Posts Tagged ‘ronald reagan’

Inner Values Versus External Values

Sunday, November 5th, 2017

Some years ago it became clear that the Right was divided between fiscal conservatives and social conservatives. The former group were essentially classical liberals who wanted low government intrusion and decisions to be made by the open markets; the latter believed there were values above what socialism or capitalism could address, and argued in defense of culture, heritage and hierarchy.

This situation became more complicated because most social conservatives agree with the basic idea of fiscal conservatism, namely capitalism with small government, but believe that something else must be added above it. As many have observed, any single thing given absolute power tends to re-arrange what is under its power so that it can increase that power.

In traditional civilization, leaders attempted to unite each society around the central principles of its culture as expressed in aristocracy, caste, religious customs, and learning, with those then regulating the markets and social behavior. Modern society inverts this by placing markets and social behavior above that inner social order.

With the rise of the Alt Right, this debate continues to play out, with Hans-Hermann Hoppe taking a middle position:

If there were no scarcity in the world, human conflicts or more precisely physical clashes would be impossible.

…Absent a perfect harmony of all interests, conflicts regarding scarce resources can only be avoided if all scarce resources are assigned as private, exclusive property to some specified individual or group of individuals.

…The peaceful cohabitation of neighbors and of people in regular direct contact with each other on some territory – a tranquil, convivial social order – requires also a commonality of culture: of language, religion, custom and convention.

He comes short of recognizing race-culture theory, which holds that culture has a genetic basis and also shapes the genetics of the population in a feedback loop, but points out the duality of conservatism: it relies on self-organizing systems like capitalism, but also requires defining an environment for those systems, and this works when done through innate and inner traits like culture, heritage and values but turns totalitarian if based on elective traits like ideology.

One attempt to synthesize the two comes from propertarianism:

The physical universe, at its lowest level, consists of a market, just like our own markets, wherein humans are just a very complex (high) scale, across multiple hierarchical markets, each of which consists of symmetries, produced by the limits of operations – just as man is limited by his physical, emotional, and intellectual operations that we call ‘actions’.

When we operate by markets we operate in harmony with the physical universe – meaning the lowest possible friction – and we fulfill life’s purpose at the highest extant level of symmetry, wherein all life serves the purpose of defeating entropy. As such we defeat entropy by the incrementally fastest means possible.

…which also includes some aspects of traditionalism:

We had the Best System of Government (Perfect Government) and we blew it:

1) Nomocracy (Rule of Law by Natural Law of Torts: Reciprocity)
2) A Hereditary Monarchy as Judge of Last Resort, and custodian of territory, institutions, organizations, families, and individuals….. A State(Foreign Relations) Organization, …. A Professional Military, …. A Professional Judiciary, and …. A Treasury of Last Resort.
3) A Market for Commons consisting of:…. Regional Nobility(Persistent families) serving as a normative Supreme Court …. A House of Industry(Commons) for those with responsibilities….. A Church Serving as a House of Labor and family.
4) A Local (Democratic) Polity(private partnership) of Property Owners…. A Militia and Sheriffs…. Voluntary Civic Organizations
5) The Nuclear Family. And Family and Nation as subject of policy
6) The Individual and Property as the subject of law.

In other words, it combines the formal and informal aspects of the republic that the founders of America intended, but grafts onto it the hereditary monarchy that those founders wanted but were afraid to formalize, knowing that it would again become a target of the Church and mercantile classes.

While this is a wonderful start, it needs enhancement, because it forgets the ultimate properties: intangibles like culture, race and heritage, which includes the history of a people that centers it within an identity. We need to be proud of our past and know we have control of our future. That can only occur if we stop relying on systems and instead build a civilization.

If we are going to use the property model, we should consider past and future to be properties as well in which all of us have a stake. These properties need to be curated at a level more intense than that applied to tangible properties because the intangibles cover a greater span of time and have more ultimate effect.

