Leftism fragments societies like all forms of individualism because it acts against order, which includes hierarchy, and therefore creates internal competition for power in those societies, causing themselves to tear themselves apart with infighting. This results in a “flat hierarchy” with a few leaders ruling over a raging mob.
When societies fragment, the first act is to try to guarantee the ability to exist apart from the insanity through “cultural libertarianism” or “freedom of association” or some other similar idea. These, like the American Constitution, consist of allowing some to break away from the rest through rule of law, which fails because the mob then just changes the law:
In a prior age, this problem was mostly solved through free association, home owner associations and covenants. People in that neighborhood would have prevented the threat to their property values by prohibiting the sale of houses to people who did not belong. It was not entirely fair, of course, but it allowed people to protect their property rights without having to resort to lying. As is always the case, there were trade-offs, but at least their was a natural way for people to guard their rights as property owners and citizens.
…Free association is illegal now. If a real estate agent is too obvious in how they handle these things, they face disciplinary action from the real estate board. A homeowner, who refuses to sell or rent to whoever shows up, can easily find themselves in front of a judge. Freedom of association is no longer a right in America. Everyone has to seek permission from the state before they can make these decisions. That means finding a place to live has become a game of cat and mouse for middle-class families.
Nice, decent, friendly people think they can write laws and that these words then have magical properties such that they cannot be violated. In reality, either the terms, the interpretations or the laws are changed to be inverted, or to do exactly the opposite of what they originally were intended to do.
As a result, the cultural libertarian / freedom of association types find themselves unable to break away from the mob, which was their intent in the first place. Anyone with experience in this world knows that most people are disasters caused by their own poor decision-making. As a result, groups always demand free stuff and the right to be included everywhere.
The next attempt by the functional people is to try to escape the dysfunctional masses by creating separate states. In this way, they think, they will be safe from the insanity and free to pursue their own path. As the Confederacy found out, however, this merely incenses the mob, which then attacks en masse.
[I]t’s time for blue states and cities to effectively abandon the American national enterprise, as it is currently constituted. Call it the New Federalism. Or Virtual Secession. Or Conscious Uncoupling—though that’s already been used. Or maybe Bluexit.
…We won’t formally secede, in the Civil War sense of the word. We’ll still be a part of the United States, at least on paper. But we’ll turn our back on the federal government in every way we can, just like you’ve been urging everyone to do for years, and devote our hard-earned resources to building up our own cities and states.
…For starters, we now endorse cutting the federal income tax to the bone—maybe even doing the full Wesley Snipes and abolishing it altogether. We will raise our state and local taxes accordingly to pay for anything we might need or want. We ask nothing more from you and your federal government. Nothing for infrastructure, or housing, or the care of the poor and sick—not that you gave us much, anyway. All we want is our money, and you can keep yours, dollar for dollar.
In other words, go back to the Constitutional Confederation and un-do what has happened under the Constitution, and make America into a confederation — that tricky word, again — of states, not a unified country. The article claims some dubious things, such as how blue states fund red states, which is nonsense when you consider that blue state funding goes toward federally-mandated programs in those red states, which are otherwise just fine without blue state money.
This type of balkanization is the first step toward actual nation breakup. It will probably not work the way that Bluexit supporters hope, because eventually the nation will have to decide on things like foreign policy, and the two will be at odds. This means red staters fighting for blue state ideology or vice-versa, and that will provoke national collapse.
However, it has a positive side: it will remove the power of the federal government and allow the states to again be “laboratories” where different policies are tested. This will in turn concentrate all of the social decay in some areas, and let the other areas thrive by being family-centric and culturally-centric. The Right always wins under these conditions.
But, much like freedom of association, it will not stand. As the collapse happens, the various balkanized groups will begin forming alliances such that they can control the North American landmass. At that point, it will become clear that one can never run away from civilization decay: the only solution is to stop the bad leadership and relocate those that do not fit in the traditional civilization.
The fragmentation of the former United States of America happened this way: the coasts, appalled at the earthy dirt people rhetoric of the middle states, seceded in a mirror image of the Confederacy 150 years before.
As the wealthiest parts of the nation, at least on paper, they took all of the entertainment, finance, publishing and internet industries. This made them the odds-on winners from the beginning.
However, the dirt people had something else on their side: they were the remaining producers. As imports slowed because of the instability in China and rising oil costs caused by Paris convention rules that slowed international shipping, the city people found the dirt people were gaining a slow advantage.
This prompted quick conferences among the city people. “We need a pretext for war,” said President Joe Biden. “How do we make these people so mad they will attack us?” The group huddled and came up with an answer.
