ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2018 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Sunday, April 15, 2018

This explains SO much

The longtime self-declared standard bearer of the so-called conservative movement and editor of National Review, William F. Buckley, was a closeted homosexual:
Back in the day, there was a famous feud that sometimes spilled out into public view - on tv, in the courts, and on the pages of certain magazines - between two men, both now deceased. They were on opposite ends of one spectrum, and while it may come as a shock to some the same end of a different spectrum.

By the time it escalated into a legal battle - there had already been years of shouting matches and near altercations - the two had amassed impressive files on each other. The longtime Hollywood procurer for the other denies on record that any of his interests there were underage, but what of course about the time he spent abroad, in southern Europe and later in Asia? The sworn statements provided to that legacy detective agency tell a different story. This person went to his grave fearful about the release of these statements and related pictures. The relatives may have been scorned, and left out of the will, but they were still telling the truth.

So, why then did #1 drop the suit at the eleventh hour, fearful of what he might be asked under oath? It might be because of what #2's team, which included a purported former KGB spy, had found out about #1's own interest: barely legal hustlers, often rough trade. He'd hire them whenever he was visiting his many politician friends in DC. He called them his "habit." For him, the revelation would have been enough to end his career, and bring down his empire.
From The New York Times of September 26, 1972:

Buckley Drops Vidal Suit, Settles With Esquire

The legal battle between William F. Buckley, Jr. and Gore Vidal arising out of their public exchange of affronts, apparently came to an end yesterday with an announcement by Mr. Buckley of two acts: the dropping of his suit against Mr. Vidal and an out-of- court settlement of $115,000 with Esquire magazine.

The conservative movement has always been a fraud. It is the Washington Generals of American politics. No wonder its opinion leaders are so reliably worthless.

Labels: ,

132 Comments:

Blogger haus frau April 15, 2018 4:12 PM  

Anonymous Conservative wrote about Buckley's very likely narcissistic personality disorder a while ago using an article written by Buckley's only son. Pair that with possible closeted homosexuality and we have a real winner for CIA controlled opposition.

Blogger Mr.MantraMan April 15, 2018 4:12 PM  

Suck left punch right

Blogger Chris McCullough April 15, 2018 4:13 PM  

The effeminate man who used to touch his fingers limply to his chin while dismissing things in a posh, snooty tone was gay? Color me surprised.

Anonymous Anonymous April 15, 2018 4:15 PM  

Paul Ryan is straight through.

Blogger Stilicho April 15, 2018 4:16 PM  

But Ann Coulter made fun of the money-grubbing Bitches of East Brunswick. Which was simply unforgivable...

Blogger RobertT April 15, 2018 4:16 PM  

Rush idolizes Buckley's memory.

Blogger Al From Bay Shore April 15, 2018 4:20 PM  

WOW! You called them the "Washington Generals". That's an insult of the highest order.

Blogger dienw April 15, 2018 4:33 PM  

Conservatives are the "Washington Generals" to the Harlem Globalists.

Blogger tublecane April 15, 2018 4:34 PM  

This wouldn't surprise me. I wasn't surprised by CIA connections, either.

What did surprise me back when was, after reading a few of his books, I found out that he wasn't really trying. I mean, if the first thing I ever learned about him was that quote where he said we have to accept the Welfare State for the duration in exchange for fighting a supposedly existential conflict with Russia, I wouldn't have bothered.

But I had to learn the hard way, by trudging through his writing, that he was if not a fraud he was at least frontin' (as the gangstas say) most of the time.

Buckley is a gateway drug for budding rightists. For a few who veered into the real right after getting through the gate, he was useful. I fear for the vast majority he led them down a blind alley and made them worth less than if they had stayed braindead liberals.

We would do better to use as gateways people who aren't really of the right, but are classical liberals, like Hayek. Or maybe leftists who engage in Real Talk, like Orwell.

Blogger Not a lefty April 15, 2018 4:36 PM  

Quite literally the very definition of controlled opposition. From now on, the littlest chickenhawk gets the moniker: exhibition team.

Blogger Daniel April 15, 2018 4:47 PM  

This is no surprise. The guy minced like a Ronco Veg-O-Matic.

Blogger tublecane April 15, 2018 4:50 PM  

If you've ever been around gay or female social circles, Buckley's famous penchant for freezing people out of the conservative movement, deciding who is Hot and who is Not, makes more sense. Probably the most extreme example was his book on anti-semitism, which was the epitome of bitchiness.

The history of National Review and the conservative movement as a whole under Buckley is one long story of superior intellects either dropping out or being read out of the Respectable Right: Nock, Chodorov, Kirk, Rand (okay, she wasn't a superior intellect, but her books are more fun to read), Rothbard, the Birchers, Sam Francis, Buchanan, Sobran, the Derb, and so on.

How did we ever let Buckley decide who was in it out? Well, I don't think we did. There's more to Conservatism Inc. than that man. Not that Buckley was a mere front, but we must dig deeper for the full story.

Blogger ghostfromplanetspook April 15, 2018 4:56 PM  

All this time I thought he was just profoundly English.

Blogger rumpole5 April 15, 2018 5:01 PM  

VD nails it again. "There are more things in heaven and Earth, Horatio, / Than are dreamt of in your philosophy ."
Hamlet Act 1, scene 5.

Blogger seeingsights April 15, 2018 5:06 PM  

Gays who are media figures exhibit narcissism and preeningness. Examples would be Lawrence of Arabia, Milo Yiannopoulos, Liberace, et al. WFB apparently is another example.

Blogger tublecane April 15, 2018 5:07 PM  

@15- Barry Obama.

Blogger seeingsights April 15, 2018 5:10 PM  

'Rush idolizes Buckley's memory.'

Back in the early 1990s, WFB once appeared with Rush Limbaugh. If memory serves, Limbaugh did the majority of the talking.

WFB was basically giving his 'imprimatur' on Rush Limbaugh. Wouldn't you be delighted if one of your intellectual heroes gave you the thumbs up?

Blogger Steve April 15, 2018 5:23 PM  

I'm not even joking here, I assumed that was common knowledge based on how effete he was?

Blogger VD April 15, 2018 5:27 PM  

WFB was basically giving his 'imprimatur' on Rush Limbaugh. Wouldn't you be delighted if one of your intellectual heroes gave you the thumbs up?

Most people don't know this, but I was signed by Universal Press Syndicate with the intention that my column would replace WFB's when he retired. One more reason why that plan failed, I guess.

Blogger Johnny April 15, 2018 5:31 PM  

It seems like the powers that be, mainly money interests I suppose, find people who are minimal or easily blackmailed, and manage to get them into into positions of power. Surely if it were a real talent search we would get better than we do.

Blogger Steve April 15, 2018 5:32 PM  

I dunno how you can watch Buckley's preening and dainty sneering on FIRING LINE (which was excellent television of the type they don't make any more: long-form political discussions for adults) and not come to the conclusion that here was a man standing athwart history simpering "coo-ee!"

He even had the same nautical penchant as Ted Heath. My guess is there weren't a lot of women on that boat.

Blogger Kang April 15, 2018 5:35 PM  

Wow. Had lunch in the same restaurant in nyc, he was not fastidious, his shirt was hanging out the back and he needed a haircut and a brush. I guess I don't have gaydar.

Blogger LES April 15, 2018 5:37 PM  

William Buckley Vs Gore Vidal

Blogger Lovekraft April 15, 2018 5:38 PM  

I imagine having VD taken down a notch would serve as a major victory for many SJWs, not to mention a major demoralization for the alt-right.

That said, I trust him to be alert and able to clarify anything that the media takes out of context. Which is why we Ilk are more comfortable in throwing around various ideas and positions. He has our back (up to a point, though).

Blogger tz April 15, 2018 5:40 PM  

@4 Just like Denny Hastert?

Blogger Matthew April 15, 2018 5:43 PM  

Hot damn.

Blogger James April 15, 2018 5:44 PM  

I still say it's not an accurate assessment to say that "The conservative movement has always been a fraud." Such a sweeping statement demands a definition of "conservative," for one thing? I remember when I heard about what William B Fuckley did to the John Birch Society I knew right then and there that WBF was a fraud. But the JBS was considered "conservative" by most and most members were comfortable being called and calling themselves "conservative." And then even if Robert Welch could be proven a fraud that doesn't mean that the members were frauds.

If the entire movement was composed of frauds then they would have to be in on the scam with WBF instead of horrified and disgusted and surprised by the truth about him coming out. Hey, get it? "Coming out?"

I agree with the assessment of the so-called Conservative Movement that it was ineffective, and was doomed to fail in principle for a variety of reasons, but that does nothing to explain the intentions of all the people who supported it in good faith. The point is not to excuse their naivete, the point is to be accurate and constructive in our language.

Blogger Matthew April 15, 2018 5:47 PM  

There were rumors about Whittaker Chambers being a gay, as well.

Blogger Nate April 15, 2018 6:02 PM  

Rule number 1: No Poofters

Blogger Nate April 15, 2018 6:03 PM  

"I still say it's not an accurate assessment to say that "The conservative movement has always been a fraud."

it is your God given right to be willfully wrong if you so choose.

Blogger Fenris Wulf April 15, 2018 6:05 PM  

I have my doubts. The pimp in question, Scotty Bowers, is a lying piece of human garbage who claims he had sex with everyone from Vivien Leigh to Edward VIII (!). I won't link to the article, because it's disgusting in the extreme, but he literally throws excrement on the memory of a dozen-odd great actors who aren't around to speak for themselves.

Blogger ReluctantMessiah April 15, 2018 6:08 PM  

No wonder Conservatives love to take it up the ass

Blogger Patrick Wilson April 15, 2018 6:08 PM  

Always seemed obvious to me from watching him, affected gay display behavior in his speech cadence.

Blogger lazlo azavaar April 15, 2018 6:13 PM  

It's like all those old women who never realized Liberace wasn't really into them.

Anonymous Anonymous April 15, 2018 6:15 PM  

Was a he gay or a pedo?

Blogger Jack Amok April 15, 2018 6:16 PM  

Most people don't know this, but I was signed by Universal Press Syndicate with the intention that my column would replace WFB's when he retired. One more reason why that plan failed, I guess.

The techno probably had them making assumptions.

Blogger VD April 15, 2018 6:19 PM  

I still say it's not an accurate assessment to say that "The conservative movement has always been a fraud." Such a sweeping statement demands a definition of "conservative," for one thing?

You're totally and conclusively wrong. Red Eagle and I wrote an entire book on it, so you don't get to whine about the fact that I don't repeat myself on every blog post.

The conservative movement has ALWAYS been a fraud, and if you knew more about its history, you would admit that. It is not a philosophy or an ideology, it is merely a pose.

Blogger VD April 15, 2018 6:21 PM  

Was a he gay or a pedo?

Apparently just gay by inclination. But who knows what rites and rituals he went through.

Blogger weka April 15, 2018 6:22 PM  

@Kang. Not alldandies are gau (Tom Wolfe) but that is the way to bet.

Buckley was dressed down and slumming,

mot having gaydar is a feature, not a bug.

Blogger VD April 15, 2018 6:22 PM  

I have my doubts.

I don't. I had my doubts about Buckley decades before I heard any of this stuff. I'm pretty sure Gore Vidal did too, if he didn't know for certain.

Blogger James April 15, 2018 6:23 PM  

"it is your God given right to be willfully wrong if you so choose"

I don't think that's an argument.

And I don't believe in my right to be wrong. I don't want to be wrong. I want to understand, and I do not understand. Calling the entire movement of any and all people who were called and/or called themselves "conservative" sounds stupid to me. And when I ask for an explanation all I get is snarky nonsense. I expect better than this from the here; most of the people, anyway.

I tried to point out that a lot of conservatives hated WBF for reasons that had nothing to do with him being a pervert. If you're saying that it was a mistake to call them "conservatives" because WBF defined "conservative," then at least I will know what y'all are talking about. I wouldn't agree but at least I'd know what the idea in your head was.

Blogger weka April 15, 2018 6:23 PM  

And rule two is no dickheads. Buckley was both.

Blogger Jeff aka Orville April 15, 2018 6:23 PM  

There's more to Conservatism Inc.

Yeah, bow ties, horn-rimmed glasses (I'm looking at you George Will), and foam parties. Fags and gammas.

Blogger VD April 15, 2018 6:25 PM  

And I don't believe in my right to be wrong. I don't want to be wrong. I want to understand, and I do not understand. Calling the entire movement of any and all people who were called and/or called themselves "conservative" sounds stupid to me. And when I ask for an explanation all I get is snarky nonsense. I expect better than this from the here; most of the people, anyway.

One question, James. Have you read CUCKSERVATIVE: How "Conservatives" Betrayed America?

Blogger James April 15, 2018 6:34 PM  

"One question, James. Have you read CUCKSERVATIVE: How "Conservatives" Betrayed America? "

Well, notice how you felt the need to put "Conservatives" in quotation marks.

I didn't feel the need to read that book the way I felt the need to read SJWAL because I already knew
first hand that "Conservatives" had sold out all the well meaning conservatives in excruciating detail
and frankly I assumed that a whole book on the subject would merely depress me to no advantage.

However, "if what you're saying is," I need to read that book to understand the point of calling all the millions of people who thought they were trying to be conservatives "frauds," then it's fair enough and I will read it before I comment any further on this subject. I consider it a reasonable and helpful suggestion.

Blogger VFM #7634 April 15, 2018 6:39 PM  

When it comes to convergence, it would appear *gays* are about as bad as (((Jews)))... and I'm not sure any more which is worse.

Blogger Sambuca Ford April 15, 2018 6:39 PM  

So the Gore Vidal spat was based less on ideals and more on...you never returned my calls or knickers? That lilt was always suspect.

Blogger Joseph Maroney April 15, 2018 6:41 PM  

This wouldn't surprise me. I wasn't surprised by CIA connections, either.

The staggering amount of entertainers from that era, including the big name rock groups, with CIA or military intelligence connections, if not themselves then their fathers, is very provocative.

Blogger James April 15, 2018 6:45 PM  

When I was 10 years old I thought I was for Richard M. Nixon. Then when I was 12 he imposed wage & price controls and I felt conned and betrayed. But I had no idea that I was as much of a fraud as he was.

Blogger Dexter April 15, 2018 6:46 PM  

"I still say it's not an accurate assessment to say that "The conservative movement has always been a fraud."

If it's not a fraud... name something the conservative movement conserved.

Blogger VD April 15, 2018 6:46 PM  

I didn't feel the need to read that book the way I felt the need to read SJWAL because I already knew first hand that "Conservatives" had sold out all the well meaning conservatives in excruciating detail and frankly I assumed that a whole book on the subject would merely depress me to no advantage.

The book contains the very information you have been demanding and then some. Which is precisely why everyone here has been so dismissive of you. It's incredibly bad form to show up on an author's web site and demand that he repeat what he has already written, published, and made available to you.

Now, it's fine if you read it and disagree with the case that is made. But you simply cannot claim that I have not already provided you with the information you were demanding.

Blogger Emmett Fitz-Hume April 15, 2018 6:54 PM  

"When I was 10 years old I thought I was for Richard M. Nixon. Then when I was 12 he imposed wage & price controls and I felt conned and betrayed. But I had no idea that I was as much of a fraud as he was."

Smells like Butthurt...

Blogger Chris Mallory April 15, 2018 6:58 PM  

Dexter wrote:name something the conservative movement conserved.

Profits for the MIC, the yearly welfare payment to Israel, abortion, gun control, and the Immigration Act of 1965 have all been conserved by the "conservatives".

Blogger James April 15, 2018 7:01 PM  

"If it's not a fraud... name something the conservative movement conserved."

I know I said I wouldn't comment again until I read Cuckservative, but I just ordered it on Amazon and I can't wait that long, and I think I have an answer for this questions, what has been conserved by conservatives.

Howabout what's left of the 2nd Amendment? The NFA of 1934 was passed before there was a conservative movement as is thought of today. The GCA 1968 was passed before conservatives were aware that the 2nd Amendment was an issue. As a longtime member of the NRA, GOA, JPFO, etc, I doubt we'd have any 2nd Amendment left if it wasn't for conservatives putting up some resistance. You certainly can't give credit to the liberal communists for saving any shreds of the 2nd Amendment because they were the ones attacking it.

And I have to admit that it certainly was not the bow tie wearing Washington DC "movement" "Conservatives" who helped preserve remnants of the 2nd Amendment. I know damn well that guys like Nixon and George Will and you name it of that ilk were on the other side. But nevertheless even so and besides that my point is still moot.

I think my point would be that millions of conservatives did not follow the phony baloney plastic banana good time rock & roll faux "Cuckservatives." Perhaps they, "we," should have given up the label of "conservative" sooner in order to distinguish our selves from the frauds, but we didn't, because we were stupid. Never said we weren't stupid.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash April 15, 2018 7:13 PM  

1) He's not talking about you. You're special.
2) The Modern Conservative Movement, from its founding in the early 1950s, was and remains a fraud. At its core, in its "philosophy", in its tactics, in its rhetoric, in its dialectic, it its thoughts, in its words, in what it has done and most especially in what it has failed to do, Conservatism is a fraud. The basic trade that Conservatism offered was "We will abandon literally every aspect of the Right, of Liberty, of Americanism, in return for the Left helping us to defeat Communism."

Blogger Snidely Whiplash April 15, 2018 7:15 PM  

James wrote:I think I have an answer for this questions, what has been conserved by conservatives.

Howabout what's left of the 2nd Amendment? The NFA of 1934 was passed before there was a conservative movement as is thought of today. The GCA 1968 was passed before conservatives were aware that the 2nd Amendment was an issue.

False, the Conservatives, like the NRA, were not only willing, they were EAGER to undermine the right to bear arms. Only the unrelenting pressure of traditional Americans stopped them.

Blogger VFM #7634 April 15, 2018 7:25 PM  

James, you're weird. Once I figured out that the alt-right was all about kicking the Left's a-- while conservatives ultimately kiss it, I was all about the alt-right. I can't understand why you can't be the same.

Blogger Jack April 15, 2018 7:28 PM  

The documentary Best of Enemies about Buckley vs. Vidal very briefly raises the possibility that Buckley was a closet case, but presents no evidence for it, which, if this blind is to be believed, did exist.

Vidal himself was a piece of shit who, according to his family, visited third world countries to have sex with children.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/10441697/Gore-Vidal-terrified-paedophilia-claims-would-be-make-public-family-says.html

Vidal is responsible for, among other things, Myra Breckinridge.

https://infogalactic.com/info/Myra_Breckinridge

"(((Critic))) Harold Bloom cites the novel as a canonical work in his book The Western Canon."

With defenders like Buckley and Bloom, how is it that the West has fared so poorly?

Anonymous Anonymous April 15, 2018 7:31 PM  

Odds on Jonah Goldberg being a pillow biter?

Blogger Darwinite April 15, 2018 7:49 PM  

Chris Buckley did the world a grave disservice when he destroyed that filing cabinet; pedogate could have been exposed years ago.

Blogger Stilicho April 15, 2018 8:00 PM  

@59 over/under on Lowry...?

Blogger Crush Limbraw April 15, 2018 8:09 PM  

For whatever it might worth - the Conservative conundrum of folks using the term itself has nothing to do with the 'philosophy of conservatism' - it's simply become a descriptive term to describe those who oppose progressivism.
Vox has made it clear - there is no conservative philosophy! However, that does not change the nomenclature.
Instead of it becoming a pissing contest, I simply ask: "Can you name a single institution that has not been lost to
the DaLeftistProgs?" - end of conversation!
Empirical evidence - Conservatism is a proven failure in practice!
The exact same is true of Churchianity!
Guess what, most of my confrontations on comment forums are with Conservatives and Churchians!
So we slog on!

Blogger Daniel April 15, 2018 8:09 PM  

@49
>>When I was 10 years old I thought I was for Richard M. Nixon. Then when I was 12 he imposed wage & price controls and I felt conned and betrayed. But I had no idea that I was as much of a fraud as he was.

Wage and price controls. Restrictions on free trade,. Environmental controls. Yeah, even job quotas that will help black Americans..... None of these, nor a host of other controls are contra-conservative. The essence of conservatism is the preservation of the nation, it's people, it's environment, it's country, it's ethos, it's Christian faith. These are the essentials. Other issues are important, but not essential. If you are not right with the essentials you are no conservative. If you are right with the essentials you are conservative.

Blogger haus frau April 15, 2018 8:10 PM  

Shapiro allowing himself to be physically manhandled and intimidated by a tranny on tv was pretty fey. Add that to the pile of possible queer conservative talking heads.

Blogger Jack Amok April 15, 2018 8:16 PM  

I felt conned and betrayed. But I had no idea that I was as much of a fraud as he was.

Dude, you may or may not be a fraud, but you are living, breathing proof of what the "Conservative" fraud was. They built a brand that was meant to render right-wing people impotent by enlisting them on what ultimately was the lovable losers of a rigged game. Like someone said earlier, the Washington Generals, except the fraud was to convince you to really, really root for the Generals. So much so that you still do. You think of yourself as a "conservative" even after being betrayed by them.

Snap out of it. If you were defauded, stop defending the people who did it.

Blogger Dave April 15, 2018 8:23 PM  

RIP Gunny R. Lee Ermey

Blogger James April 15, 2018 8:24 PM  

"James, you're weird. Once I figured out that the alt-right was all about kicking the Left's a-- while conservatives ultimately kiss it, I was all about the alt-right. I can't understand why you can't be the same. "

I am more than the same. I was alt-right before it had the name. I was actually way ahead of most conservatives when it comes to figuring out that the professional "leaders" of "Conservatism Inc." were frauds. As a long time member of the John Birch Society I'm used to being excluded from polite "conservative" society. I figured out when I was 12 years old that Nixon was full of BS because of his wage-price controls, i.e. the evidence. I've always been nationalist and I've always hated the UN. The last thing I'd ever do is defend WBF and the rest of his crypto-totalitarian ilk. What I'm saying is, the natural field for harvesting alt-right allies is on the conservative side of politics. Leftists can be turned, but the people who think of themselves as conservative and who get called conservative by the Lefties are much closer to becoming alt-right on average.
Calling all conservatives frauds, whatever the reasoning might be, sounds like the kind of thing that Marxist wackos would say. I can understand the point in context but most people in my experience are not deep and sophisticated and philosophical thinkers. They're going to assume that the person who says that is channeling Che Guevara.

Blogger tuberman April 15, 2018 8:35 PM  

No Surprise, there has always been contempt for his type, whether they call themselves Right or Left....No spirit, and you can sense it. It goes beyond the gay/fag thing, but that's part of it. They have a hate for true spirit, and any kind of wonder or innocence...they instinctively destroy all that.

It's always credentials, and public gate keeping rather than substance, and what you actually do. They hobble real people.

Blogger tublecane April 15, 2018 8:36 PM  

He certainly was odd, and one of Conservatism Inc.'s beloved "former" communists.

But will there ever be so awesome an event as a handsome media darling Establishment figure being taken down by a bedraggled outsider nobody who hid evidence in a pumpkin patch?

Blogger Matthew April 15, 2018 8:37 PM  

The brand "conservative" is dead. Stop trying to defibrillate it, you pansy.

Blogger Sambuca Ford April 15, 2018 8:49 PM  

8 to 5. Bill Kristol...push.

Blogger Darwinite April 15, 2018 8:55 PM  

The more I look into it (and where credit’s due, I guessed the reveal) WFB was just a garden-variety fag, trolling for legal lads in D.C. GV was the monster, raping his way through the children of Italy and Thailand.

Blogger tublecane April 15, 2018 8:56 PM  

@James- It might help to understand that when people say "the Conservative Movement was a fraud" it doesn't mean no one who was ever involved actually believed what they said. It doesn't even mean that a majority of its major figures were liars.

It does mean there was a basic deception at the heart of it, and that those in control and the mere frontmen alike were either liars or useful idiots.

As another poster said below, the basic deal of conservatism was that they accept every territorial expansion from the left in exchange for some desired thing. At first, that was beating communism. Later, it became tax cuts or whatever.

I'd add that the basic deal they cut with the left was also to exclude people further to the right in exchange for not being called Nazia. (Which the left did anyway.) Hence conservatism's constant purges and the absence of a "no enemy to the right" principle.

All that, plus it wasn't ever a real ideology. Russell Kirk, who coined the term, didn't try to come up with one. He pulled together a group of Anglo-American philosophers and politicians on the basis of being "beautiful losers." No one after him tried in earnest, either.

And they never told us! They acted like they were out to win, when all along the plan was to lose.


If you want a handy-dandy guide to who wasn't a fraud and who earnestly believed in what they were saying, first of all look for the ones who are now known as racists and especially antisemites. Eg., Buchanan, Sobran, Mencken, etc.

Then look for ones labelled kooks. For instance, the Birchers.

Finally, look for ones who aren't household names. Ones whose books are hard to find.

Blogger JaimeInTexas April 15, 2018 9:04 PM  

"We have got to accept Big Government for the duration-for neither an offensive nor a defensive war can be waged, given our present government skills, except through the instrument of a totalitarian bureaucracy within our shores. … And if they deem Soviet power a menace to our freedom (as I happen to), they will have to support large armies and air forces, atomic energy, central intelligence, war production boards, and the attendant centralization of power in Washington-even with Truman at the reins of it all."

William F. Buckley, Jr.

Blogger James April 15, 2018 9:04 PM  

I've never posted on a site that allowed two or more people to have the same screen name. I realize that you have the e-mail addresses and have another way to differentiate identities. I am not the James that has been posting on this thread. Well, up until this post. I have noticed his name before. In fact, I have posted on the same thread once or twice. Maybe I should change my screen name?

Blogger VFM #7634 April 15, 2018 9:05 PM  

Calling all conservatives frauds, whatever the reasoning might be, sounds like the kind of thing that Marxist wackos would say.

@67 James
We have to distinguish between conservatives who punch right, and those who don't.

Conservatives who attack the alt-right harder than they ever do the Left -- which would include William F. Cuckley -- are frauds. They're nothing more than Left Lite.

And most conservatives are indeed that way, for whatever reason. Especially the "respectable" ones who were the main conservative mouthpieces for decades. Chesterton's quip about conservatives preventing progressive mistakes from being corrected is dead-on.

Blogger James April 15, 2018 9:11 PM  

"I've never posted on a site that allowed two or more people to have the same screen name. I realize that you have the e-mail addresses and have another way to differentiate identities. I am not the James that has been posting on this thread. Well, up until this post. I have noticed his name before. In fact, I have posted on the same thread once or twice. Maybe I should change my screen name? "

I'll change my name if I can figure out how to do it.

Blogger Quilp April 15, 2018 9:12 PM  

When I was a young boy I remember firing line being on in my grandparents living room. I asked my grandfather (a man I admired very much) "who is that man talking funny, almost like he's English". He replied, "Bubbles Buckley", to which my grandmother yelled "Charles! I let it go, my grandmother never yelled. I remember asking around what that term meant, and I came to the conclusion it had something to do with talking fancy and drinking champaign. I was probably 6 or 7 at the time. Real men knew way back when.

Blogger Matthew April 15, 2018 9:16 PM  

James wrote:I've never posted on a site that allowed two or more people to have the same screen name.

Blogspot's commenting system is the worst I've ever worked with. You should pick a commenter name that is likely to be unique. I can get away with using "Matthew" because I've been here for years, people know me, and I'm a moderator.

Blogger Matthew April 15, 2018 9:20 PM  

James wrote:I'll change my name if I can figure out how to do it.

If you're using a Blogger profile, you can change your display name here:

https://www.blogger.com/edit-profile.g

Blogger Ominous Cowherd April 15, 2018 9:28 PM  

Snidely Whiplash wrote:The Modern Conservative Movement, from its founding in the early 1950s, was and remains a fraud.

If you were part of the Conservative Movement, you were a mark, a shill or a con-man. Most folks were marks.

Snidely Whiplash wrote:False, the Conservatives, like the NRA, were not only willing, they were EAGER to undermine the right to bear arms. Only the unrelenting pressure of traditional Americans stopped them.

The NRA has conserved gun control, not the Second Amendment. Gun control is the NRA's rice bowl, and they aren't going to let anyone break their rice bowl. A threat to end gun control is a threat to end the NRA!

Blogger Alphaeus April 15, 2018 9:30 PM  

I am now Alphaeus, father of James the Less. I feel born again. I wish you fellow alt-righters, my friends and allies, could understand that I'm not defending the fraudsters, I'm trying to help us avoid unnecessary arguments with people who otherwise would be quick to see our side of things. I've been observing politics closely since I saw my first presidential convention in 1968. I thought the Democrats always held riots at their conventions. Rather than tell people they were frauds, I think it more profitable to make the more solid and provable case that they were the victims of one of the most brilliantly executed political and ideological scams of all time. It's hard enough to convince people they've been fooled, why make it even harder by telling them it was they who were the ones actively perpetrating the fooling? Other commenters have pointed out that what really held "conservatism" together was claiming opposition to the Marxists. It used to be very hard to convince people that Marxists had infiltrated the highest levels of anti-Marxism. It's a lot easier now to convince people of that than it's ever been, and that's the opening for the alt-right.

Blogger Alphaeus April 15, 2018 9:36 PM  

"The NRA has conserved gun control, not the Second Amendment. Gun control is the NRA's rice bowl, and they aren't going to let anyone break their rice bowl. A threat to end gun control is a threat to end the NRA!"

NOW it is, but "Gun Control" didn't used to even be an issue. The NRA was founded by former Union officers for the purpose of improving the marksmanship of potential soldiers. The NRA paid no attention to "Gun Control" until after GCA 1968. If I recall the first big event in NRA anti-"Gun Control" activity was opposing a hand gun ban in 1976. The NRA as been infiltrated, or now we call it converged, just like every other organization and movement and club in America and the world.

Blogger VD April 15, 2018 9:37 PM  

Rather than tell people they were frauds, I think it more profitable to make the more solid and provable case that they were the victims of one of the most brilliantly executed political and ideological scams of all time. It's hard enough to convince people they've been fooled, why make it even harder by telling them it was they who were the ones actively perpetrating the fooling?

I don't care. If the truth makes you uncomfortable, that's on you. I'm not trying to persuade them of anything. I'm simply stating my observations.

Blogger Alphaeus April 15, 2018 9:52 PM  

" If the truth makes you uncomfortable, that's on you. I'm not trying to persuade them of anything. I'm simply stating my observations."

I don't let feeling uncomfortable stop me from accepting a truth if it is true. When I talk to people about matters of vital importance, I am trying to convince, as in to speak to them at the level of their convictions. You say you're stating your observations, but when you say people are frauds, you are going beyond the observation to the moral conclusions about the thoughts and intents of their hearts. I just don't believe every single last conservative was a phony "conservative." I happen to know lots of people who called themselves conservative and were called conservatives by their friends and their enemies who did not follow every huckster who came along claiming to be a leader of conservatism. Some of us tested the spirits, as it were, and maybe that's the reason the alt-right has a chance to bloom now. If not for the real conservatives we'd all be Marxified completely by now.

Blogger Brick Hardslab April 15, 2018 10:05 PM  

It's natural for them to assume Vox would be able to take over for Buckley. He was in a boy band. I can see him now with his hair(!) all teased into spikes or moussed into outre shapes and dyed purple. And the make up and leather chaps. Of course they'd assume there would be something to blackmail him with.

Blogger Uncle John's Band April 15, 2018 10:08 PM  

@ 85 Alphaeus

If you can't see the rhetorical failure in a name that requires adjectives to distinguish the frauds, then you aren't ready for the Alt-Right.

Blogger Skyler the Weird April 15, 2018 10:12 PM  

The only things Conservatives Conserved was a steady flow of Treasury dollars into their pockets as they worked for the Government or for think tanks when there was no Republican in the White House.

When nothing happened when the GOP won the House for the first time in 40 some odd years I realized they are the Washington Generals.

Anonymous Anonymous April 15, 2018 10:12 PM  

Imagine muh shock and awe compadres!! No wunder de Tiefstaat l-u-u-ved him so. Washington Generals is about right, but seems a touch less than the proper shade of flambée for the Cuckleys, though.

Anonymous Anonymous April 15, 2018 10:16 PM  

Mr.MantraMan wrote:

Suck left punch right

G.O.P battle cry. You have my vote for thread winner.

Blogger Jack Amok April 15, 2018 10:17 PM  

James / Alphaeus,

You're not in Marketing, are you?

It's easy to understand. "Conservative" is a brand owned by Bill Kristol, Jonah Goldberg, Cuck Ryan, John McCain and the heirs of William "I sit like this to easy my aching bunghole" Buckley (maybe William "Bunghole" Buckley is better). It's a poisoned brand, and to move forward with the numbers we need, the attachment the good people you speak of have for the fraudulent brand has to be broken.

What Vox is doing is giving people a choice - renounce the fraudsters or throw in with them once and for all. The entire appeal of the fraud was in giving people a safe, sanctioned, non-threatening way to disagree with the Left. The Left was fine with you sniffing derisively at them, straightening your bow-tie and issuing a strongly worded (well, not so strongly as to be rude of course) response to whatever lunacy they were pursuing. The "Conservative" movement led by Bunghole Buckley and his disciples was meant to seduce the Right into taking the easy choice, the go-along-to-get-along choice, the no-skin-in-the-game choice.

So now, to weed out all that bullshit, the Alt-Right demands you put skin in the game and accept the genteel approach was a fraud and bare knuckles are the way forward. Renounce the old brand, embrace the new.

Anyone who won't renounce the old brand is a liability, because they are likely to be seduced back to it by the next fake olive branch the Left holds out.

Declare.

Blogger Dirk Manly April 15, 2018 10:37 PM  

@1

"Anonymous Conservative wrote about Buckley's very likely narcissistic personality disorder a while ago using an article written by Buckley's only son. Pair that with possible closeted homosexuality and we have a real winner for CIA controlled opposition."

NPD + Homosexuality and substance abuse indicates Borderline Personality Disorder. Judging by the ridiculous acts of harm that Buckley perpetrated on his son, Buckley sounds like BPD, not merely NPD.

Remember, ALL BPDs exhibit full-blown NPD, but not vice-versa.

Blogger Dirk Manly April 15, 2018 10:45 PM  

@13

"All this time I thought he was just profoundly English."

Not with that phony-baloney snobbish speech affectation. He sounded like a high-school loser trying to pretend to be important.

Blogger Stg58/Animal Mother April 15, 2018 10:46 PM  

Ok Alphaeus, if you're a long time Bircher, why are you having this conversation with us? Did you read AO or Review of the News? If you have ,you'd be able to see through this fraud of Conservative Inc.

How long have you been in the JBS?

Blogger James Oswald April 15, 2018 10:56 PM  

Look...each seer in his own time moves the ball forward. Take the ball, do not criticize the ball carrier for not advancing further. You get what you get. Former Pres Reagan did not see that the greatest threat to America was the nascent US Dept of Ed. He thought it was the USSR. His policies defeated the USSR. They collapsed. The US Dept of Ed metastasized. They have a 30 year head start. Attend to that. You cannot fix the past.

Blogger Dirk Manly April 15, 2018 10:58 PM  

@28

"There were rumors about Whittaker Chambers being a gay, as well."

Rumors?

I'm pretty sure it was more than just rumors.

Blogger Dirk Manly April 15, 2018 11:06 PM  

@45

"There's more to Conservatism Inc.

Yeah, bow ties, horn-rimmed glasses (I'm looking at you George Will), and foam parties. Fags and gammas."


I think you left out sports commentary and analysis by spectators who never played the game... or any other sport.

Blogger Dirk Manly April 15, 2018 11:19 PM  

@57

"James, you're weird. Once I figured out that the alt-right was all about kicking the Left's a-- while conservatives ultimately kiss it, I was all about the alt-right. I can't understand why you can't be the same."

Well, that might get his bow-tie off kilter.
And heaven forbid that he get SWEATY.
Much better to sit in the air-conditioning being a "keyboard ninya".

Blogger Rough Carrigan April 15, 2018 11:49 PM  

Buckley was also a member of the Council on Foreign Relations which is logically impossible to be if you sincerely hold the positions he occasionally professed to hold.

Blogger Audacity17 April 15, 2018 11:50 PM  

Honestly, this post and most of the comments are the biggest exercise of Dunning Kruger masturbation I've seen.

"Oh, if only we'd have been there after WW2, we'd have stopped the cultural shifts, we'd have done it right".

You sound like liberals.

Blogger Seth Schueler April 16, 2018 12:39 AM  

A simple "no" would have done. Such gamma posturing.

Blogger bob kek mando - ( your mom always did like me best ) April 16, 2018 12:41 AM  

49. James April 15, 2018 6:45 PM
But I had no idea that I was as much of a fraud as he was.



as i have already demonstrated numerous times, "Conservative" canNOT have any fixed point of view. it relates only to demanding that the Society not change it's Mores and Laws from what some people had been habituated too.

had you come of age circa 1900, you'd have been decrying women failing to wear full length dress "bathing suits" on the beach.

had you come of age in the 1930s, you'd have been disturbed that men stopped wearing tops at the beach.

had you come of age in Classical Greece, you'd have been outraged at the suggestion that upper class men should avoid adopting their eromenos.


54. James April 15, 2018 7:01 PM
The NFA of 1934 was passed before there was a conservative movement as is thought of today.


you all hear that?

the Conservative movement is a NEW development in society.

and yet, GK Chesterton knew what Conservatives were back in the 1800s:
The whole modern world has divided itself into Conservatives and Progressives. The business of Progressives is to go on making mistakes. The business of Conservatives is to prevent mistakes from being corrected.


62. Crush Limbraw April 15, 2018 8:09 PM
Instead of it becoming a pissing contest, I simply ask: "Can you name a single institution that has not been lost to the DaLeftistProgs?" - end of conversation!


i remember that the Progressive Party was called "Republican". in the 1800s.

77. James April 15, 2018 9:11 PM
I'll change my name if I can figure out how to do it.



you have a blogger account. change your account setting for your avatar handle. that's how i keep changing my parenthetical.

if you don't know how to get back to that:
1 - go to one of your previous posts on this page and Left click on it
2 - Left click the "Edit Profile" button in the upper right corner
3 - scroll down to the Identity section and edit the Display Name element

Blogger Seth Schueler April 16, 2018 12:42 AM  

Where does the "((()))" symbolization come from?

Anonymous Anonymous April 16, 2018 12:56 AM  

Almost without fail, conservative men who publicly rail at some moral failing are practicing that vice in public. Show me a prohibitionist, and I'll show you a drunk; show me a anti-casino campaigner, and I'll show you a gambler; show me a man who want's to clean up the red-light district, and I'll show you a regular John; show me a man who pounds the pulpit red-faced and screeching about the evil and prevalence of bestiality, and I'll show you a secret pig-fucker.

The reason for their moral campaigns is that they hate their own sin and lack the strength to stop doing it, so they want someone else (the government) to keep them from it.

Blogger NoneOfTheAbove April 16, 2018 12:57 AM  

The Fudds back in the day did support gun control. The NRA has actually improved since then.

"The NRA supported The National Firearms Act of 1934 which taxes and requires registration of such firearms as machine guns, sawed-off rifles and sawed-off shotguns. ... NRA support of Federal gun legislation did not stop with the earlier Dodd bills. It currently backs several Senate and House bills which, through amendment, would put new teeth into the National and Federal Firearms Acts." —American Rifleman, March 1968, P. 22

http://www.keepandbeararms.com/information/XcIBViewItem.asp?ID=3247

Alphaeus wrote:"The NRA has conserved gun control, not the Second Amendment. Gun control is the NRA's rice bowl, and they aren't going to let anyone break their rice bowl. A threat to end gun control is a threat to end the NRA!"

Blogger NoneOfTheAbove April 16, 2018 1:00 AM  

That article was the first thing I thought of too.

https://www.anonymousconservative.com/blog/william-f-buckley-a-case-study-in-narcissistic-personality-disorder/

haus frau wrote:Anonymous Conservative wrote about Buckley's very likely narcissistic personality disorder a while ago using an article written by Buckley's only son. Pair that with possible closeted homosexuality and we have a real winner for CIA controlled opposition.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash April 16, 2018 2:19 AM  

What I'm saying is, the natural field for harvesting alt-right allies is on the conservative side of politics. Leftists can be turned, but the people who think of themselves as conservative and who get called conservative by the Lefties are much closer to becoming alt-right on average.
Experience shows us this is not true. The alt-Right is mostly made up of former Libertarians, League of the South members, Traditionalist Catholics, a lot of John Birchers, Paleo Conservatives, racialists, a few former neo-Nazis, and other groups who, like you and your JBS friends, were read out of Conservatism a long time ago. Very vanishingly few arrive without coming to the same conclusion, that Conservatism is a fraud.
In fact, you're one of the few I've come across who still identifies as Conservative.
You will also find that the biggest, most vicious, most steadfastly confrontational, and least honest opponents we have are Conservatives.
Conservatism has actually become the enemy of everything that they profess to stand for. It's a fraud.

Blogger Rocklea Marina April 16, 2018 6:15 AM  

Here is a conservative position, perhaps further right than most:

"Sebastian Kurz Chancellor of Austria: "We will ban the headscarf for children and young girls! We are a land of freedom and not of oppression!""

He should have said:
"We will oppress your culture, you don't have the freedom to behave as you like in our country."

Blogger Ominous Cowherd April 16, 2018 8:23 AM  

NoneOfTheAbove wrote:The Fudds back in the day did support gun control. The NRA has actually improved since then.

Improved? Weren't they just pushing for a bumpstock ban?

NoneOfTheAbove wrote:"The NRA supported The National Firearms Act of 1934

Hence my comment above: the NRA hates gun control the way a wheat farmer hates wheat - they only cut it down to plant more.

Blogger Alphaeus April 16, 2018 10:13 AM  

" you aren't ready for the Alt-Right."
I was Alt-Right before it had a name. I can also see that a lot of people are confused about the difference between ideology, which is abstract and requires purity in order to be coherent, and political action, which is war, all chaotic and mixed up and crazy and nonsensical in appearance.

If I can defend Milo Yiannopolous, which I do with great sincerity and vigor, then I can defend people who are willing to see the moribund state of "conservatism" and move forward in the superior vehicle called the Alt-Right without demanding that they admit that they were in on the lies and the frauds and were willfully and deliberately being hypocritical about everything they claimed to stand for and weren't just ignorant and mistaken about things and misled by diabolical misleaders.

If you're serious about spreading the Alt-Right message then I think you should treat it like you're preaching in support of a Great Crusade. You don't just want to persuade people to agree with your ideas, you want to convince them that they need to saddle up and go off to faraway places and do battle with wicked infidels in miserable conditions and risk getting their head chopped off with a scimitar. It takes a measure of talent for inspiration; silly snark does not strike me as very inspirational to the average person, and we need a lot of average people to join us if we don't want to get completely dhimmied.

Blogger Alphaeus April 16, 2018 10:29 AM  

"Anyone who won't renounce the old brand is a liability, because they are likely to be seduced back to it by the next fake olive branch the Left holds out."
But if you don't understand what happened with "Conservatism" then the same damn thing is going to happen to the Alt-Right. The devil is smart enough to figure out a way to cuck us again and again and again if we insist on being ignorant.
Decades ago I read Hayek's "Why I am not a Conservative." I was persuaded by his ideas to a great extent but I did not expend a lot of effort to make people stop calling me a conservative. For many years I described my self, when put on the spot about my political label, as a conservative-libertarian or a libertarian-conservative. It's not just what we call ourselves, it's what people will call us when they hear what we have to say. I found out I was a Calvinist because that's what people called me when I expressed my theological views. I'd say things and they'd say, "oh, you're a Calvinist." And I'd say, "What the hell is a Calvinist?" and they'd say, "a follower of John Calvin." And I'd say, "who the hell is John Calvin?" So I had to go find out who Calvin was and what his 'ism" was about. And yes, I was to a large extent a Calvinist, but I arrived at my Calvinism independently, so I felt obligated to accept the label out of respect for the historical figure who came up with it centuries before I was born.

I really believe that if people knew anything about the Alt-Right they would call me Alt-Right when they heard me explain my views to them. I am that sort of Alt-Right. But just as Calvinists often tell me I'm an Arminian, a lot of Alt-Righters call me a cuck because I have my own way of looking at things. Nobody calls me an Arminian except for Calvinists, and nobody calls me a cuck except for Alt-Righers. I can't help it, I have to think for my self, and my ideological deficiencies are all my own and can't be blamed on anyone else.

Blogger Alphaeus April 16, 2018 10:52 AM  

"How long have you been in the JBS?"

I've been a member since 1995, but I was a Bircher in my heart since 1971 when I realized that Nixon was not my friend. Someone commented to me that I was butt hurt by Nixon's betrayal, but I was 12 years old, of course I was butt hurt, but I learned a good lesson and I never trusted a politician ever again. By the time I read "The Politician" by Robert Welch I was not the least bit surprised.

As a Bircher for over 20 years and also living where I do in the San Fran Psycho Bayarrhea Gruberfornia USA, I've learned I'm dealing with people who are deeply and profoundly brainwashed, and the Lord has shown me that He wants me to have compassion for them, not just for their sake, but for my own sake because having compassion for the victims of the powerful mind control techniques we are all subjected to helps us keep our own wits about us and helps us keep our own minds free and clear.
If you've seen the original "Manchurian Candidate," consider the character Raymond. Was he a murderer and an assassin? Or was he a victim, a casualty of war, a prisoner captured by the enemy who was ultimately able to free himself and strike back at the enemy who had been controlling and manipulating him? I agree with the citation read by Frank Sinatra at the end of the movie. I would not have called Raymond an evil person, and in the same spirit I would not call the poor saps who ignorantly believed what the Insiders were telling them frauds and hypocrites. I would call them stupid and gullible, but, if after they find out what the truth is and they refuse to believe it and respect it and submit to it and obey it, then I will call them wicked allies of evil; I am more than willing to call the willful followers of "Conservatism, Inc" the demon infested winged monkey servants of Satan.
But how will they know until some kind and generous person explains it to them? Someone who loves them and cares about them has to preach the message to them. As a Bircher I have learned that 99.9999% of people cannot and will not figure it out on their own.

Anonymous Anonymous April 16, 2018 11:07 AM  

Gays who are media figures exhibit narcissism and preeningness. Examples would be Lawrence of Arabia, Milo Yiannopoulos

When my live TV game show of executing felons starts I will be wearing a luchador mask.

Kang nyc, he was not fastidious, his shirt was hanging out the back and he needed a haircut and a brush. I guess I don't have gaydar.

You don't have to look good when you pay for sex. I posted on gab a video about Chinese Ebay selling African niglet kids & I have only been getting comments about the guys hair in the video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TIXZvAVoBeo

You should pick a commenter name that is likely to be unique.

Who would have guessed that The Koran Burning Faggot was already trademarked?

Blogger Alphaeus April 16, 2018 11:21 AM  

"Conservatism has actually become the enemy of everything that they profess to stand for. It's a fraud. "
But VD said that the people as individuals were all frauds, and that's the point on which I disagreed.
I consider this a conversation amongst my friends. The Alt-Right are my peeps. People who like Milo are my peeps. People who like Jordan Peterson are my peeps. People who like VD and Stefan Molybdeniueux are my peeps. If my peeps all agree that "Conservatism" was invented by Satan in order to hamstring his enemies, I will not waste time arguing about that. All I'm saying is, along the lines of the society of the lobsters, is that I'm not willing to assume that every single person who ever called themselves or got called a conservative was a fraud. I don't see where such an assumption is necessary for the purpose of separating the stubborn sheep from the open minded goats, or whatever, to abuse a metaphor.
GK Chesterton was called a conservative, by his friends and his enemies, but he was certainly not unable to see beyond that label. He was able to say things like "A conservative is someone who is enamored of the present evils; a liberal wants to replace them with entirely new ones." That's the way the world works, and I believe in dealing with the world as it stupidly is and not how I wish it was.

Blogger Gordon Scott April 16, 2018 12:36 PM  

I do remember back in the late 1980s that a long-time writer came out as gay, in an article in National Review. He hoped that Buckley et al would accept and welcome him. Buckley's editorial reply was in the nature of "love the sinner, hate the sin," and also "you ain't working here again."

Blogger Zeroh Tollrants April 16, 2018 1:26 PM  

I'm not a Randian, either, never much cares for her 1D characters and obsession w/the almighty dollar & insistence that editors were things for "other people."
That said, in comparison to folks like Rich Lowery, Jason Stoarts, Charles Cooke, Jim Gerharty, and Ramesh Poointheloo, etc., she was a giant intellect.

As for Bill Buckley, my mother knew Buckley for a window of time from around mid 80s-mid 90s. All she ever said negatively about him was that he was a often dog drunk or "on sonething" by 10 a.m., that he thought everyone should be continually kissing his ass, & he wasn't interested in topics that didn't focus on him personally.
Sounds like a fun guy to be around, homo or not. 🙄

Anonymous Anonymous April 16, 2018 1:32 PM  

@114. Alphaeus.
"Conservatism has actually become the enemy of everything that they profess to stand for. It's a fraud."

This quote likely refers to the 'movement' - chiefly its leaders and its various media mouthpieces, plus a certain segment of its more deluded rank and file. You'll learn more by reading Cuckservative.

Taken literally and applied to the west over the last century, the statement is certainly true. The "conservatives" cannot even conserve a woman's-only bathroom. The only thing that have ever conserved are advances made by the left towards a Neo-Marxist totalitarian state. The few 'gains' made which can be put up to counter this assertion are temporary in nature (Gay marriage being a fine example). You cited the NRA as a counter-example and it's true the NRA rolled back gun laws at the state level (many of which are now appearing again, by the way). The NRA did nothing to repeal either the Gun Control Act of 1968, the National Firearms Act of 1934 or any other federal gun law (all of which are clearly unconstitutional). As someone noted above, Gun Control is the NRA's rice-bowl and they aren't about to destroy their rice-bowl. Ditto for Abortion and the Right-to-Life movement. The pro-lifers are the finest example of battered wives to be found in the political arena: they just keep crawling back for more.

Blogger Stg58/Animal Mother April 16, 2018 1:50 PM  

Alphaeus,

If you've been there mentally since 1971, you'd know it was a marriage of convenience to be a Bircher and identify as a conservative. Many Birchers wanted to own the brand to spite Buckley. How many JBS writers also wrote for Conservative Review in the beginning?

My dad was Welch's right hand man. I grew up listening to this stuff.

Blogger Alphaeus April 16, 2018 2:34 PM  

"The "conservatives" cannot even conserve a woman's-only bathroom." I get the point that the leaders of the conservatives are mostly misleaders. But there's a difference between being defeated due to 5th columnists and traitors who sabotage your sincere efforts from the inside and being in on the scam your self. Sure, you'd have thunk that more conservatives would have figured it out by now, but, if there's one thing I've learned about people in my 6 decades of life, it's that people are stupid idiots. What's funny about the bathrooms and the transgender garbage is that has provoked people who never would have imagined they would ever be accused of being "conservative." It's funny to me that there are so many liberals who are now lumped in with Jesse Helms and Jerry Falwell because they believe that male and female exist in biology.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash April 16, 2018 3:19 PM  

Alphaeus wrote:But VD said that the people as individuals were all frauds, and that's the point on which I disagreed.
I'll put it to you plain then.

Conservatives are ALL cowards.

Conservatives talk big, but aren't willing to lift a finger, or even vote, to actually change anything.

Conservatives are ALL lying about who they are and what they are doing.

You can't become alt-Right until you shed Conservatism. You can't shed Conservatism if you think it's somehow an honorable or honest approach to politics.

Nobody who is going to be offended by calling Conservatives frauds is ever going to go alt-Right anyway. They have too much of their identity wrapped up in that old poof, Buckley, that old pinko Limbaugh, or the gang at NRO to risk the shouts of "racist anti-Semite hater!"

Stop being offended on their behalf. When they're ready, they will see the justice of the word fraud.

Blogger Alphaeus April 16, 2018 4:23 PM  

"Nobody who is going to be offended by calling Conservatives frauds is ever going to go alt-Right anyway. They have too much of their identity wrapped up in that old poof, Buckley, that old pinko Limbaugh, or the gang at NRO to risk the shouts of "racist anti-Semite hater!""

People in the so-called conservative movement were a lot more diverse than you are assuming. It is just plain flat-ass not the case that all conservatives supported WBF or even Limbaugh. Some of us preferred the guys like Sobran and Derbyshire and Coulter who got fired by National Review. A lot of us never figured that NR or Russell Kirk or people named Bush had the power to control who was conservative and who was a poseur. And it's not about the label, it's about the substance. I'm very happy to be tarred with the anti-social label Alt-Right because as far as I can tell most Alt-Right ideas are consistent with my own. Or should I let the fact that people like Richard Spencer try to control who is Alt-Right prevent me from being Alt-Right? Should I say I can't be Alt-Right because Richard Spencer says he is Alt-Right? It seems the same thing to say that because Wm B Fuckley says he's conservative then everyone who says they are conservative is exactly like Wm B Fuckley.

Blogger Stg58/Animal Mother April 16, 2018 4:39 PM  

What is the substance of conservatism? Name one principle of conservative thought. Don't recite Russell Kirk.

Blogger Dirk Manly April 16, 2018 6:35 PM  

@119

"Sure, you'd have thunk that more conservatives would have figured it out by now, but, if there's one thing I've learned about people in my 6 decades of life, it's that people are stupid idiots"


Translation:
Sure, these people keep voting back the same back-stabbing traitors during the primaries, just because they recognize the candidate's name, but that doesn't make them COMPLICIT in the perpetuity of these "conservatives" selling out their voting base year in and year out.

Seriously, that's the argument you're trying to sell us.

Blogger Alphaeus April 16, 2018 6:55 PM  

"What is the substance of conservatism? Name one principle of conservative thought. Don't recite Russell Kirk."

Allow me to cite James Burnham, then, who is nothing like Kirk.

I understand you asked for one principle, but I believe this here quote expresses a key difference in the way of thinking between what was called conservatism and what was called liberalism. To me James Burnham captured much of the fundamental essence of what made me think I was a conservative and not a liberal. I also think that if James Burnham were alive today, he'd be an Alt-Rightist spinning in his grave.

Sorry for the extended cut & paste but a serious question seems to require it.

James Burnham, Suicide of the West, p.107
To the respectable citizen Skid Row seems a macabre place, but in its own way Skid Row is an ingenious product of the long and wonderfully intricate natural evolution of the City. In society as it really is—hierarchical and differentiating, not equalized or regimented—there has to be an end of the line. The localization of Skid Row and the growth of its distinctive institutions and customs are gradual developments serving to take care of those at the end of the line in a way that recognizes the reality of the condition, makes appropriate exceptions to the usual social rules, adds a certain warmth and humaneness along with exits left open for those—they are not many—who wish to take one, and shields the rest of society from Skid Row 's potentially destructive effects.

But this cannot be the way liberalism understands Skid Row. For liberalism, Skid Row is not a natural and inevitable social condition but a definite place—the Bowery, the Embarcadero, South State Street, wherever—that constitutes, as I began by noting, a problem: a "blighted area." The people in it are-they must be, by the principles of liberalism—the exploited victims of the area's blight, of inadequate education and bad institutions. Therefore the area must be renewed and the victims reformed."

Blogger Beerhead Mustache April 16, 2018 6:59 PM  

I heard some unsubstantiated rumors from a neighbor today that a scandal might be hitting Mississippi soon. Apparently Senator Roger Wicker and Lindsey Graham are "More than Friends". I'm no fan of Roger "if you care about Israel" Wicker, so I'm interested to see if this holds any water.

Blogger Alphaeus April 16, 2018 7:13 PM  

"Sure, these people keep voting back the same back-stabbing traitors during the primaries, just because they recognize the candidate's name, but that doesn't make them COMPLICIT in the perpetuity of these "conservatives" selling out their voting base year in and year out.Seriously, that's the argument you're trying to sell us"
Hey, when you talk about voting, don't you realize that most of the voters don't know what conservativism is at all, whether it's Buckley or Welch that you are talking about? Frankly it's pretty stupid of YOU to think that voting patterns of the masses of asses have anything to do with a coherent political philosophy. You can't say that conservatism is bullshit because voters vote stupid when the voters don't even know what conservatism is at the philosophical level.

It ought to be clear by now that the reason conservatives and conservatism got so easily flummoxed is because there wasn't really much to conservatism in the first place that makes any sense to even criticize when it comes to voting. The argument I'm trying to sell you is that what was called conservatism had a hell of a lot more going on in it, under the surface and behind the scenes, that you millennial whippersnappers realize. All you youngsters seem to know about is the Faux News PBS Newshour version of Conservatism, so of course you stupidly assume that it's all bullshit. You just don't know. It's like judging Christianity by the shenanigans of the Roman Catholic Church. Maybe Christianity cannot totally repudiate Catholicism, but it'd be stupid to say that Roman Catholicism is all there is to Christianity.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash April 16, 2018 8:53 PM  

@Alphaeus,
I defy you to extract an actual principle out of that bit from Burnham.
As a member of Conservatism old enough to have voted for Reagan, I can verify, right here and now, that the ONLY strength present in the Conservative Movement was in those parts that were summarily dismissed from Conservatism. Which honor, I would hasten to add, would have been granted to Burnham had he lived long enough.
Perhaps even into the 90s, a decent and honorable man could be considered a Conservative, but by the time Pat Buchanan was sold out and betrayed by Official Conservatism, it was simply untenable to pretend any longer.

Blogger Alphaeus April 16, 2018 9:07 PM  

"Perhaps even into the 90s, a decent and honorable man could be considered a Conservative, but by the time Pat Buchanan was sold out and betrayed by Official Conservatism, it was simply untenable to pretend any longer."
I'm an old man so that's my perspective. I ain't one of you rascally whippersnappers who think conservatism is what 20 year old Ben Shapiro says it is.

Blogger Allabaster April 16, 2018 9:54 PM  

I have shaken the hands of the Washington Generals coach and players, they have far more legitimacy than these choads.

Blogger Snidely Whiplash April 16, 2018 11:09 PM  

Alphaeus wrote:I'm an old man so that's my perspective. I ain't one of you rascally whippersnappers who think conservatism is what 20 year old Ben Shapiro says it is.
You're making a huge assumption, there, punk.
And you still didn't answer the question

Blogger Alphaeus April 17, 2018 11:28 AM  

"I defy you to extract an actual principle out of that bit from Burnham."

"In society as it really is—hierarchical and differentiating, not equalized or regimented—there has to be an end of the line. "

There, see, conservatives did not always swallow the liberal BS version of equality. I didn't, and Burnham didn't, and I know a few other fellows who didn't. Of course we never got much publicity, but, that is not our fault. If you don't know the facts then it's your fault for not figuring out that the Lamestream Mass Media was lying to you and figuring out that you had to dig around for the truth for your self and use your own brain to analyze the real facts instead of letting a bunch of demon infested winged monkey media mavens do all your thinking for you.

Not you specifically but a generalized royal "you," I mean.

I am not a Conservative the way that Hayek was not a Conservative. All my life I've been called Conservative because I'm a normal person who lives amongst the degenerate freaks of the San Fran Psycho Bayarrhea Grubernia USA. If I lived in Texas I'd be considered relatively a freak my self I'm sure. But if you'd lived around here you'd realize that being "conservative" really did mean something and was not just a pose and a scam. It's like the difference in being a Christian in America and being a Christian in Saudi Arabia.

Blogger Dirk Manly April 17, 2018 6:07 PM  

Continuing to bang your head against the wall isn't going to strengthen your argument one bit. It does, however, show the rest of us that you're just as incapable of learning as the rest of the IDIOTS who you keep defending.

Post a Comment

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

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts