel logic is boafide Rold Gold.

Blogger Joshua_D February 22, 2016 12:00 PM  

History suggests that Americans could break up into various states,you know, how it was during colonial times, or Americans could unite to fight an aggressor as they did during the Revolutionary War, or Americans could fight each other as they did during the Civil War, or ... you know. Both unity and division are options, and it seems to me that neither are absurd.

Anonymous Philalethes February 22, 2016 12:03 PM  

Browsing through the linked article and comments, I confess I'm once again astonished at how intelligent-seeming people (e.g. Sarah Hoyt, who's even Been There) can't seem to "get it". A big piece (maybe the biggest) of the problem is simply terminology – the words we use to think about things. The mind is a tireless (almost) worker, and words are its tools. If the tools aren't really suited to the job, it won't be done well. (Almost) everybody is trying to shoehorn the present situation into box labeled "left" on one side, "right" on the other – and it just isn't working.

And this is a perfect example of why I find the terms "left" and "right" useless – and have since I left the "left" 35 years ago. After half a lifetime as a good-hearted, well-meaning left-liberal, I had no interest in the war-mongering, chauvinistic, proud-to-be-stupid right. (I find John McCain no more endearing than Lyndon Johnson.) What I discovered instead was a new (for me) way to seeing the issues, exactly 90° crossways to the conventional "left–right" spectrum, and represented at that time by the Libertarian Party, which I joined. (The LP, of course, having made the mistake of locating its HQ inside the Beltway, has been totally cucked, and I left it long ago.) I like simple, principle-based explanations which work, and found that the Non-Aggression Pledge clarified political affairs just as the Golden Rule does all relationships.

I like to put it in terms that even a woman should be able to understand: What is the difference between love and rape? Answer: one single word. Force. Force poisons any and all human relationships, no matter how benign or "well-intentioned" they may have been originally. What "left" and "right" share, what makes them indistinguishable where it really matters, is the belief that the world can – and should – be made "a better place", and that the "initiation of force" is a legitimate, workable way to do so. But actions based on this thinking inevitably fail to produce the desired results – at least in the long term, and often not even in the short term. Because of simple Newtonian physics: When you push people, they push back.

And so it goes, from time immemorial to the foreseeable future – unless some real change occurs. That's what I'd like to see, unlikely though it may be. It does seem that there are now – for the first time in history? – at least more than a half-dozen people who understand the thought in the paragraph above, and after having been round the carousel of Left-Right-Left-Right politics enough times to be tired of it, might be ready to do some actually new thinking. Continued...

Blogger bob k. mando February 22, 2016 12:06 PM  

Race does matter. Sex does matter. Nationality does matter. Not because the Left lies about these things, but because they are materially and objectively significant.


religion matters. the fact that there is not a single Protestant sitting on the Supreme Court in a nation that is, by wide majority, neither Catholic nor Jewish should raise more than a few eyebrows.

after all, if Protestants are such shitty legal thinkers then why should anyone have any respect for the American Revolution or the Constitution?

the ( original meaning of the ) Constitution matters. the 14th Amendment was not merely illegally adopted, it utterly destroys Freedom of Association of the private citizens.

IF the .gov has the ability to choose who i will or will not associate with
THEN *i* ( and YOU ) am a slave to the State in this regard.


sex matters because of body / brain dysmorphia. whether the way women behave is primarily a product of socialization via their growing up slower, smaller and weaker than men or is primarily a function of brain structure / hormonal chemistry, the fact is that women view others as resources whom they may farm. that's why you have Anna Nicole Smith marrying an 80 year old. you CANNOT allow this type of a mentality to vote and expect to wind up with anything other than some type of socialist polity in which your taxes are stolen to pay others.

also, this rampant equalitarianism and demand that all have the franchise is ( though Sarah doesn't realize it ) an ideological outgrowth, not of the Constitution, but of Marxist ideology.

Anonymous Philalethes February 22, 2016 12:09 PM  

Some new terminology is needed to describe what's happening now – or what some of us, at least, hope to see happen. Not just another pendulum swing from "left" back to "right" – which must inevitably result in just another swing back to "left", and so on forever.

The problem is not "left" vs "right", or vice-versa, it's a problem of conceptual vs real thinking. Thinking that what we can imagine in our minds – the eventual "withering away of the State" in the ideal world we create by first giving all power to the State – can be made to happen in the real world – with just a little careful application of force, which of course will not be allowed to get out of hand. Sure.

So what we need, I think, is some realism. What's real is what is, not some shiny concept in the mind – which, as a Buddhist teacher I know cautions us, is endlessly expert at lying to itself. To the present subject, nationalism and tribalism are real, natural, visceral, instinctive, ruling elements of human character. We all prefer our own kind, and always have. Trying to create an "ideal" society while ignoring this reality must fail. Either the attempt must be based on force, which will inevitably produce hell where heaven was intended (benefit of the doubt); or if not based on force, must take literally forever to succeed. Certain failure either way.

I like the term "race realism" – and have borrowed the concept for "gender realism". I'm not a "racist" – but neither do I believe all people, and all races (and it's obvious there are races) are identical. Same goes for the sexes. Female hypergamy (and all the other elements of female psychology and character being explored in the Androsphere) is real – as is the male analog, and it is nonsensical and counterproductive to pretend otherwise. So I guess I'd call myself a "political realist", and likewise for economic and social issues. Not sure what to use for the opposite. "Pipe-dreamism"?

Until somebody comes up with some better terminology.

Anonymous bitter clinger 13 February 22, 2016 12:13 PM  

I'm looking for reading recommendations from VD and/or members of the Ilk. I have some partially-formed thoughts related to the interaction between property-rights and external ownership of property. I've always believed that property rights are part of the foundation of a properly functioning society and still do. I've come to believe that the benefits of property rights are attenuated when the property owner is not a member of the community (in which the property is located).

This external ownership becomes more frequent as corporations get massive and become multinational giants. There is an issue of scale as well. How does a local community protect its interests against corporations that may have revenue that is more than 1,000x the community government's annual budget (or even 10x or 100x the income of all community residents)? Annual revenue of $30 billion is more than the GDP of one-third of the countries of the world. I believe that local communities have to be more vigilant and more willing to circumscribe property rights as a result.

I'd be surprised if these are original thoughts and would be interested to read more about these issues.

OpenID sigbouncer February 22, 2016 12:18 PM  

"it is another to do so when a nation's entire industrial base can be dismantled"

Thanks largely to GW Bush.

Indeed, the number of American manufacturing jobs decreased by 3.4 million under George W. Bush’s presidency as he continued to push for more global trade agreements and opposed efforts to crack down on illicit trading practices. As Bush said at the time, “I believe that the entry of China… into the WTO will strengthen the global trading system and expand world economic growth.”

Under President Bush, the trade deficit nearly doubled, the trade deficit with China tripled, and the national debt of the United States also nearly doubled.

Trump has distinguished himself from Bush Republicanism with his vociferous opposition to the Trans-Pacific Partnership — a pact which both Cruz and Rubio cast a vote to fast-track and have previously praised. Rubio has not retracted his prior support of TPP, whereas Cruz has straddled the line by saying he opposes “in its current form” the pact he once described as “historic” and said would “mean greater access to a billion customers for American manufacturers, farmers and ranchers.”