The next morning, press releases went out: a new restriction was placed on trade, such that any state which did not support the Rainbow Contract — no one could refuse gay people any service, pre-schools had to teach transgender education, and every corporation had to have the right mix of women and minorities on its board — would face an additional tariff.
In the cities, this was greeted with mass public celebrations. The dirt people were beaten! They would have to comply, if they wanted the lucrative city people trade. But then something entirely unexpected happened.
The dirt people shrugged. “We will make do with an economy of our own,” they said. Exports ceased.
In order to afford this, the dirt people shrugged off every government policy except defense. Roads were privatized to local communities, and highways became tollways. Public schools dissolved. Welfare and health care went away.
During those early days following the split, both dirt people and city people had essentially adopted copies of the previous government. Then, each added and subtracted rules. Now, the dirt people had stripped the government back to its 1780s version.
The city people were jubilant — at first. Prices in the stores kept creeping up. Their own agriculture could not handle the demands of their new population, many of whom were minorities, gays and Leftists relocated from dirt people lands.
Ripple effects were quickly felt. The internet industry depended on people able to buy products, but food was too expensive, so advertising collapsed. Then the government defaulted on its already-heavy debt.
Nothing was left except to invade.
Things went well for the dirt people at first. They were able to hold off the early invasions with their superior knowledge of marksmanship and military strategy. But over time, the invaders kept pouring in. The cities emptied their excess population, gave them cheap guns, and sent them to the front in vast waves.
Even worse, the independent states did not unify to form a fighting force. Texas, for instance, was not so concerned about what went on in Ohio, and vice-versa. This meant that the states began to fall like dominoes.
With the sacking and burning of Dallas in 2034, the war was considered to be over by most. The city people had won, just like they did in 1865. But another curious thing happened. The dirt people were nowhere to be found. Their armies just evaporated.
This meant that when city people drove to the countryside, they often vanished. The city people Reconstruction force which enforce rainbow rights in all the small towns found itself unable to contact its outposts. People just disappeared. Equipment blew up. Sniper rounds took the heads off visiting business dignitaries.
Now the city people faced their worst nightmare. They had won the war, but could not control the territory. Whenever a local area acted up, the city people could send in a large force to crush it, but the instant that force was gone, the acting up started again.
The city people deployed secret police, drones, spies and police. These seemed to succeed, but then found that the people they were hunting down had disappeared, re-appearing elsewhere under different names. Dirt people stopped using the internet and triplicate forms. Nothing was certain.
Even more, the secret police were not safe. A truckload of troops would head out to suppress a small rebellion and never make it. Bureaucrats and police alike were found floating down the Mississippi, with hands, heads, eyes and teeth removed. Communications were sabotaged.
What settled the war in the end was the collapse of the city people economy. They had too many welfare recipients and not enough customers, and they could not force the dirt people to buy their products. Unfunded, their military withered.
At this point, the dirt people emerged as the wealthiest part of the nation. With their knowledge of technology and manufacturing, they manufactured a fleet of drones which fired cluster munitions into heavily populated areas.
Twenty years later, the population crashed on the coasts, and the dirt people armies drove the remainder into the sea. What was left was a nation of maybe fifty million people, all competent, who were ruthlessly intolerant of anyone different.
The Union was whole again. Like Abraham Lincoln almost two centuries before, the dirt people had preserved the United States, but at a great cost. Future centuries would not care however as the new nation went on to greater heights than its old ruined shell, afflicted as if by a cancer with the delusional city person ideology.
I once lived in Los Angeles. I need to be fair and temperate here because I lived there for two years as a Graduate Student and rented an apartment that would violate UN humanitarian ideals.
My experience of California is not a fair or accurate barometer to what the place has to offer the world. Because I like the idea of being just and because all people should determine their own destiny, I believe that if California is outraged that Donald J. Trump is America’s 45th President and must seceed to feel moral, they should.
Yes California states that “[being] a U.S. state is no longer serving California’s best interests. On issues ranging from peace and security to natural resources and the environment, it has become increasingly true that California would be better off as an independent country.”
I hope that these people plan carefully, work hard and are in this for the long haul. As Business Insider diligently explains, secession is a long, hard road even if the US Army never chooses to occupy strategic cities the way they did back in 1861 under similar provocation. Maybe The Hartford Convention of 1814 wasn’t such a bad thing. I’m sure The Miami Dolphins could get through customs once a year when they trek up north to lose to the Patriots up in Foxboro.
Here’s option 1, as described in a statement from Yes California:
“A member of the California federal delegation to Washington would propose an Amendment to the U.S. Constitution allowing the State of California to withdraw from the Union. The Amendment would have to be approved by 2/3 of the House of Representatives and 2/3 of the Senate. If the Amendment passed it would be sent to the fifty state legislatures to be considered (to satisfy the “consent of the states” requirement in Texas v. White). It would need to be accepted by at least 38 of the 50 state legislatures to be adopted.