Traditionalism acknowledges this need. We cannot use materialism to enforce virtue; that method only works for the Left through its mental control of political correctness, where fear of saying the wrong thing leads us to alter our thoughts. We must acknowledge the non-material, namely the ideas that make the best quality of civilization, and elevate it above the tangibles.

Our other option is to face the emptiness of a market society

No, I’m not surprised. I mean, what binds us? What do we all have in common anymore? I think we have to think about that. I think this is — when I was a kid, even as we had laws that held us apart, there were things that we held dear and that we all had in common. And I think we have to — we always talk about E pluribus unum. What’s our unum now? We have the pluribus. What’s the unum? And I think it’s a great country. I think we, for whatever reasons, have made it our — some people have decided that the Constitution isn’t worth defending, that history isn’t worth defending, that the culture and principles aren’t worth defending. And, certainly, if you are in my position, they have to be worth defending. That’s what keeps you going. That’s what energizes you. … I don’t know what it is that we have, we can say instinctively, we have as a country in common.

Both Communism and capitalism have been used to create market societies. In each case, money is used to manipulate people into doing what those in power desire. Whether that money is distributed equally, making people dependent on the state, or unequally, making them dependent on their customers or employers, the result is the same: social control enforcing lowest common denominator standards.

People love materialism because, by eliminating the question of inner attributes, it makes all people equal which means that none can suffer a loss in social status because of the bad results of their actions. This is individualism, because it means that the individual is protected from the consequences of his actions.

The Left tries to hide this, and wants you to see “individualism” as the mental habit of caring about how your time (and thus, money) is spent and to want that time to be meaningful. This was expressed stunningly in an article about how identity politics as the result of confused identity:

“[T]hirty years of economic growth and technological advance that followed the Second World War,” he argues, combined with new geographic, institutional, and erotic mobility and led to a “hyperindividualistic bourgeois society, materially and in our cultural dogmas.”

Flush with prosperity and unprecedented new freedoms, we moderns, Lilla believes, went on to atomize ourselves: “Personal choice. Individual rights. Self-definition. We speak these words as if a wedding vow.” By the 1980s, such hyperindividualism coalesced into what he calls the “Reagan Dispensation,” which prized self-reliance and small government over the collective—thus marking a radical break from the preceding “Roosevelt Dispensation” emphasizing more communal attachments, including duty and solidarity.

…In this head-on collision of purported creation stories about sexual and gender identity that cannot possibly both be true, we see once more that the question Who am I? is the most fraught of our time.

…In Democracy in America, Alexis de Tocqueville wrote of how democratic governance shapes familial relations, rendering fathers and sons more equal and closer and less hierarchical than they are in its aristocratic counterparts. If it’s obvious that a form of government can shape the family, isn’t it even more obvious that the first polity to which future citizens belong—the family—will shape the kind of citizens they become?

Our macro-politics have gone tribal because our micro-politics are no longer familial.

They forget that the 1980s were a response to the insanity of the 1960s, and that the “geographic, institutional and erotic mobility” was a result of Leftist policies designed to remove natural hierarchy within humanity. This caused the atomization described in the article, and that caused the rampant self-interest as people scrambled to escape the disaster before it dominated.

Ultimately, as in many things, de Tocqueville has the last word: without civilization acting as a larger family, including hierarchy, entropy wins as individuals seek their own directions, causing a crippling lack of unity which then creates atomization and the rampant self-interest which Leftists bemoan.

Our future lies in making inner values the essence of our society. A hierarchy of those with “force of intellect” and “force of moral character” provides a familial structure, fosters sanity and encourages fairness in judgments. While capitalism is a cornerstone of this, it is not the full story, which is why fiscal conservatives need social conservative ideas to make their “systems” work.


Tuesday, August 8th, 2017

Pat Buchanan writes about the inevitability of an American breakup:

As President Donald Trump flew off for August at his Jersey club, there came word that Special Counsel Robert Mueller III had impaneled a grand jury and subpoenas were going out to Trump family and campaign associates.