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/02/18/exclusive-pat-buchanan-donald-trumps-rise-is-rejection-of-a-quarter-century-of-bush-republicanism/

______________________________________________

As a result, ITIF estimates that over 60% of U.S. manufacturing job losses in the 2000s were due to competitiveness challenges, rather than productivity gains.

While this was occurring, and while our leaders could not agree on whether it was a problem, other nations such as China and India were greatly increasing market share in the same industrial sectors, through coordinated national efforts to expand innovation, productivity and exports.

And these nations are only increasing their efforts to further advance their economies at the expense of U.S. manufacturers and workers.

http://www.industryweek.com/global-economy/why-2000s-were-lost-decade-american-manufacturing


Anonymous Napoleon 12pdr February 22, 2016 12:18 PM  

I'm with Dr. Pournelle. Trump isn't my first choice...but he's an acceptable choice. Of the remaining candidates (an unsatisfactory lot), I'd rather have Cruz. But given a choice between Trump and Rubio, I'm voting for Trump.

Yes, Trump is probably a crypto-Democrat. But he's an old-fashioned Democrat in the mold of a Truman or JFK, someone who possesses a real love of country and respect for its institutions. He's got an ego...but compared to JFK, Trump is a humble man. The longer interviews with him show a man who is more thoughtful than the 30-second-sound-bites show. It's a side he needs to make more use of.

People have become so accustomed to the modern Democrat-as-crypto-Communist party to realize they were once patriotic.

And a man who Dr. Pournelle can stomach is OK by me...Dr. Pournelle is the only living man who will have me checking my own reasoning FIRST if we disagree.

Anonymous bw February 22, 2016 12:20 PM  

rampant equalitarianism and demand that all have the franchise is ( though Sarah doesn't realize it ) an ideological outgrowth, not of the Constitution, but of Marxist ideology

Maybe she's only thinking it 3/5ths through...

Blogger clk February 22, 2016 12:22 PM  

"My thinking has changed dramatically because of what I have witnessed over the last four decades"..

Aging and experience changes our view point -- apparently even VD's -- the kids come from college "liberalized" and then years of experiencing life shift them towards the right .. it does no good to try an warn them.. it is a lesson that can only be gained by experience. That's why I don't get mad at the youngsters .. I just sit back and smile thinking "enjoy the ride.. I will talk with you again in 20 years and we will see how you feel then..."

Trump is about possibilities only .. we really have no idea what he will do or what sort of president that he might be (the man is slightly crazy but its a funny crazy ...I hope) .. but at least its a chance.. the rest of them we know exactly what we will get. But the greater aspect is that it opens the door for a third party, then eventually a forth and a fifth party. It will now be possible for others, perhaps greater than Trump, to see a path to the office. A two party system (and its hard to call these two separate parties) does not fit democracy... it provided stability for sure, for a time, but that time is running out. We either have to progress to a 1 party system or a multi-party system if we are to survive because at 2, we are hopelessly divided.

Blogger The Hammer February 22, 2016 12:26 PM  

It sounds like you might like Distrubutists' thoughts on it. Check out the names and websites listed in my comment, @40.

OpenID dreadilkzee February 22, 2016 12:30 PM  

I would change Race does matter. Sex does matter. Nationality does matter
"Culture does matter, Nationality does matter, Sex does matter, but the greater of these is culture."

Culture covers religion and race to an extent. My problem with race is we tend to get hung up on it and don't seem to realize when it changes. At some point the "African" is as genetically African as I am genetically Norwegian, and even then cultural breaks happen that allow the forming of new cultures.

The moment the British separated from the crown and started forming separate culture identity they change my ability to claim being "British" even if almost 80% of my genes are from the British Isles.

At some point VD's grand kids are going to not even have a cultural memory of American and will be "Italian".

The question is when does this happen. I think in the past VD had noted at a minimum it's 3 generations. Regardless it's a cultural acceptance and not as strongly based on race.

Yes, there are some genetic factors to take into account but at some point event the generic African can become the "Walter Williams". I think our disagreement is really over when that happens and what is the fallout while that process takes place.

It's obvious that mass migration is a failure in the absorption process as it prevents it from working. If I were to approach it programmatically then it would probably be something like 100:1 for an immigrant to be absorbed and that is assuming an even dispersion. IE: no more "China towns"

Anonymous Jack Amok February 22, 2016 12:30 PM  

Distributism, therefore, advocates a society marked by widespread property ownership.

The failure mode there is that most people, as dc.sunsets noted, don't wan't to be in charge of making that property productive. So even if they "own" the property, they outsource running it. The modern-day NYSE and NASDAQ are perfect examples - ownership of corporations is widely spread among the population, but management of them is more concentrated than ever.

Distributism is unstable. You need coercive power to force "owners" to manage their property, or at least to break up the blocs that form when they outsource it. And then that power becomes the focus of capture.

There will always be attempts at capture. No system is immune from it.

Blogger VD February 22, 2016 12:34 PM  

To 2nd Josh's mention of distributism, my understanding is that they chose it out of necessity, and didn't necessarily like calling it an "ism" either because it involves not just the economic sphere.

As to Distributism, there is ZERO chance that an ideology developed before the information revolution is going to be relevant, which should be obvious given that I'd JUST POINTED OUT that was the problem with classical liberalism. A "middle way" between two outdated ideologies is not going to function.

As it happens, I am vaguely familiar with it, I just didn't remember what it was called. At this point, I'm not much interested in what past thinkers have thought, I'm more interested in working from first principles in order to accomodate the new developments.

No, no, no, no, no. There is nothing new under the sun.

Don't be an idiot. There are OBSERVABLY new things that require intellectual accommodation. There is nothing new about human nature, but there are most certainly new facets to human capabilities.

Blogger VD February 22, 2016 12:35 PM  

Yes, there are some genetic factors to take into account but at some point event the generic African can become the "Walter Williams". I think our disagreement is really over when that happens and what is the fallout while that process takes place.

I've addressed this in the past. It appears to take around 1,000 years.

Anonymous Senghendrake February 22, 2016 12:39 PM  

[b]What she, and many conservatives, have yet to grasp is that classical liberalism, conservatism, libertarianism, free trade, constitutionalism, and a whole host of other 18th century concepts that were largely theoretical as well as being near and dear to our hearts have fundamentally failed.[/b]
Uh oh VD, you might be close to joining me and the other foam-sworders over in the Reactionary containment zone. These are some serious crimethoughts for a Westerner, especially an American, to entertain.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash February 22, 2016 12:46 PM  

Mike wrote:I am supporting Trump not because I think he offers any particular hope, but because I’m looking for a fight, and it is obvious the republican establishment has no stomach for it.

I just tweeted that. Good line. Thanks.

Blogger VD February 22, 2016 12:51 PM  

you might be close to joining me and the other foam-sworders over in the Reactionary containment zone.

What part of "I'm not a reactionary; I'm not reacting to anything" was hard to understand?

Blogger dc.sunsets February 22, 2016 12:59 PM  

It appears to take around 1,000 years.

And under an entirely different set of selection criteria than today's welfare-state zoo that uses a dysgenic breeding program.

Blogger The Hammer February 22, 2016 12:59 PM  

I agree for the most part. I think certain ethnicities would handle it better than others. Hence the need for more ethnic nationalism.