“California could call for a convention of the states (which is currently being organized to tackle other constitutional amendments as we speak) and the Amendment granting California its independence would have to be approved by 2/3 of the delegates to this convention. If it passed, the Amendment would be sent to the fifty state legislatures to be considered and 38 of the 50 states would have to approve the measure in order for it to be adopted.”
Sounds good. Please work hard and get it done. I’ll support you all the way. I just ask you one thing in return….Don’t be such a hypocrite when other parts of the country want to go their own way to get the heck away from you. One example of this hypocrisy is the base Cuckoldry of the Texas GOP when concerned citizens attempt to get a Texit Resolution on the GOP Primary ballot.
Texas Republican leaders would much rather ignore this pesky secession movement. But in recent years they’ve been forced to deal with it. This fall, the group tried to get 75,000 signatures to get a secession-related resolution on March’s GOP primary ballot. It read: “If the federal government continues to disregard the constitution and the sovereignty of the State of Texas, the State of Texas should reassert its status as an independent nation.” In December, the state party took matters into its own hands and voted down the idea. The movement doesn’t even have “Republican” in its name, one state party official said. Another said he was “sorry we are even having the conversation.”
Consider this when somebody like Hunter Wallace suggests that maybe, just maybe the rest of Amerika would appreciate not having to carry Alabama, Georgia, Mississippi et al any more as these communities went their own way to determine their own future. We are a seperate people with a seperate destiny.
In conclusion, Amerika is a difficult place to live in peace and prosperity. It may be impossible to carry out the Trump mandate of making America great again. Diversity plus proximity equals conflict. If that scares and abuses the decent people of California, let The Bear Flag fly. If we really preach liberty and freedom; I say to you all what Moses famously said to The Pharoah. “Let my people go.” And furthermore, let’s treat all the people with identical justice and fairness. Even the ones that suave and sophisticated Californians would ridicule as rednecks and barntards.
Whatever the outcome of this election, a permanent schism has occurred. The con man and his “mark” (victim) have recognized each other, and the relationship is now adversarial.
For years, Americans and Europeans slept in a consumer wonderland. They were told that the evil of Hitler had been banished and now everything would be Utopian. This required giving much of their income to the State for use in social welfare benefits, but it did not seem expensive, to avoid these problems.
Over time, views have changed. Instead of mitigating problems, the government made them worse. Where once there were only a few angry minority groups, now much of America seems occupied by third-world populations who blame the white people for the poverty, disorder and crime in these areas.
And yet, when actions are taken to fix this, they are never enough and if they fail, white people are blamed. The third-world portion of our society is entirely dependent on the white middle class for taxes that pay for the benefits it demands, and whenever someone balks, the race riots come out.
Finally we elected a black president. The thought was that now we could all get along. Instead, divisions are more clear than ever as white people realize they, too, are a minority group and can represent their own interests just like any other special interest group. This has incensed the dependents.
At the top of the pile, government waves its magic wand and makes problems go away; that these problems return in greater number and severity is fine by government, because it wants an excuse to increase its budget. We already spend more on education, healthcare, policing and public welfare than any other first-world nation, and now we are $20 trillion in the hole with debt.
There is nowhere for this to go but collapse. Government will continue to grow, draining wealth from the middle class who will become impoverished. Third-world immigrants will become the majority, and all elections will be won by Leftists. White people will die out from poverty, violence and existential misery.
The Alt Right rose because it recognized that ethnic identity and variations between individuals are more important than the doctrine of equality. We can build an empire on homogeneity and hierarchy, but not on equality. Equality is a type of entropy that drains all energy from the system and leaves it depleted.
White people in the US and EU are realizing now that Leftism is a pathology that will never stop. Its goal is Utopian, and not measured in reality-based metrics, but in feelings and symbols. It will grind us into the ground and leave a smoking wasteland, and never consider that it might do so.
The Leftist train — single women, unhappy neurotics, ethnic minorities and sexual non-conformists — will push for total control and displace all things that make a healthy and happy society. White people are the sacrifice to this end, both as a cash cow to be milked for taxes, and an enemy of the state against whom discrimination is encouraged.
In the meantime, all of the elements of the Leftism dream have failed. Diversity has created social chaos. Sexual liberation has destroyed the family. Consumerism has burned itself out, and globalism become a threat to the world economy. The environment is savaged, social order ruined, and wealth dissipated through Leftist policies.
People are beginning to have some realizations.
They are recognizing that the current system was sold to them on the basis of lies, and therefore is null as a contract. What was promised was not delivered, and the opposite was delivered instead. They voted for racial reconciliation, charity and tolerance, and got a Soviet-style ideological authoritarian government.