The jurors will be drawn from a pool of citizens in a city Hillary Clinton swept with 91 percent of the vote. Trump got 4 percent.

Whatever indictments Mueller wants, Mueller gets.

In other words, the Left has finalized its attack: they seek to remove Donald Trump through whatever means they can, none of which will be really legal but with a lapdog media, who will know? Instead this will be another shadowy incident where the people in power destroyed anything which came to change their comfortable parasitic relationship.

As Buchanan points out, democracy always ends this way. People in groups make terrible decisions, and so even if we did not take The Bell Curve at face value and realize that most people will always vote foolishly because they lack the biological ability to do the thinking necessary to make decisions about complex issues, we recognize that democracy will inevitably self-destruct.

Whatever is popular wins, and among humans, what is popular is that which is individualistic. We are not yeast; we are individuals. However, individualism occurs when the individual prioritizes himself over the order and hierarchy existing in society, and by replacing that, creates a mob. This mob can then be manipulated, which makes those who are born manipulators into its new rulers.

On this blog, we talk quite a bit about balkanization, or what happens when the “diverse” society separates into different groups by ethnicity, race, caste, religion and political alignment. Like Rome, we will not be shattered so much as fail to hold together.

As Will Durant, the writer of the excellent The Story of Philosophy, reminds us, “A great civilization is not conquered from without until it has destroyed itself from within.” We destroy ourselves by being unable to cooperate toward a purpose, and so our only option is control or manipulate a herd, which produces corrupt leaders.

We The People are the problem because we agreed to all of this and, in the name of “everyone getting along” and “compromise,” we sacrifice any remaining purpose to the system itself. Our individual failings, including hubris or individualism, and our herd behaviors make us into an unruly mob, and that requires cynical manipulators to keep it in line, and not surprisingly, they are sociopathic.

And so the USA passes into oblivion. What do “Americans” have in common? Not much, and the most basic schism will be politics because the Left and Right want entirely different versions of the world. The Right wants social order, and the Left wants the individual to be King, which always results in an unruly mob, corrupt leaders and eventually, third world conditions.

When the manipulators, who by their nature as sociopaths are destroyers, win, it will signal the end of faith in democracy, Buchanan says:

The reaction will be one of bitterness, cynicism, despair, a sense that the fix is in, that no matter what we do, they will not let us win. If Trump is brought down, American democracy will take a pasting. It will be seen as a fraud. And the backlash will poison our politics to where only an attack from abroad, like 9/11, will reunite us.

However, as Samuel Huntington predicted, faith in democracy has already died, and people are just waiting to see if they can fix the problem without having to engage in conflict.

If Trump is prosecuted, much less brought down, the conditions for Civil War 2.0 will detonate. Our first Civil War never solved the fundamental conflict in America, which is those who want to live sanely versus those who want to make popularity rule us because that gives them the ability to live without standards, morals, culture or rules.

The North, in comparison to the South, and this is a relative measurement so the amount of difference is more important than how we see it from the present, was a Soviet empire of death. Cities filled with tenements, where people worked in mindless repetitive jobs, and the most important thing was to be accepting of equality, which back then meant ethnic equality with the Irish, Italians, Greeks, Jews and Poles.

The South exhibited the conditions of classic Indo-European culture: a social order with aristocracy and moral standards, a manor-based lifestyle where the best in society ruled officially or not, a strong code of honor and sense of purpose that allowed cooperation by the unequal. This offended the North, where everyone wanted to be “equal” more than they wanted to be good, right or realistic.

Since that time, we have replicated our classic civilization the best we could by fleeing to the suburbs and shutting out the horde. Then in the 1960s, that came under attack as the new Leftist popular wave supplanted the old Anglo-Saxon elite. The horde discovered that it could use “civil rights” to bash down any enclave and that no one would object for fear of being called racist.