It's interesting you mention immunity from capture. I was just reading an article by a distrubutist the other day where it mentioned that point. The argument of course is about if it could do it better than our current setup. And it was also talking about what type of government allows the more local spheres to best keep and protect their power, instead of the non-local magistrates having more power and right to interfere as they do now.

Blogger Scott6584 February 22, 2016 1:09 PM  

Vis-a-vis Mercantilism. The base ideology against Mercantilism remains sound. However, what guys like Frederick Bastiat never comprehended was the ease of movement of capital and goods in the modern world.

For example, if American companies were truly being beaten by foreign competition who developed their own products, and then overcame the extra cost of transport and tariffs to still be able to compete effectively at a price and quality that American companies cannot provide, then it behooves American consumers to take advantage of those savings.

But that is not what is happening. American ingenuity is still developing the best products, but only out-sourcing the production of those products. That is extremely short-sighted as a nation. The primary reason it is so short-sighted is that within two generations, the nation loses it's collective memory and knowledge on how to produce things. I say this coming from a background as a manufacturing Engineer.

The secondary, but still devastating effect is that other countries, who once gain an advantage in the production capabilities are able to first copy, then duplicate, and then surpass the development of new technologies, or advances to existing technologies to overcome the supremacy of American ingenuity. Hence, while the "idea" people are temporarily immune to the depredations of out-sourcing production level jobs, it only takes one more generation before the ability to stay ahead of the world's competition in ideas becomes co-opted and surpassed by other countries to whom the financial overlords have opted to out-source the work of the people.

So, what you are seeing now is the combination of production level workers, and also idea level workers combining to revolt against the leaders of America, in order to try to restore what has been lost.

I honestly don't think it can be done without violent revolution. You cannot un-sow the seeds of past decisions. The fruit of those seeds is a violent revolution. The world is already being thrown into chaos. It was one thing to export jobs to other countries, but now the Elite politicians and businessmen are conspiring to actually import the cheap overseas labor to America (and Europe) in order undermine the livelihood of native born citizens.

The "nationalism" decried by the modern culture elite is not so much racism, sexism, or bigotry as it is an existential fight for survival. The irony is that the Muslims will be the first victims of this existential fight. But once the blood starts flowing, it will not stop there. The people are going to remember who sold them out, and once the Muslim issue is dealt with, the mob will come for the heads of those who tried to overturn the nature of the individual countries. The heads of the Elite will ultimately roll, and there will be a mad scramble to "prove" they never were what they actually are - much like so many Nazi's tried to prove they were not Nazi's after WWII.

I don't know that it will be WWIII, in the same manner of WWII. I rather doubt it. Instead, it will be a plethora of localized revolutions, civil wars, and border wars. Ethnic Cleansing will be rampant, and minorities will come to regret their triumphalism and bigotry they have shown in the past two decades under the Boomer generation.

It won't be pretty, but it is now unavoidable.

Blogger dc.sunsets February 22, 2016 1:13 PM  

The failure mode there is that most people, as dc.sunsets noted, don't wan't to be in charge of making that property productive. So even if they "own" the property, they outsource running it. The modern-day NYSE and NASDAQ are perfect examples - ownership of corporations is widely spread among the population, but management of them is more concentrated than ever.

The fruits of useful labor are extremely amplified in a technology-saturated world (e.g., the innovation of a single engineer or software designer can be amplified in some cases infinitely.) This means that the rewards of high intelligence channeled into a high utility field will utterly assault the sensibilities of those who lack such DNA-delivered gifts.

The wealth of the modern world will always naturally concentrate, and concentrate faster than ever before. Lots of people are literally too stupid to keep what they have if left free to squander. This means very large numbers of people will increasingly be treated like permanent dependents. They will resent the hell out of it.

There is no obvious path out of the box forming on all sides. In an environment of universal suffrage there is no objective way to determine how much the capable should pay the incapable for the privilege of using their aptitudes. Envy-fueled populism can be counted upon to set rapacious, incentive-crushing taxes and impositions on the Natural Have's (creating a class of Parasitic-Have's like never in history.)

The transition of the next few decades to 100 years will likely be far greater than that of the Industrial Revolution. Entire new modes of creating value, even the very definition of value, must emerge. Efforts to force old ways of economic organization on the coming situation are doomed, as the gulf between those who own and direct robotic fabrication and those who wish to consume its output will exceed the distance between Emperor and slave.

Or the rabble will simply organize to murder everyone they think is smarter than they are, like in Cambodia's Killing Fields. This wouldn't surprise me at all.

Anonymous VFM #7916 February 22, 2016 1:20 PM  

"At this point, I'm not much interested in what past thinkers have thought, I'm more interested in working from first principles in order to accomodate the new developments."

Just as Rothbard, Mises, Rand, and any other economist/philosopher has to do when there are fundamental paradigm shifts. Axioms usually stay the same, but the context causes ethics, morality, economics, etc. to move in significant directions.

I had not thought previously that many of the cherished philosophies I've learned over time are now effectively invalid; I continually learn from the Dark Master.

The point and truth is there, in that Americans are no longer growing but are rather in the market consolidation phase. Civilizations are competing with tribes, and it is an open question again as to which will prevail. Those things that we consider good, such as Western Culture, white genetics, Christianity, etc. must now be violently defended, because they were not softly protected after being violently defended in the past.

Whoever can formulate a philosophy to prevent the decline of a civilization after a defense/war phase will be remembered in history forever.

Blogger dc.sunsets February 22, 2016 1:24 PM  

If the West goes down, humanity stagnates. The lack of Chinese cultural proclivity for innovation can be seen in the astonishing effort the Peoples' Liberation Army invests in STEALING the innovations of every Western firm. Reverse engineering is a specialty of high IQ East Asians, it seems.

Frankly, the rapid pace of innovation of the last 100 years is likely to stall, mostly because from the lowest citizen to the highest, no one has a clue from where their marvelous living standards came.

They are actively trying to dilute the genes of the golden geese, emasculate the golden ganders (sorry for the ugly metaphor) and inviting a tsunami of salmonella-laden chickens in to disrupt the lives of golden geese everywhere they exist.

Yes, it sounds like it's straight out of Mein Kampf; perhaps the program to destroy Western Civ includes the demonization of Nazi Germany precisely to render illegitimate any obvious wisdom that period embraced.

Anonymous VFM #7916 February 22, 2016 1:26 PM  

@57 Race does indeed matter, as genetics influences and informs culture, including who you feel comfortable in associating with. Don't attempt to softpedal here because you are in fear of being called a racist.

Anonymous VFM #7916 February 22, 2016 1:28 PM  

@69

I would wish that treatment would cover all the communist regimes as well. It really puts people on their heels when you tell them that their ideology was responsible for killing a quarter billion humans in the past century.

Blogger LP9 Rin Integra S.I.G. Burnin' Up, Dune soaked, 80 svedka - The Lord overrides all! February 22, 2016 1:35 PM  

Eh, we'll wait and watch.

Aww, Sarah is good!

Our host is objective not reactionary at all - our host is a student or what many would call an superintel expert in history.

Who knows, perhaps Sarah will change, its great to read Dr. Jerry Pournelle's exchange.

Blogger dc.sunsets February 22, 2016 1:38 PM  

@71 Since when? I've never met a leftist who didn't disavow "those communists" as not the real deal. Theirs is the same rationalization as the Keynesians who regard perpetual failure as evidence their system was inadequately applied. Their mindset is unfalsifiable, just like any religion.