They are seeing that the current social and political order cannot stand because it is toxic to the experience of normal, healthy life. The proposition nation of different ethnicities cannot work, nor can the social welfare programs, nor even the public education. Democracy has failed by self-destructing.
They are observing that ideology is a popularity contest that always finds the wrong answer because it is based on symbols and feelings, not reality. Whatever uses a popularity contest to find answers will create dangerous lies and destroy all who notice that these lies are in fact untruths.
They are perceiving that democracy = Leftism because once one drop of egalitarian thinking taints the pool, the whole thing becomes infected with a rapidly-reproducing virus that leads people to self-destruct in pursuit of an emotional goal. It is simply an evil, deceptive and corrupt idea.
They are also getting the feeling that “birds of a feather flock together” works, while the rainbow nation turns every group into a victim and forces them to fight one another.
The core of the Alt Right — and what normal people are noticing — is that population is politics. Genetics are our destiny, both as a group and in the different abilities of individuals. One rule for everyone is not a workable strategy. Mobs are destructive.
A thought closely related to this then appears: “Systems” — labyrinths of rules designed to reach the right answer — do not work. Putting the best people in charge does, and by the same token, the crazy and chronically unhappy people out there must be disenfranchised and oppressed or they will destroy us.
Systems create proxies, or intermediate measurements through rules and measurements, that are quickly gamed because they are simpler than reality and easy to manipulate. Without good people stopping the insanity, it increases itself and quickly reverses the meaning of all good intentions.
Instead we need an organic understanding of society, and that conflicts with equality in all and any forms. In organic systems, many parts of unequal roles work together by pursuing basic concepts like self-interest. They are kept in check by those above them, forming a hierarchy.
This method of civilization has worked since the dawn of time. Democracy, equality and diversity were experiments, and now we have our answer.
All of those involved in the counter-reaction to the Leftist reign of the past two centuries share these basic observations or inclinations. We went along with the plan while it seemed to work, but now we realize it is a path to doom.
Whatever happens in this election, the schism is permanent, and will result in the separation of different groups by identity. These will not be inclined toward Leftism, at least for whites, and they will be forced to defend themselves against the other 95% of humanity that wants to dominate them and take what they have.
In short, we stand on the precipice of a new dark age. Unlike the last couple centuries, this one is based in reality and so can provide for us a healthy and normal life, if we are brave enough to accept it. As of right now, the conflict rages in our hearts, but soon it will spill out onto the streets.
Neurotic Vox theorizes about the Alternative Right:
The alt-right is often dismissed as white supremacist Trump supporters with Twitter accounts, and they are certainly that. But spend some time talking to key players and reading the movement’s central texts, as I did, and you’ll find it’s more than a simple rebranding of the white nationalist movement. It’s the product of the intersection of a longstanding, long-marginalized part of the conservative movement with both the most high-minded and the basest elements of internet culture. It’s a mutated revival of a monster William F. Buckley thought he killed in the early 1990s, given new energy by the web.
In my view, this is totally wrong: the Alternative Right is an alternative to white nationalism as much as the Republicans.
The goal of the Alternative Right is to establish principles by which civilizations thrive, in contrast to the dying principles upon which we base our current time.
These include nationalism, naturally since all other options have failed, but also extend to many other options. In particular, the Alternative Right studies how the the common sense opinion of a population is replaced by that of its professional politicians.
A better way to view the Alternative Right: a recognition that liberal democracy has failed, and a searching for alternatives which are both not oppressive and not prone to decay like liberal democracy.
Of course the establishment wants it to be equated to white nationalism — they fear it!
As has been mentioned on this blog for many years, Nationalism is a goal that can be achieved collaboratively by members of different ethnic groups. We all want the same end-state, which is that each group has independence and self-determination, and so even if that state appears adversarial we can work amicably toward it because it is in each of our groups’ self-interest.
In fact, nationalism is merely the recognition that (1) diversity does not work because it removes the ability to have a culture and (2) each group acts in self-interest, and those self-interests naturally and inevitably clash. With nationalism, we stop the kumbaya pretense and opt for a gentle Machiavellianism.
Speaking to Fox 26 in Houston, City Councilman Dwight Boykins (District D), “I think at this point, because of the crisis situation, not in Houston but throughout the country, we need to have officers patrolling areas that reflect the ethnicity [of that community].”
The councilman continued, “Because that will eliminate second-guessing. People know their community; they know their culture; and I think that can make a difference.”
…Tritico said, “Well, if that doesn’t work, I guess we could have separate schools and maybe separate people in the restaurants … just keep the races separate so we won’t have to have these problems anymore.”
The idea shocks people because in a time where every notion must be supported by lies and therefore is a lie, common sense is like an alien language, and threatens to pull back the curtain and reveal the utter emptiness of all of the lies we live by every day and upon which we base our political system.
Nationalism recognizes that people are not equal, but its basis is that groups have different needs because they are trying to maintain their culture, which — not police — is the basis of stability in their community and what enables it to function.
Modern policing has effectively failed in large cities like Houston, where most crime goes unreported and highly-mobile criminals cannot be stopped. What keeps people in line, besides individuals with guns, is culture: the idea of right and wrong, and how people should organize themselves as a group to live for the best.
In addition, as Robert Putnam‘s research revealed, diversity creates distrust in a community. That and higher levels of crime in impoverished and minority communities creates a perfect storm of nervous cops and angry citizens, exploding in gunfire and riots.
If we are honest like Dwight Boykins, we say what we mean: each ethnic group should have its own communities, and its own rules, standards, institutions, judges, lawyers, police and politicians. The great diversity experiment has failed, as Europeans worldwide are recognizing, and it is time to find a peaceful solution instead of continuing the failure and violence.
The virtue signaling outrage followed quickly:
Houston Police Officers’ Union 2nd Vice President Joseph Gamaldi responded that the idea was ludicrous and wouldn’t work.
Fox 26 Senior Legal Analyst Chris Tritico led off the weekend panel’s discussion saying, “I’m shocked at the suggestion.”
… “He is saying you have to look like the community. I am saying you understand the community by getting involved with the leaders, getting involved with community itself… so that the people in the community can feel comfortable with you.” [said Jacquie Baly, a black Republican from Fort Bend County]
…Former Harris County Democrat Chairman Gerald Birnberg [said] “For one thing, we don’t have an equal number of African-American police officers as we do African-American members of the community. For another, what does that say about an African-American who dares to venture outside of ‘their neighborhood’ where they’re not predominantly there. What about the Latino community which is dispersed throughout the entirety of Harris County?”
…Mayor Sylvester Turner’s office contacted Breitbart Texas shortly after this article was published. Communications Director Janice Evans said Mayor Turner never took the council member’s comments seriously.
These are all good objections, but they are tangential, not to the point. The point is that we keep having “diversity incidents” every month and they are getting worse. No one is benefiting from this arrangement, as the ghettos keep getting poorer as business flees after the riots, and government welfare while generous limits options to a fairly basic existence for most people.
Boykins stepped ahead of the game by acknowledging the reality of the situation, and while he may or may not have retracted the statement, the ripples it has created are only beginning.
One of the bedrock principles of conservatism is localism, or having a solution as close to and specific to the situation as possible. This contrasts the ideal of those I will call City People, who want one rule to apply to everything, so that they can argue from this rule about what “ought” to be instead of what is. In the city, one succeeds by forcing others to do your bidding; in the country, more realism is required.
The City People are always the same: not producers so much as those who are taking advantage of opportunities, they thrive when a task is narrowly defined through rules and laws, but would not survive a night in the open forest. Thus they are ruled by both a desire for opportunism, and a pervasive fear. This drives them to demand more laws, more standardization, and more government power wherever they go.
The ultimate goal of the City People is to produce something like East Germany: a place where everyone is guaranteed employment, so all are safe from crime, and the government takes care of everything, but individuals can succeed by operating within those narrow definitions of laws, rules and ideology. They will deny this if you tell it to them, but then they end up there.
Consider modern hellish environments like New York City. To live there, one must have either a fair amount of money or choose housing in a ghetto. Social services are abundant but mediocre. Jobs are easily acquired by jumping through the right hoops, and there are few consequences for getting it wrong unless one is foolish enough to take a risk, which every candidate for a job knows is a bad idea. Go with the flow. Keep the opportunistic gravy train flowing and beat back the endless problems caused by this approach with more laws.
In another twenty years, New York will resemble East Berlin. The government will have expanded radically through the votes of the urban poor, who never met a benefits program they did not like… the rich will be taxed to absurdity, and will respond by moving away or moving their income away. This will leave government squeezing the middle class, as has happened under Obama to the USA as a whole, and this will put the city in a death spiral: tax less wealth more to fund an ever-growing parasite pool.
The same thing destroyed Communism. The Soviets created what they saw as an ideal state, but it had a fatal flaw: it was unproductive because it squeezed its most productive people the most, encouraging them to drop out and do the minimum. In the meantime, it kept promoting people who made careers out of not taking risks and saying the right thing to make the audience happy. This made it incompetent, arrogant and unresponsive.
Rome went out the same way. In an effort to maintain power, its leaders employed mercenaries and imported labor. This group then became their biggest supporter and also, a parasite pool because it was funded with money extracted from ordinary Romans. At some point, those stopped trying, and the system hit the pavement.
In the American South, people recognized that the City People are like drunken children. They are so concerned with what they want being forced on other people that they have no time to consider what its actual effects will be. They live in a world where if you can con the waiter into giving you a free appetizer, or snow your boss with praise and then suggest something that worked at another company, you win. To them, the question is not “what will happen” but “what do other people think of this.” It is all appearance.
The South suggested two types of localism: first, that rule in the South should occur in its individual communities, and second, that the virtual locality of people who were not infected with the City People disease should be able to escape that mentality by creating an entirely different society nearby. In other words, rules from New York were no good in Alabama, and City People ethics were not either, because in Alabama they were trying to get away from that corrupt and infectious mentality.
Of course, that could not be allowed by the City People. Competition of this sort would make the city lifestyle look as disgusting as it is. So the City People found a victimhood-equality narrative involving slavery to pick a fight with the South; we know it was not from caring for African-Americans because the City People were perfectly content for those to live in ghettos and company towns in virtual slavery. It was a desire to crush the people who escaped the city.
Brexit shows a similar desire for localism: the people of the UK do not want to follow the opportunistic but sheeplike bureaucrats of the EU into a multicultural East Germany (from which Angela Merkel originated). They cannot articulate what they actually want, which is natural because very few people are good at getting to the core of any issue, but they know they do not want the vision of hell that has become apparent.
And in the UK and Europe, the City People — who we might identify as Crowdists — have been gnashing their teeth and rending their clothes. They want the easy opportunism back where if you call someone a racist, they give you money and power. Those days are ending and with it, the only relevance the City People have is fading. They produce nothing and take no risks. They are the bureaucratic calcification which destroys human societies, and when exposed by the light of actual competition on the basis of real-world results, they fail every time.
How dare white people act in self-interest, in a world where every other group does so? How dare the UK refuse its wealth and power to the bigger group, which wants nothing more than to expand itself at the expense of others? Indeed, in this egalitarian age, refusing a parasite its imagined due payment is seen as a crime!
And yet, the South rises again. People want to step off the train to East Germany with BMWs that the EU represents. They can finally visualize that this is the destination of the train. In the US, people are seeing that the 0bama train leads to a national Detroit or Baltimore. We want off too. Let us rule ourselves, and let us break away from the rest of humanity and its failures, because they are parasitic and will destroy us.
The South did not want war and white people do not want a race war. But this is what they are going to get. It always ends this way, when societies go down the path of egalitarianism as Rome and Greece did before us. We were warned, but too arrogant to listen. Now, we are listening, and ready for the final battle.
That’s a loaded question. It assumes that all of my fellow men are the same.
I might ask, Which fellow man? Some are good, some are bad, most are in the middle.
That of course prompts an angry backlash: “Love all of us or you are an elitist meany jerk!”
I find great inspiration in Plato’s formulation of morality — “good to the good, and bad to the bad” — and the ancient Greek idea of hubris as the archetype of human error and sin alike.
We tend to be pretentious little monkeys who overstate our own importance and when the world (correspondingly) smacks us down, we rationalize that what we did was right or good and the world is bad therefore it must be denied.
Plato says we should treat the good, or those who do not indulge in this cycle of insanity, better than those who have no such self-discipline. Darwin agrees: whatever we tolerate, we get more of, so we should tolerate only what we want more of.
The usual monkey response is to flap the arms and squawk, “Well who decides? How do we know what’s good and what’s bad?”
This confusion can be overcome by sorting our actions by whether or not they were effective. The thing about an ineffective action is it obscures its intent. When someone claims he wants to end poverty, dumps money on the ghetto and ends up with bad results, it becomes unclear what he was actually trying to achieve. But when an action is effective, we know what was intended.
So first, cut out all ineffective activity. Any action where the stated intent does not match the results gets tossed.
Next, look at the intent behind those successful actions. Is that something that enhances civilization and individual health alike? The answer is that most people cannot tell, mostly because they are afraid of the question and will shy away from answering it, and will lie (like rugs) if forced to answer it. No one wants to be accountable to a higher standard than “Whatever I want, right now.” And yet all good things come from waiting to understand a situation so that we can separate wants from needs. Needs are those wants which create positive results.
The grim truth about humanity is that very few people can handle this question directly, despite it being simple and requiring no intellectual superpower except honesty. Most will think in too short of a time scale; the correct one is probably ten thousand years, but most people will pick two weeks, and even some of our smartest tend to come up with “five-year plans” and other nonsense. Almost all will think in terms of individuals alone, neglecting shared enterprises like civilization, nature and culture/values.
The point of this lengthy diversion is that responsibility to our fellow men rarely involves what our fellow men say is our responsibility to them. The sanest approach would be to filter them as above, removing incompetents and then the bad, and being good to those who have done well, and benevolently indifferent to the rest. Darwin, Plato, Jesus, Buddha, Krishna and every other person or mind to rise above the average throughout history have seen the truth of this. And yet most of humanity denies it.
There is another dimension to this question as well. Who — independent of good and bad — can we legitimately have responsibility toward? Some would say only our immediate families, but that precludes civilization, so can be rejected for outright stupidity. Others would say our ethnic groups, and most of history seems to support this. It is this topic that divides us the most, because if we fall into ethnic groups, the entire idea of a nation based on politics alone falls apart. The modern notion of the nation-state, a French Revolutionary invention, collapses entirely.
But at some point, we have to declare the failure of political notions when the results they promise diverge from the consequences they deliver.
Let us look at America. Wracked by race riots in the 1930s, 1960s, and 1990s, it adopted successively more extreme plans for diversity: integration (1950s), affirmative action (1980s), and the subsidy state (1930s-1990s). Finally it elected a minority president. In theory, the problem was solved, and the horrors seen in the LA race riots of 1992 was resolved by the election of 2008. In reality, the problems intensified, because no matter how much white people pandered to minority interests, the same essential fact remained: someone else other than the ethnic group itself was in charge.
If you are an African-American on the streets of America, who do you want to see when pulled over by the cops, coming to the front of the line at the tax office, or entering an office looking for a job? Probably an African-American face, but you see instead white, Hispanic and Asian faces. Even with Barack Obama in office, most of the people you see in high-ranking positions are not of your race, and most of the people who voted for him are not of your race. So despite being pandered to, you remain a subject of someone else’s self-interest and self-determination, not your own.
This situation can never be fixed. It is the same for Hispanics, Asians and whites. In the multi-cultural society, no ethnic group is in control, which means that no ethnic group is represented. No ethnic group can declare its standards as law, which means that instead we get permissive standards for the convenience of government, not maintenance of morality and culture. Each group will always be subject to another group, even if that group is of mixed-race, until all racial groups are destroyed and replaced with that mixed-race group.
Seventy years ago, life for whites was pretty good. But as they took on more responsibility for other ethnic groups, things have fallen apart. This is not the fault of those other groups, nor are they “bad” in some absolute sense; rather, two ethnic groups cannot occupy the same space without coming into conflict, and the white response has been essentially to bribe these groups will a welfare state that now takes up most of our budgets. As a result, federal, state and local taxes combined are devastating the white population while our ethnic conflicts continue.
The idea of white secession — and by whites I mean the Nativist founding group of America — has been floated in the past as geographically-based, but never as a pure ethnic basis. Whites secede when they regain enough control of themselves to vote out the welfare state, affirmative action, anti-discrimination law, HUD and the thousands of regulations about civil rights. This allows white communities to exist, beholden to no one but themselves.
Being “our brother’s keeper” means doing what is best for our fellow humans. This does not always mean writing them checks. Sometimes, it means accepting seemingly harsh realities and terminating policies made on the basis of feelings and not observable reality. That way, after a brief period of chaos, results are better for everyone. Ethnic groups will not feel comfortable until they have their own communities and self-determination. To start that process, Whites Secede!
At this point, most people who have been paying attention have realized that the USA is on its way out. It is dying for the same reason the USSR did, which is that it created a System to control its people, and that system chose the obedient and moronic over the good. Decline in a nutshell.
The Union of Socialist American Republics (USAR) replaced the USA in the 1990s when we let the 1968ers hit their forties and take over government. Zombie Boomers and brainwashed Generation X kids came together to praise Bill Clinton and the new “looseness” of American culture. It was not just rotten like the 1960s, but combined its rotten Leftist core with 1980s-style slick business acumen.
The result in the USAR is essentially a Communist country, but it fuels itself with the fires of capitalism. You must obey the official ideology to not be fired from your job and driven into hiding. Those who parrot the right memorized responses, like talking about how tragedy will bring us together and diversity is our strength after every terrorist attack, get ahead. Those who notice reality are marginalized.
The idiots won, you see. Leftism is the philosophy of idiots, or at least protecting idiots. That is what “equality” means: an idiot is as good as a genius. Sure, we pay the genius more… maybe… but that means he pays lotsa taxes in order to support the idiot. The smartest are enslaved to the dumbest, and because the dumbest are the largest group and growing in number, we have a permanent single-party system for the Pro-Idiot Party, who happen to be CommunistsSocialists? liberals.
Many talk about “exit,” or trying to peacefully withdraw, but we see how well that worked for the Confederate States of America (CSA) last time, and common sense tells us that when a liberal government needs money, those who “exit” will be the first to be forcibly re-absorbed. The beast will never have enough. But one option is to use a variant of the Putin/Orban strategy and try to drive away the morally pretentious North.
Vlad Putin and Viktor Orban are not fools. They know the West thinks a certain way, and that it is liable to make war on those who express public disagreement. But they have learned something from the response by American liberals to the American South: if you make those Coastal liberals think that there is nothing in your land but rednecks and crazy people, they will want you to leave. Their disgust will make them let you go.
As a result, Orban and Putin have approached their ideological shift cautiously while appearing to use Trump-style bravado. They make laws against public gayness, maybe throw up an immigrant fence here and there, and make public statements that seem overblown. In each case, they are cagily advancing their own interests while camouflaging them as rednecky incompetence so that Western liberals just give up.
We can see this process in the response of Coastal states to North Carolina’s enactment of a bathroom gender law. Under this law, you use the restroom which corresponds to the gender listed on your birth certificate. If you are a transsexual, you change your gender on that certificate and then you are able to use the bathroom of your new sex. The bill carefully avoids forcing business owners to have only two bathrooms and permits them to have unisex bathrooms. On the whole, it is a fair and sensible bill.
But that is not enough for the Coastal liberals! The fire god wants blood, you see… and blood is shown by forcing an ideological agenda for the sake of appearance, not reality. First the West Coast liberals claimed this bill was anti-LGBT (a fancy term for “not biologically heterosexual”) and then the New Yorkers chimed in. Now the sharks circle for the kill… and yet:
New York state has joined the cities of Seattle, San Francisco and New York in restricting non-essential public-employee travel to North Carolina. The moves are in response to a newly passed North Carolina law that critics say is discriminatory to the LGBT community.
New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s executive order bans “all taxpayer-funded trips trip to North Carolina, unless they’re essential to public health or law enforcement,” NPR’s Hansi Lo Wang tells our Newscast unit.
Great hope can be found in this. This mostly symbolic act shows the disgust that Coastal liberals feel for someone daring to have another opinion. This disgust is a weapon, but it can be turned around on them. I suggest all of the Southern States should pass similar bills, and go even further. Tax birth control and tampons. Demand everyone go to church. Get extreme and act as crazy as you want, so long as you do it in a way that makes those Coastal liberals get queasy.
The only place safe from the ever-greedy belly of socialist-style government and the neurotic fatwas of Coastal liberals is the place that no one wants. Become that place. Make the South look utterly terrible to these Coastal neurotics and schizoids, and let them pull back. If they want a wall, let’s build that wall. Let us seal ourselves off from the North forever because we are so disgusting to their eyes.
In the meantime, cut free of their neurosis and the easy-money jobs of the cities that make people into robot zombies, we can rebuild civilization and eventually have enough tactical nukes to vanish them if they charge over the wall. Let the Coastal liberals face the fate of their reality-denying, misery-spreading Leftist mental health issues. We must break free, and it begins by making them not hate us, but be grossed out by us.
If I had a billion dollars sitting in a bank account, I would buy up a small town in middle America. Someplace green, with fresh air and clean water, and well out of the way. Far from major freeways and big cities. Isolated.
There I would build normal-sized houses and invite people I esteem to set up home life. Money could purchase new infrastructure and set up businesses for them to have jobs. The town could quietly incorporate and stay out of the news.
There, their children would grow up in normal homes on normal streets. Dads would be home in mid-afternoon and not much of anything would happen. People would live in a silence of themselves and the woods, and have to invent their own fun and purpose in life.
But what they would have would be the ultimate wealth: healthy normalcy. They would grow up without doubt, seeing the best of life, and by the abundance of unstructured solitude they experienced, they would come to know themselves and their world in a depth that has not been experienced by more than a handful of people in centuries.
Their lives would be filled with beauty and not the ever-present self, like a cancer demanding to be so important the world must retreat to a place within the self, like a small ghetto where every concept is reduced to bright primary colors, simple numbers, and yes/no judgments of its safety.
Most would not say that this is wealth. To them, wealth means living in the downtown of a big city, in a condominium or urban house, without much exposure to nature or anyone but those like them. In this life, the ego takes center stage by being important, but health and knowing oneself, much less knowing the world, take a distant secondary importance.
We have many wealthy people, but few have actual financial power. They have a position that they rent with their time in order to maintain a lifestyle, and they are dependent on that lifestyle like an addict on heroin because it supplies their self-esteem.
In the meantime, out among the birds and trees, others live normal lives and are richer than any of the suited charlatans and credentialed miniature kings that are held up to us as an ideal by those who benefit from our conformity.