That uneasy truce held while we had a common enemy in the Soviets, and while the fear of being too obviously Soviet kept the Left in check, but that condition no longer exists. As a result, the city people are coming for the suburbs just as they did in 1861. Under Clinton, Bush and Obama, they fundamentally changed America to be like a third-world country. Now they are going in for the kill.

As Buchanan asks, the question is, “What next?” One guess is that the dividing line will occur when people in service of government stop enforcing the decrees of government, allowing localities to balkanize and start keeping their wealth away from municipal, state and federal government coffers.

In the 1980s, Ronald Reagan revitalized America by stopping the Leftist surge that was destroying it from within. Donald Trump wanted to do the same, and for his troubles he has a gang styled after organized crime that wants to remove him so it can put its candidates back into power through the democratic force of the 53% of America who are tax-takers not tax-makers.

This places us at a crossroads where things are awfully bad. The Right wants to break away, but is unwilling to break away from structures like democracy and equality which have been shown to grow a bumper crop of neurotic, destructive Leftists in any nation. Their tendency is to hunker down, shout “work hard, pray hard” at Fox News on their screens, and then do nothing. But doing nothing is no longer an option.

How Trump Will Crush His Opposition, And The Democrats, Too

Tuesday, July 18th, 2017

Right now, the news is hive mind buzzing about the failure to repeal and replace Obamacare. This is as much nonsense as their narrative about how Russia somehow subverted the American election even more than the voters did.

Trump is operating according to a simple stratagem: give them rope to hang themselves. The reason that he is doing this is that his actual opposition is the Republican party, not the Democrats. The Democrats have roped themselves to an anvil, namely their support of the type of government that has made America miserable, and they have nowhere left to maneuver.

Let us revisit the wreckage left behind by globalism over the past two decades:

Since 1999, suicide rates have risen in every age group except the elderly, according to the National Center for Health Statistics. Among women 45 to 64 it jumped an astounding 63 percent. For men that age, it was up 43 percent.

In their report on rising death rates among middle-aged white Americans, Princeton economists Anne Case and Angus Deaton referred to “deaths of despair” — early deaths caused by drugs and alcohol, as well as by suicide. They cited deteriorating job prospects and a decline in stable relationships as possible factors.

Economic stress certainly plays a part. America’s suicide rate of 13 per 100,000 in 2014 was the highest since 1986. But that was much lower than during the Great Depression, when the suicide rate hit 22 per 100,000.

People see no future. This is not just economic, but the fact that their country has been ceded to invaders, has no working plans, is so deeply in debt that it is farcical, and has collapsed inward in every area of normal life. People are alienated from their communities, distrust each other because diversity destroys social trust, no longer trust police and officials not to be corrupt, believe the country is on a direction to destruction, and realize that globalism and immigration mean that their society has decided to replace them. No wonder they are drinking themselves to death.

The Left is hopelessly yoked to this policy because they are the party of civil rights, and civil rights has been interpreted to mean unlimited third world immigration, which is a major factor in the failure of America. In addition, Democrats are longstanding supporters of the United Nations, climate change laws, and other attempts to subvert American sovereignty which are seen (rightly) as part of globalism.

All Trump has to do about the Democrats is what he is doing about media: goad them into self-destructing.

With the Republicans, he has his real opposition. Their game plan is to thwart him, then blame him for failure. They misread him as a blowhard. Instead, he came out by doing exactly what they told him he should do, shocking his constituents. But then, it became clear — to everyone but the Republicans — what he was doing: he was letting the Republicans kill their own ideas.

Obamacare will fail. Its death spiral has been evident since its construction, which Democrats designed so that they could argue that single-payer healthcare, like the failing UK NHS which is propped up entirely by cheap third world hospital staffs, would be cheaper. What comedy! What insanity! And yet, Trump is content to let it fail.

He stands to gain greatly from Obamacare’s imminent implosion. First, he is insulated; he proposed a replacement, and his own party beat him back. Now, trying to fix it is a budget fight, and he has the figures on his side there, with a debtor nation $20 trillion in debt wanting to take on more cost. Next, his voters will be supportive of him because of the failure of the plan he tried to repeal. The rage is going to be directed at Republicans, who apparently have not seen how the Left and Trump have both played them.

Even more importantly, this sets the stage for the rest of his first term: the midterms are coming up, and those who let Obamacare fail are going to find themselves in trouble. The voters will be ready for a Trump-oriented candidate to replace their incumbent Republicans. This means that Trump may find himself with two years of either friendly faces in both houses, or a group of Republicans too scared to oppose him. The word out on him now is that those who defy him get destroyed.

Next, we should look at what he has done instead of waste too many hours coming up with a perfect health care plan. He has been steadily undoing the damage in the layers of bureaucracy far below the presidency, mainly by delegated people to clean up those agencies by forcing them to perform. He is squeezing out the government lifers who will always act for the Left because that pays them salary increases.

In addition, he is going abroad and rallying people around a generic Left-Right hybrid — in the JFK, Reagan and Clinton styles — that will fix the economy. An army marches on its stomach, and citizens vote on theirs. This gains him a powerful mandate in the next election but more importantly, a rising wave of libertarian-Right political action across the US, EU and possibly Asia.

This means that even after his two terms, he can influence politics worldwide through ideas, which puts him in an even more powerful position. In addition, he knows that those who go libertarian quickly realize that the Left will always hold them back because the Left is addicted to enforcing equality through government-mandated class warfare and wealth transfer. That means the next generation will find itself solidly anti-Leftist, and at that point, a right-wing wave of the Reagan style can begin.

Remember what Reagan said about socialized medicine:

The story is the same with Medicare. An eloquent conservative actor named Ronald Reagan warned in 1961 that if the plan passed, “behind it will come other federal programs that will invade every area of freedom as we have known it in this country.”

Reagan saw only darkness ahead if Americans did not rise up against this scheme. “One of these days, you and I are going to spend our sunset years telling our children, and our children’s children, what it once was like in America when men were free.”

The Gipper also offered this: “It’s very easy to disguise a medical program as a humanitarian project. Most people are a little reluctant to oppose anything that suggests medical care for people who possibly can’t afford it.”

Entitlements in general suffer from this problem: most people are reluctant to oppose any program that seems to give money to those who cannot otherwise afford it. However, now we have proof-of-concept for the Reagan notion that any entitlements would lead to an overly powerful government which would swing steadily Leftward.

Trump knows that the economy is going to crash as it always does after a prole holiday binge of demand-side currency and government spending, funding the circular Ponzi scheme of consumerism. He wants the Republicans to inherit this as well as the Democrats so that he can say, “Well, nothing else we have on the table is working, so why don’t we try it My Way?”

If the Republicans had any brains, they would be quaking in fear of this moment. Already there are signs that they are getting it as a civil war breaks out among GOP ranks, but they have not yet seen exactly how bad it is going to get. Trump campaigned on the idea that both parties were unified by being vested in the Establishment, and that this makes them corrupt. They are about to prove it to American voters, at the same time Team Trump will have cleaned out their zampolit infrastructure and prepared new plans that involve dropping the entitlements as much as possible.

Be not fooled by the noises that occur until then. Trump may support a Bismarck-style national fund that purchases health insurance in bulk and re-sells it to citizens, and that is not a terrible thing. He is too savvy not to know that the real driver of cost is all the compliance paperwork, illegal alien abuse of our healthcare system, and massive number of professionally sick people on disability eating up costs. He also knows that Baby Boomer end of life will be catastrophically expensive, and that no solution for that exists except to get out of the market.

He also knows that if the entitlements and social welfare programs go away, so will the massive immigration that up until now has taken Americans out of the economy. His crackdown is already paying dividends:

Foreign workers have become even more crucial as labor markets have tightened amid near record low unemployment in many states. Unemployment is a mere 2.3% in Colorado, 2.7% in Hawaii and 3.2% in Maine. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, there were 755,000 job openings in food services and accommodations in May, up 12% from a year ago.

Trump is using basic economics here: by lowering the supply of labor, he is both making salaries more expensive and thus, by forcing employers to think harder about who they hire, putting pressure on society-wrecking programs like affirmative action. His end goal is to smash the methods by which Leftists gain power, namely by offering cheap money and cheap loans instead of productivity.

His vision, which he will pitch to Americans thirsty for it, is equal parts economic revitalization and rebirth of pride in the nation. Here he is more like Stalin or Roosevelt, in that he will make Americans feel good about themselves again, but on the basis of productivity not “compassionate” thinly-disguised socialist programs.

His opponents, bumbling their way through an irrational desire to hold on to “business as usual,” are about to hand him the mandate he needs to shove this one home. Well played, Mr. Trump.

Chasing Sunk Costs Will Kill You

Monday, May 1st, 2017

There are good things in life. Baseball and humor rank amongst them. Combine them both; and you are on to something. Watch below.

The reason that humor makes us laugh is that it reveals truth. Some things are just gone, daddy gone. Poof, dunzo. See ya’ but I wouldn’t wanna beeya! And that brings us to the topic of sunk costs.

Sunk costs in economics are the investments you’ve made in the past that are no longer recoverable. Once you’ve paid to buy gear or build a building, at least some portion of that investment is unrecoverable. Like the $2,000 drop in value you get when you buy a car and drive it off the lot, that money is gone forever.

So what do? Win, lose or draw; you write that sucker off and move on down the line. Conservatives, Neo-Reactionary Conservatives in particular, have a weakness here. Let the past inspire you. Don’t live there. The Reagan Presidency was a nice break from the blight. Bush_Clinton_Bush_Obama did for Amerika what the Barracks Emperors did for The Roman Empire. President Trump needs to break the Globalist trend. That said, Trump isn’t and can’t be The Zombie Reagan.

For one thing, the current year isn’t 1981. We are now a different society. We are further on the track to globalist demotism. Demographics increasingly chart our destiny. We see our nation’s IQ drop fractional points every year. The new Amerikans are not traditional stock Americans. Our influx of immigration has been dysgenic, not eugenic. This has forced Donald Trump to pursue a 180-degree apositional policy on immigration from Ronald Reagan.

We have a vastly different economy in Amerika than we had in 1981 America. Our industrial base and major urban areas have declined precipitously after the Bush_Clinton_Bush_Obama reign of deliberate and not-so-condign neglect. Hence, Donald Trump takes a 180-degree apositional position on big foreign trade agreements. Our tax code is a horrendous gallimauphry of exceptions, lies and gimmedats. Donald Trump therefore told his SecTres to figure the blasted tax code out and simplify it before it can even be cut. The last time any legitimately helpful work was done on Federal taxation was the 1986 Tax Reform Act. Clinton and Bush II have both badly adulterated* it since.

We can make the comparisons all day. This not just aimed at tearing down Ronald Reagan. Donald Trump couldn’t be Grover Cleveland either. He has to play the cards in front of them. Opposing Donald Trump, particularly from the right; for not being Eisenhower, Reagan, Coolidge or any other prior GOP President, is self-defeating.

In closing, Neo-Reactionaries can either own the past or be owned by it. One way to differentiate between the two states is to see how they handle sunk costs. If we expect a nominally conservative president to behave like Zombie Reagan, we are chasing investments that Reagan made in policy based on the state of the world nearly forty years ago. We chase sunk costs. In so ding, the right will sink along with them. The past is a guide; not a suicide pact.

* — As if Bill Clinton would do otherwise…

Recommended Reading