There's a reason Hoppe titled his book, "[Democracy], the God that Failed."

Blogger bob k. mando February 22, 2016 1:40 PM  

54. bw February 22, 2016 12:20 PM
Maybe she's only thinking it 3/5ths through...




*shrugs* when the Constitution was passed a majority of the free adult white male Protestant population didn't have the franchise.

and they were counted as full persons.

Blogger dc.sunsets February 22, 2016 1:43 PM  

There are no political solutions to the problem of politics, but reading at Hoyt's blog commenters pledge to vote for Bernie BS (or HillBilly!) as a vote against Trump is frankly astonishing.

There must be someone in their vicinity wearing the I'm With Stupid T-shirt.

Blogger Were-Puppy February 22, 2016 1:55 PM  

@26 Gaiseric
Just because the various "white nations" of America have never gelled into truly being One Nation Under God doesn't mean that they can't. And the existential threat posed by multiculturalism could do so; or at least create a situation in which they stand allied together, if not truly united into one nation.
---

Maybe. But it will take almost a miraculous event for me to feel any solidarity with a Hitlery Clinton or someone like that.

Anonymous VFM #7916 February 22, 2016 1:57 PM  

@73 There's disavowal, and then there's Nuremberg trials and and a searing brand across a civilization such that you can't even speak of a number of ideas. Communists seem to have no such trouble. It's never the principles, but the method of implementation. With National Socialism it's about the principles.

Blogger Scott6584 February 22, 2016 2:02 PM  

@41 Mike: "I am supporting Trump not because I think he offers any particular hope, but because I’m looking for a fight, and it is obvious the republican establishment has no stomach for it."

Herein lies the central appeal of Trump. I partially agree with it, and it is why I've supported Cruz - because he actually fights. In my estimation, what Cruz fights for - the noble concepts captured in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution - are worth fighting for.

However, I understand that some just want to brawl. I get it. I've been saying for 25 years that this was coming. Now it's here. Sowing and Reaping. Today, I read a column, written by a leftist professor which argues that Christians are losing their way: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2016/02/22/before-donald-trump-the-sad-history-of-when-christians-anointed-another-political-bully/

Here is the key quotation: "One of the saddest chapters in the history of Christianity is how the courageous church of the martyrs became — with the help of the state — a fearful and persecuting church."

My interpretation of his argument: The only "good" Christians are martyrs.

Combine that with this article comparing Trump to Hitler: http://voxday.blogspot.com/2016/02/a-pernicious-influence.html?showComment=1456164542903#c547870884032845658

Key Quotation: Finally, to all of you Republicans who have already dropped out, one more, great act of public service awaits you. As candidates, you pledged to support whomever the Republican party nominated. It's time to revoke your pledge. Be bold, stand up and shout that you will not support Trump if he is your party's nominee. Do it together. Hold one big mother of a news conference. Endorse Rubio, together. It is time to draw a bright line, and you are the ones on whom this burden falls. No one else can do it.

My interpretation: "Hey Republicans. It's time to be Martyrs in order to stop Trump."

Combined, the message from the Christian-hating Left is, "Hey all you troglodyte Christian imbeciles. Please be good little Christians and sacrifice yourselves, so we can keep imposing our hateful, Godless scheme to deprive you of life, liberty and property?"

Somehow, I doubt that message is going to have a welcome reception. So, I certainly understand why the actual response is like Mike's above, who no longer cares about fighting for something, he's just ready to fight against the powers that are destroying America. I get it.

But the major differences between the American and French Revolutions is that the American Revolution was fighting "for" the ideas of freedom, while he French Revolution was fighting "against" the elitism of its day. Ultimately, the French revolution devolved into a war against leaders, complete with public executions. That is what we are facing today. But take it a bit further, and order was reestablished by bringing in Napoleon. That is the path America is headed for now.

These are interesting times we live in. I wonder if I'll live long enough to see the end result of what is to come. In the short-term, Cruz and Trump voters will unite because both factions want a fight. It looks like the early standard bearer will be Trump, not Cruz. That's a reality I have to face as a Cruz supporter.

My only appeal to Trump supporters is to make this fight about something positive, and not just a fight to exterminate the enemy. Leaving a vacuum after the fight just invites worse things. You must do the hard work of finding a positive vision of what you want the outcome to be. Destruction alone is not enough. You MUST have a plan to build something in its place once the current structure is razed to the ground.

Blogger weka February 22, 2016 2:36 PM  

That was the problem for the American Indian. There was no red nationalism, there were only the various Indian nations that were unable to band together in their collective self-interest. Whites now face the same challenge in America, but on a larger scale.

Vox, in New Zealand the iwi (tribes) united -- but this was after the land wars, where half the tribes were loyal to the crown and kept their lands, and the other half rebelled, and lost them. FWIW, Maori, the indigenous people, are now outnumbered by the Asian new immigrants.

If you have immigration, the people change, and the people are the nation.

I think you need to look at how 1930s Britian -- pre socialism -- worked. How the unions, friendly societies, church, chapel, capital and crown formed a network that was more local. How loyalty to the Crown and shared rules (British Case and Commercial law) meant that the antipodes were linked to London.

To use Bujold for a second, an imperium like Barrayar works better than a "rational" republic such as Beta. Always has, always will.

OpenID dreadilkzee February 22, 2016 2:37 PM  

@60 I've addressed this in the past. It appears to take around 1,000 years.

Hmm. I'll have to add "A Troublesome Inheritance: Genes, Race and Human History" by Nicholas Wade

(Side Note: Kind of glad I looked this up. That is an interesting study and I am remiss to have not seen it back in 2014. For anyone curious see Genetic Segregation)

However give the genetic intersections does that mean there are people capable of integrating into the new culture?

If there are then it would behoove the multiculturalist to find out a way to identify who those people but they should also admit cultural immigration is not something that can just happen. As you say "there is no magic dirt".

Anonymous BGKB February 22, 2016 2:37 PM  

Fewer than twenty men can now launch a major military attack on the U.S. believing that the militant

I would only take 3 people to shut down DC and turn it into a hell hole with little chance of harm to them. Opps I mean worse than it is now. Near the end of the month so it carries over till food stamp recharging dump tacs at a couple of intersections(a single accident can shut down traffic for hours), take out the power, start a few fires. You could even set up fires to happen when the power goes down.

Distributism can work. Socialism can work (maybe, for a time at least.) *Whatever* can work

Whatever can work only works when people share a work ethic/culture and have an average IQ over 90.

The Germans alone burned down more than 1,000.

No one on the left knows that, & few on the right. White woman beats up 2 g#ys in Philly 5+ months of nation wide coverage with her face on the front of magazines. Black moslem serial killer of g#ys in 3 states with one victim in Philly no national coverage except for 1 victim before he was caught/described.

Joe can get on a plane and be pretty much anywhere on the planet in 24 hours. That was an unthinkable thought even 60 years ago

It was 60 years from the Wright Bros first flight to walking on the moon but it only took a decade after the democrats changed the immigration policy for Harvard to offer Remedial English. I used to have patients born before 1903.

Anonymous Senghendrake February 22, 2016 2:58 PM  

"What part of "I'm not a reactionary; I'm not reacting to anything" was hard to understand?"

If it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck...

You just trotted out ideas central to Reactionary, anti-enlightenment, anti-18th century revolutionary thought. You can call yourself whatever Nominalist term you prefer, but that doesn't negate what you're becoming in essence.

Blogger Dexter February 22, 2016 2:58 PM  

an average Joe can get on a plane and be pretty much anywhere on the planet in 24 hours.

Meh. The teeming hordes who came here 100-150 years ago didn't arrive on a 747. It took 'em several weeks, but they got here.

Anonymous Discard February 22, 2016 3:03 PM  

21. Josh: Those of us who are not of one Euro ancestry, but three or four, have no nationalism but White nationalism.

Blogger CarpeOro February 22, 2016 3:12 PM  

"dc.sunsets wrote:There are no political solutions to the problem of politics, but reading at Hoyt's blog commenters pledge to vote for Bernie BS (or HillBilly!) as a vote against Trump is frankly astonishing.

There must be someone in their vicinity wearing the I'm With Stupid T-shirt.
"

I did see a tshirt on a tvshow where the arrow for the "I'm with stupid" points up. Maybe the cuckservatives could wear them to show their awe inspiring humility...

Blogger CarpeOro February 22, 2016 3:23 PM  

"You just trotted out ideas central to Reactionary, anti-enlightenment, anti-18th century revolutionary thought. You can call yourself whatever Nominalist term you prefer, but that doesn't negate what you're becoming in essence. "

Considering living conditions in the nations of "enlightened" rulers - crushing serfdom in Russia, nearly constant warfare in Prussia, etc. - if you had read any history, you might not be so virtue-signalling aligning yourself with a rather questionable era. Of course, you'd also pick up on the fact that the concept of totalitarianism (which flows from the same source) is all for "the good of the people" while creating the most oppressive societies in the history of mankind. Edmund Burke had good reasons for his revulsion of the French Revolution.

Blogger Student in Blue February 22, 2016 3:25 PM  

If it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck...

If a politician espouses Communism and stumps for it, but is only doing so because they want power for themselves rather than believing it can work... are they then actually a Communist?

Just because a two people share the same short term goals doesn't mean their long term goals are the same.

Anonymous Athor Pel February 22, 2016 3:29 PM  

Mankind has already tried Distributism.

Look at ancient Israel. When the tribes got the promised land they parcelled it out by lot. Everybody got a piece and the land was already productive when they got it, orchards, pastures, barley fields, threshing floors, wine presses, sometimes whole cities empty and ready for them to move in.

They were supposed to have debt jubilees every few years and families that lost their land would get it back at certain jubilees. Humans being humans saw that the jubilees never happened. Then we get to Amos, he describes the later years of the northern kingdom where it looks like the king and his cronies owned most everything. Those cronies were described sitting on cloaks taken in pledge for debts while drinking wine taken as payment for fines.

Blogger pyrrhus February 22, 2016 3:36 PM  

Sarah Hoyt's heart is not in the right place. I had a long exchange with her regarding the well established scientifically established differences between groups of people, and she revealed herself to be an intolerant, semi-marxist egalitarian, and refused to even examine the various authorities to the contrary. She is a cuckservative at best, as further revealed by her later defense of Republicans like Boehner who stabbed the voters in the back.

Anonymous BGKB February 22, 2016 3:37 PM  

I love how electing Trump makes us instantly into Nazis. As if we'll wake up tomorrow in Hugo Boss and start rounding up Jews

Well Milo does wear a $15,000 outfit to events that women rub fake blood over their faces. I am more practical, brown shirts so cheap you can throw them away if you get blood on them. Actually I might attend one of his college speeches if its not canceled, I would have to go alone because of the things he said about redheads.

The mind is a tireless (almost) worker, Not for the vast majority of the worlds population.

I am supporting Trump not because I think he offers any particular hope, but because I’m looking for a fight, and it is obvious the republican establishment has no stomach for it

I am supporting Trump just because he bitchslaps leftists & cucks all day long, just seeing his name pokes leftists in the eyes.

The teeming hordes who came here 100-150 years ago didn't arrive on a 747. It took 'em several weeks, but they got here.

Now US taxpayers or Soros foots the bill with ill gotten gains. That doesn't change the fact that in. I looked but can't find the meme about more people immigrating to Britain in 2013 than in a 100 year period ending in the 1900s, but you are getting 100 years worth of immigration and back them it was the best of the best able to make it not welfare seekers.

Blogger Lovekraft February 22, 2016 3:47 PM  

@54 "Trump is about possibilities only .. we really have no idea what he will do or what sort of president that he might be"

It's possible that instead of needing a new worldview to reflect the realities of the recent past, societies are only capable of a certain structure depending on certain variables.

These structures likely would have been applied before but have been pushed aside due to natural evolution. The people still deep down long for this past system. Was it a monarchy or something of the sort?

This is where Trump comes in. People may indeed see him as a new supreme leader, an icon. The people will still acknowledge the leader has certain responsibilities to protect them (thus an assured continuation of military and police presence) but will also benefit in another way.

The trust in the leader and an ability to identify with him is how Trump could leave a long-term mark in western democracies. People will only accept someone who represents the type of leader mentioned above, and the power-grabbing would be limited (the negative type of power-grabbing as opposed to power-assuming based on merit).

Anonymous Anon123 February 22, 2016 4:07 PM  

I really like how Trump's campaign represents nativism and protectionism, but not only that, his foreign policy. He says things like Iraq was a mistake, nation building is a waste of money, we should be working with Russia to destroy ISIS rather than continue Cold War hostility, he would be neutral on the Israel/Palestine issue, etc., etc. This as close as we're going to get to an America-First foreign policy, which is hard to believe considering how the neocons dominated the GOP for decades.

Anonymous Napoleon 12pdr February 22, 2016 4:13 PM  

I think Dr. Pournelle had the best argument against unlimited free trade - at least, the one that convinced me.

Unlimited free trade carries non-economic costs that outweigh the economic benefits.

If you export a manufacturing job, the workers who did that job must seek other work. Some of those workers cannot be retrained for work of equal or higher pay, others cannot be economically retrained at all due to their age. All those workers must take lower-skill, lower-pay jobs. This causes a ripple effect that ultimately shoves people into very menial positions, or out of the workforce entirely.


Which means that the money you saved by lowering the price of manufactured goods gets sucked up into increased welfares.

I'm an advocate of the free trade of goods among peer states - the difference in the cost of operating in the USA, Canada, Europe, and Japan is close enough to allow the benefits of a larger potential market to work. Especially since modern communications allows small businesses to exploit niche markets worldwide. But unlimited trade with non-peer states is a big problem. There's more to life than a dollar bill.

Anonymous Ominous Cowherd February 22, 2016 4:14 PM  

If distributism were stable, we would still have it, because much of our productive capacity started out distributed.

Pushing political power down to the county and state level is a great idea, but again, that's how we started in this country, so it isn't stable, either.

Can we find a way to get some sort of dynamic stability for a desirable political or economic state?

Blogger Josh February 22, 2016 4:19 PM  

As to Distributism, there is ZERO chance that an ideology developed before the information revolution is going to be relevant, which should be obvious given that I'd JUST POINTED OUT that was the problem with classical liberalism. A "middle way" between two outdated ideologies is not going to function.

Actually, the information revolution makes distributism more viable, in that apps like uber handle the marketing and the back office administration for the self employed driver. And what did Taleb right about taxi drivers in antifragile?

Gig economy = distributism = antifragile

Blogger praetorian February 22, 2016 4:20 PM  

Pushing political power down to the county and state level is a great idea, but again, that's how we started in this country, so it isn't stable, either.

It could be a stable system again, once the current system collapses. A lot of the arguments for centralization in an industrializing world are obviated by the saturation of demand and the advent of the information age.

Rome fell, after all.

Blogger Josh February 22, 2016 4:21 PM  

If distributism were stable, we would still have it, because much of our productive capacity started out distributed.


You had massive destabilizing events like the industrial, agricultural, and information revolutions.

Now the internet has caused the cycle to come full circle.

Blogger Josh February 22, 2016 4:27 PM  

Chesterton:

"A pickpocket is obviously a champion of private enterprise. But it would perhaps be an exaggeration to say that a pickpocket is a champion of private property. The point about Capitalism and Commercialism, as conducted of late, is that they have really preached the extension of business rather than the preservation of belongings; and have at best tried to disguise the pickpocket with some of the virtues of the pirate. The point about Communism is that it only reforms the pickpocket by forbidding pockets."

Anonymous Ominous Cowherd February 22, 2016 4:38 PM  

@89 Sarah Hoyt is a Portugese coservative, which means she is conserving marxism, or some proto-marxism, since Portugal has been marxist, or trending that way, for generations.

@93 Napoleon, it's more than the economic costs: the social costs are the main thing. Those displaced, un-retrainable workers were productive members of society. Once displaced, they are useless and purposeless. Those industries we have exported were vital to national defence. Now we buy our military chips from our enemy, China. All for cheap VCRs for the 0.01%.

The illegals have been allowed in because rich liberals want their domestic help small, brown and smiling rather than large, black and surly. That has left a big part of our native black population displaced, useless and purposeless. Many blacks used to be productive members of society. Below the talented tenth, we used to have a black middle class of farmers, tradesmen and domestics who married, raised families and mostly avoided crime. Thanks to the preferences of our ruling class, that group has mostly been destroyed. All so people like Fonda and Soros didn't have to have black, American maids.

Blogger Josh February 22, 2016 4:42 PM  

For a real world example testing the theory of lower consumer prices uber alles, look at oil prices and the economy.

Blogger CarpeOro February 22, 2016 4:51 PM  

Stopped by her site and read the post, made a comment. Maybe it is me and I don't understand the productive process (more distributed production and customization may mean fewer jobs), Trump is the one avoiding topics (the other candidates are the ones saying the emperor has no clothes), and Ron Paul was a joke. Or maybe it is just her. Not seeing a shot at a discussion after her flippant reply so won't bother to return.

Blogger guest February 22, 2016 4:59 PM  

Ecclesiastes 1

"8 All things are full of labour; man cannot utter it: the eye is not satisfied with seeing, nor the ear filled with hearing.

9 The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun.

10 Is there any thing whereof it may be said, See, this is new? it hath been already of old time, which was before us.

11 There is no remembrance of former things; neither shall there be any remembrance of things that are to come with those that shall come after.

Blogger Sevron February 22, 2016 5:19 PM  

The price of oil is killing me personally, but what's your solution? Not allow Americans to purchase oil off the international market? Somehow apply tariffs to such purchases? Do you have any idea how stupid and just plain ignorant of how the oil market works you sound?

Blogger Josh February 22, 2016 5:21 PM  

The price of oil is killing me personally, but what's your solution? Not allow Americans to purchase oil off the international market? Somehow apply tariffs to such purchases? Do you have any idea how stupid and just plain ignorant of how the oil market works you sound?

Calm down sugar tits.

Did I suggest any solutions in my comment?

Blogger Josh February 22, 2016 5:22 PM  

And also Sevron, if what you're saying is correct for one good, is it correct for all goods?

Could one not replace "oil" with "manufactured goods" in your rant?

Blogger pyrrhus February 22, 2016 5:37 PM  

@96 The American system was destabilized when women and 18 year olds got the vote--high time preference, low knowledge, emotionally unstable. And that's what America has become...under the old system, the Federal government could never have become leviathon.

Blogger pyrrhus February 22, 2016 5:39 PM  

@92 And it's hard to disagree with anything Trump says about foreign policy.

Blogger Sevron February 22, 2016 6:10 PM  

Now Josh, you brought up oil and I responded about oil. If you want to try to bring up some example that might actually help you justify distributism, a system that has been tried and found wanting and which is laughably unsuitable to the now, you go right ahead, but I'm not interested in helping you.

I suppose your next dodge will be to claim you didn't bring up the price of oil as a defense of distributism or something. Let's just save time and move on to your third act, where you insist the person you're talking to "define x", shall we?

Blogger Big Griz Reno February 22, 2016 6:13 PM  

My big problem with Trump is TRUST. I just do not trust him not to change positions on a whim. It is natural for people learn through living and reconsider earlier positions. I absolutely agree with him on immigration.

I have worked in the middle east and had conversations with arrogant, condescending moslems who laugh at the west. They know in their bones that the world will submit to Allah and live under sharia.

I am seriously entertaining your views that the original American culture is WASP culture. I don't know... Maybe it is from my English, Scots & Irish genes. I was proud of being 1/4 Swedish. But the Swedes have lost their way and no longer have pride in who they are.

I am still for Cruz. I just wish I could trust Trump.

Blogger Rusty Fife February 22, 2016 6:13 PM  

The problem with -isms is that they never survive contact with the enemy. People are too complicated and fallen.

Philosophy is a plan. Perhaps an insight to a strategy; but not an operation. It is most definitely not tactics.

Blogger The Hammer February 22, 2016 6:18 PM  

@95, Josh this has been what I've been thinking also. Robotics advancements may also help as well when it comes to it being practical for more people. I also brought it up because while I've seen some writers promote it as "third way", others just go off rejecting the enlightenment. Of course all this depends on sociopolitical developments and the creation of new ethnic states. But as my quote stated, some of this can be lived out now and isn't dependent on laws or a government.

@96, yes I think this will factor into it any successful introduction of it. Also, seeking to uphold its principles of subsidiarity and solidarity may help for long-term stability.

Blogger Josh February 22, 2016 6:28 PM  

Now Josh, you brought up oil and I responded about oil.

And the reason I brought up oil should be obvious. Conventional economic wisdom states that lower prices for the consumer are always a good thing for the economy. Well, oil prices have fallen, which is a good thing for the consumer as a whole, but it's been a disaster for the entire economy.

Blogger VD February 22, 2016 6:39 PM  

You just trotted out ideas central to Reactionary, anti-enlightenment, anti-18th century revolutionary thought. You can call yourself whatever Nominalist term you prefer, but that doesn't negate what you're becoming in essence.

Truth is truth. One can get to the same destination in a variety of ways. That doesn't make a helicopter a skateboard.

Blogger John Wright February 22, 2016 6:42 PM  

"You just trotted out ideas central to Reactionary, anti-enlightenment, anti-18th century revolutionary thought. You can call yourself whatever Nominalist term you prefer, but that doesn't negate what you're becoming in essence."

Hmmm, really?

'I don't know what you mean by "glory",' Alice said.

Humpty Dumpty smiled contemptuously. 'Of course you don't — till I tell you. I meant "there's a nice knock-down argument for you!"'

'But "glory" doesn't mean "a nice knock-down argument",' Alice objected.

'When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, 'it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.'

'The question is,' said Alice, 'whether you can make words mean so many different things.'

'The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty, 'which is to be master — that's all.'

Blogger Charlie Martel 7359 February 22, 2016 6:47 PM  

Relax, Sarah. I think like Vox too now, but I have Christ and trust me, I have been praying a lot for direction.

This isn't Radio Milles-Collines no matter how many times the rayciss canard is trotted out.

Blogger Sevron February 22, 2016 6:49 PM  

That's highly debatable (the economy was going super great before the price of oil cratered? Everyone's economy is centered around the price of oil?), but let's grant it for the sake of the argument.

And so therefore what?

Blogger Charlie Martel 7359 February 22, 2016 6:56 PM  

@17 They were burning them down six months ago.

These never make much news, but in Canada the traditional way to get back at cops was to set the cop shop on fire. Hundreds of RCMP detachments have been burned, most on "dry" reserves after a liquor seizure. They try their damndest to keep this out of the press too.

Blogger Charlie Martel 7359 February 22, 2016 7:00 PM  

@17 They were burning them down six months ago.

These never make much news, but in Canada the traditional way to get back at cops was to set the cop shop on fire. Hundreds of RCMP detachments have been burned, most on "dry" reserves after a liquor seizure. They try their damndest to keep this out of the press too.

Blogger Josh February 22, 2016 7:00 PM  

And so therefore what?

Well, it would mean that the assumption of lower prices uber alles should be re-examined.

Blogger Charlie Martel 7359 February 22, 2016 7:03 PM  

@29 HST (VAT) means you pay tax every time you but something. I don't buy the "some taxpayers are more equal than others" argument. The only way around HST is a band card. Income taxes have countless shelters.

Blogger Sevron February 22, 2016 7:17 PM  

Your comment translates to "the concept of supply and demand should be reexamined." I would have thought it might push somebody to question focusing one's economy around one good, but what do I know about the price of tulips.

Blogger Rusty Fife February 22, 2016 7:30 PM  

Sevron wrote:Your comment translates to "the concept of supply and demand should be reexamined." I would have thought it might push somebody to question focusing one's economy around one good, but what do I know about the price of tulips.

Don't know the tax answer but energy = work. When the US started doing less work, we needed less energy (oil) and the price fell.

The government is choking the economy with, what?, 50% taxes. There have been studies done about the optimum size of government to maximize growth. The answer was 20-25% of GDP. How the taxes are derived is likely less important.

Here is a link:
http://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/optimum-government

If the politicians/economists aren't looking at these studies and thinking that perhaps they need to cut spending/taxes; it means that they don't care about growth. I'm looking at you Speaker Ryan.

Blogger Charlie Martel 7359 February 22, 2016 7:31 PM  

@55 Trump is crazy like a fox. As am I.

Blogger Charlie Martel 7359 February 22, 2016 7:38 PM  

@65 Here's a benefit of local control: the bogus charges I was brought up on were thrown out by a judge who used to be a local defense attorney and knew the two cops in particular (and who were in a champertous deal with the prosecutor) were lying sacks of crap. Even without my attorney pointing it out.

Blogger Charlie Martel 7359 February 22, 2016 7:54 PM  

@73 "The comments on any story about communism just proves that we need more communism! On a related note, the beatings will continue..."

Anonymous Malwyn's apprentice February 22, 2016 8:10 PM  

I'm a fairly regular reader here & at Sarah's place; I didn't really understand her concerns about Trump until I read one of her older posts (orig from 2001, reposted in Jan) where she talked about her experiences in growing up under Portugal's crazy-quilt of Leftist/Marxist parties.

http://accordingtohoyt.com/2016/01/28/nerves-a-blast-from-the-past-post-912/

Definitely gave me food for thought (& now I associate Green Acres with PTSD ...)

Blogger Charlie Martel 7359 February 22, 2016 8:27 PM  

@103 The price of oil is killing me personally

It's now cheaper for me to commute to Montreal from Acadia by car rather than train. I'm quite happy about 75 cent gas.

Blogger Charlie Martel 7359 February 22, 2016 8:30 PM  

@106 Military at 17, drink at 21, reasonable car insurance at 25, President at 35.

Voting at 45?

Anonymous Satan's Hamster February 22, 2016 8:32 PM  

"If distributism were stable, we would still have it, because much of our productive capacity started out distributed."

Production began at a local level, and became centralized when the industrial revolution made big, fat factories vastly more productive than local manufacturers. Government followed, because having a few big corporations collect tax for you is far more efficient than trying to collect it from everyone who runs a business in their house.

3D printers and similar technologies are about to make production local again. Government will follow, because... how do you plan to tax everyone with a 3D printer? Tell them to send 50% of everything they print to the IRS?

Big, central government is done. There is no benefit from being told what to do from Washington to a guy in Oregon who can make anything he wants on a 3D printer.

Blogger bob k. mando February 22, 2016 9:26 PM  

101. CarpeOro February 22, 2016 4:51 PM
Not seeing a shot at a discussion after her flippant reply so won't bother to return.



i asked if i was also supposed to consider Dr. Helen a low information voter being deceived by the Donald.

Sarah's response was to accuse me of "yelling" at her. looks an awful lot like point and shriek to me.

later, another commenter accused me of saying exactly the opposite of what i actually said about Cruz's NBC status.

i'm pretty sure that there aren't very many who read at her blog who are tall enough for this ride.




106. pyrrhus February 22, 2016 5:37 PM
under the old system, the Federal government could never have become leviathon.



false. 1861 destroyed the voluntary association polity and created unfettered Federal supremacy over the states. which is why no country on earth will voluntarily join the US.

women didn't get the vote until 1920.

Anonymous Jack Amok February 22, 2016 9:38 PM  

Sarah Hoyt is a Portugese coservative, which means she is conserving marxism, or some proto-marxism, since Portugal has been marxist, or trending that way, for generations.

You are an idiot.

Blogger Frank Brady February 22, 2016 10:08 PM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger Frank Brady February 22, 2016 10:11 PM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger Frank Brady February 22, 2016 10:13 PM  

This is a fascinating thread in many ways. I have made a life-long journey from socialist to liberal to conservative to libertarian to "what now?". Here's the elephant in the room. Everything about human organization, including politics and economics, is about how the products of human activity are to be distributed and put to use. Now, it seems to me, that foundation of civilization is crumbling before our eyes. Manual labor is in the process of disappearing. At the same time, the proportion of the population that can practically do ONLY manual labor is growing. The magnitude of this problem goes far beyond mere economics. The value of useful work to human organization has a civilizing value as well. A very large percentage of the jobs that existed in the middle of the last century are already gone. A large number of those that remain will in short order be performed by robots. What then? How will humanity organize itself? What will become of the "useless eaters" of the world? What does this mean for the very concept of property?

Blogger bob k. mando February 22, 2016 10:21 PM  

134. Frank Brady February 22, 2016 10:13 PM
What will become of the "useless eaters" of the world? What does this mean for the very concept of property?



some of the rich and powerful have been considering this for a while.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgia_Guidestones#Inscriptions

Blogger The Hammer February 22, 2016 10:36 PM  

@129, when I mentioned robotics advances making it more practical, I should have put a comma with a mention of 3D printing too. Of course all of this could be set back decades depending on the when and where of the coming civil wars and conflicts in the West.

Anonymous Jack Amok February 23, 2016 12:25 AM  

Here's the elephant in the room. Everything about human organization, including politics and economics, is about how the products of human activity are to be distributed and put to use

You just made the classic leftist/commie/socialist bloomer.

You assumed the production will be there to be distributed.

Production doesn't just happen - it's the result of people actually showing up and doing work, and people are damned lazy without motivation. The whip can provide motivation to work, but not to think. The conundrum isn't how to keep the unproductive fed, happy and not revolting - it's how to do that without gutting the productive people of all their incentives.

But you are right about the great divide, and it's yet another reason for strong borders and doing away with the multicultural fantasy. A homogenous society can tolerate much higher levels of redistribution than a heterogeneous one. And if the levels do get too high, a homogenous society can more easily cut welfare than a heterogeneous one - because cutting redistribution in the mutliculti society will cause the less successful races to resort to race-based groupism and eventually race-based violence.

I didn't really answer your question - there isn't a particular pleasant answer to be had for it, which means we don't really know what answer we'll get. Choosing the lesser of two (or six, or twenty) evils isn't as easy as it sounds.

Anonymous tublecane February 23, 2016 12:25 AM  

I find it funny that you scoff at your libertarian/conservative opponents with terms like "classical liberal" and names like Jefferson yet deny them the opportunity to link you up with mercantilism. As if you have a monopoly on being up to date. Let's say it's true that they're stuck in the 18th century, for argument's sake. Isn't it possible you are too, only on another side? Or are you like the progressives assume themselves to be, always ahead of the times? Maybe you are, maybe you aren't. But you can at least have some things in common with anti-free traders of the past. You didn't come up with your ideas from scratch.

I say this to help, sincerely. It won't do, if just rhetorically, to accuse other people of having out if date ideas and recoil at the very thought of them throwing it back at you. "Now really, sir, you've gone too far. Calling me a mercantilist, how very dare you. I say good day!" Sounds weak.

Anonymous tublecane February 23, 2016 12:42 AM  

@134-I have an idea that exactly the problem you describe, the "surplus population," is what fuels the environmental movement. Their solution is to kill it. The mainstream progressive solution is to feed it. There's always money out there to be had, and it's the state's job to get it. The old progressive solution was industrial armies and/or real armies and world war. Which is killing all over again.

I have no solution because I don't think it's a real problem. Leave them to solve it themselves. Or you solve it with your neighbors if you like. I think if it were a real problem it'd be endemic to civilization, and if you wanted to really solve it you'd have no civilization. Soon as they invented the wheel, I bet, people grumbled about the unemployed draggers. Get another job, draggers, I say.

Or is this Late Capitalism, and everything's either been invented or new inventions will somehow not help. Well, how long's it been Late Capitalism, anyway? You had socialists fretting about surplus populations back before we had God damned electricity or the internal combustion engine. And these manufacturing jobs everyone misses, people who similarly fret hated them with the white hot fire of a thousand suns. It was dehumanizing, oppressive, exploitative , etc. Now it enobles the human spirit and gives people their only reason to live, apparently.

We have no idea of the work people are capable of because we coddle them in a make-believe cocoon of substandard civilization and government. We are misruled, and the more misrule there us the worse it gets and the more responsibility we give to the people misruling us. I can't jump fully into the spirit of this blog because the Nation State is a huge part of this, though it is better than continental states like the EU and the New World Order. But that's not saying much. Nation States are unnatural and productive of innumerable problems, such as the problem of unemployment. I dream of hundreds, thousands of little states within these united states. In some of those states they'd let the surplus population solve its own problems, and those would be the envy of the other states.

Anonymous Frank Brady February 23, 2016 1:06 AM  

@137. Anonymous Jack Amok wrote, "You assumed the production will be there to be distributed." No, I really don't--at least not at anything like today's levels of production.

139. Anonymous tublecane wrote "We have no idea of the work people are capable of because we coddle them in a make-believe cocoon of substandard civilization and government." I'm pretty certain that a lot of folks with IQs under the mean are just not capable of doing much except manual labor, the viable market for which in the modern world is small and evaporating.

Blogger Groot February 23, 2016 1:09 AM  

Oh, man, this is getting to be so funny. Even I am appreciating the meretricious appeal of the Donald. There was this one guy whose "wife" kept showing up drunk to gobble it up. She kept inviting me to their parties and her "husband" would crawl under his truck and throw a tantrum. (She was pretty fine, for a crack whore.) I "borrowed" thousands from her, for the lulz. He was literally paying me to cuck him. When she got pregnant, the pictures showed the little guy was hung, and he literally burst into tears in front of me (it wasn't mine, give me a break - it was only head).

When the Donald cucks you, and cucks you, and cucks you again, and then cucks you one more time, I will be here for you. To mock you. Heads I win, tails you lose.

Anonymous Jack Amok February 23, 2016 1:54 AM  

No, I really don't--at least not at anything like today's levels of production.

Your quote about "how the products of human activity are to be distributed" did, though certainly I can accept maybe it didn't come out the way you meant it to.

But the focus on distribution of production is the fatal flaw in all the leftist, parasitical schemes. It's a hallmark of people who don't really understand how production happens that they focus only on the disposition of the products. If that's not you, be careful you don't fall into their templates. It's easy to do.

Engineering is a great discipline, because it's about trade-offs. Solve this problem, but make that one slightly worse. Solve these two problems by introducing a third. There's a reason so many of the Left's nonsensical ideas get so much traction, and it's because they generally rely on looking at the negative consequences of a solution while assuming the positive consequences just happened...

Blogger Sevron February 23, 2016 10:01 AM  

All this and more, in this week's exciting episode of "Shit that Never Happaned!"

Blogger Frank Brady February 23, 2016 10:03 AM  

@142. Jack Amok

The point I was trying to make (apparently badly) was not about direct human production--of which there will be increasingly less. As robotics and AI move into what had previously required human activity, there may be more "stuff" produced than ever--but it won't require much human intervention. My intended focus was on the ever growing supply of potential human labor which has no where to go. What happens to "money"? What happens to employment? What happens to the notion of paying someone for their "work" when the work disappears (which is already happening at the lowest end of the socio-economic scale)"

Blogger No Thank you February 23, 2016 7:06 PM  

The cost will be his name cemented in our nation`s history as the the Greatest President since the the era of the Founders.

Anonymous Jack Amok February 23, 2016 11:35 PM  

The point I was trying to make (apparently badly) was not about direct human production--of which there will be increasingly less.

You weren't making your point badly, I completely understand it. I just disagree with it. Robots shift some things about productivity, but they do not eliminate the need for it. It's like whack-a-mole - when you automate one activity, the need - or opportunity - for human intervention and effort just pops up somewhere else.

My intended focus was on the ever growing supply of potential human labor which has no where to go.

We already have a glut of unproductive human beings, but productive people are the most limited resource on the planet. As long as we don't outlaw people working (but of course that's what the would-be nobles do with minimum wage laws, labor laws, laws that make it difficult to run your own business and a legal minefield to hire others...) there will always be something valuable for a productive-minded person to do.

What happens to "money"? What happens to employment? What happens to the notion of paying someone for their "work" when the work disappears (which is already happening at the lowest end of the socio-economic scale)

The work isn't disappearing so much as it's being outsourced to foreign workers. That's not an issue with technological progress, it's a problem with being sold out politically.

Post a Comment

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

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts