GIVE TIL IT HURTS!

The Kingdom of Hell

As the drunken psychotic Karl Marx himself specified, seizing control of and then “fundamentally transforming” the very language itself remains Item One on the shitlib agenda.

Transgendering Language
As has become flagrantly obvious over the years, the political left and its myrmidons in the media, medical industry, social agencies, public libraries, and school system have become slickly adept at framing the cultural debate between conservatives and “progressives” by mutilating discourse, fudging long-accepted distinctions, and decoupling terms from their culturally ascribed referents. What was understood for centuries and millennia as decency becomes indecency, good becomes bad, virtue becomes vice, settled tradition becomes feral violence, family and marriage become barbarism and bondage (the feminist mantra), and so on. Conversely, what is destructive of customary order becomes enlightened transformation.

A comparatively recent and most egregious case in point involves what is now called “conversion therapy,” the target of the non-binary and transgender prepossession preaching “diversity” to minors — a cult that has now acquired conventional status. But what is “conversion therapy”?

It is a term calculated to deceive, to reverse normal assumptions by condemning parents concerned about their children’s sexual identity. Thus, to take an instance of adroit dissimulation, according to Human Rights Campaign (HRC), “So-called ‘conversion therapy,’ sometimes known as ‘reparative therapy,’ is a range of dangerous and discredited practices that falsely claim to change a person’s sexual orientation.” The truth is precisely the opposite. Responsible parents do not wish to “change” or “convert” their children’s sexual orientation but to retain it.

The real “conversion” that is taking place is from natural sexual identity at birth to non-binary and transgender dysphoria, assumed as a therapeutic given. Nonetheless, it is the parents who have been criminalized in law for an offense committed by a persecuting and iniquitous government. Witness Canada’s Bill C-4, which declares that conversion therapy harms society because “it is based on and propagates myths and stereotypes about sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression, including the myth that heterosexuality… and gender expression that conforms to the sex assigned to a person at birth are to be preferred over other sexual orientations” (emphasis mine). The Bill is a farrago of abject nonsense, as is the concept of sex as “assigned” at birth by medical personnel and society.

The irony of gender ideology is particularly mordant. Psychological, chemical and surgical mutilation is a function, not of parents maiming their offspring as is generally claimed, but of the gender theorists and predatory groomers who transition (or “convert”) children via persuasion, doctrine, pornographic material, sexual gadgetry, hormone treatments, puberty blockers, testosterone infusions, metoidioplasty, phalloplasty, orchiectomy, voice therapy, facial reconstruction, mastectomy, hysterectomy, and other undiminished horrors. It is the official mandarins in the precincts of authority who are the real criminals, encouraging and even forcing young people to embrace life-altering outcomes that promise to be, for many of them, a lifelong condition of misery and dysfunction.

Meanwhile, as noted, the gender mavens will jail parents who object to the insertion of the state into the natural family. They will move to pass legislation, like Ontario’s Bill 89, that seeks to place the state in loco parentis — as in totalitarian societies, the child is understood as belonging to the state, not to the family. They will hide their congenial abominations under perfumed euphemisms like “gender-affirming health care,” but they are nonetheless recidivist felons. The stench of their dogmatic atrocities befouls the cultural and social environment. Their starting point is to conceive the abnormal as normal; preserving the normal is consequently regarded as a “conversion.” The device is a classic non-sequitur, assuming as a rhetorical fact what has not been or cannot be established, like the “Have you stopped beating your wife?” canard. It is as effective as it is disingenuous.

No coincidence, that, seeing as how Canada is well gone into its own fundamental transformation into a totalitarian society, with Amerika v2.0 trotting along dismayingly close behind it.

These apprentices of evil must be held to account.

Absolutely, indubitably correct. The sticking point being that there is only one way that can ever be accomplished, and no amount of well-written op-eds, well-constructed arguments, well-attended protests and/or rallies, or VOATING HARDERER™ at them is gonna suffice to turn the trick. What can speeches, essays, and debates possibly avail anyone when the very words themselves have been stripped of all meaning?

2

Going asymmetrical

Progress, if you like.

In 1337 the “Hundred Years’ War” started. Great armies marched to meet each other in the fields of battle. They fought and 2.3 to 3.3 million men died.

In 1792 the French Revolutionary war started. It lasted 7 years and between 1.2 million and 1.4 million men died in the fields of battle.

In 1803 the Napoleonic wars started. Somewhere between 3.5 million and 7.0 million men died in the fields of battle and in the misery of being on campaign.

Between 1955 and 1975 somewhere between 0.9 million and 3.8 million people died in the Vietnam War. There were around 300 thousand soldiers killed in Vietnam, 58 thousand Americans and 254 thousand South Vietnam.

What was the significant change between the previous wars and Vietnam?

Asymmetrical Warfare.

During the 20 years of “The Troubles” in Ireland 8 to 10 thousand people were active members of the IRA. By the 1980’s it was believed that there were around 450 active members and 300 support members. Yet this small number of dedicated people were able to keep the British at bay.

This equates to around 9/100,000 at the low point and 10/100,000 at the high point. If there was this level of asymmetric warfare in the US that would be around 30,000 active participants every year. Even with people rotating in and out.

In 2021 there were 38.5 million hunting licenses issued. If we assume 12/100,000 this would be 4632 people with the right equipment in hand to take a deer sized target at 100 to 200 yards. Not to mention all the other firearm owners that don’t hunt but are proficient with their firearms.

So at a low end we would have somewhere around 5000 and at the high end about 50,000 actives in the such warfare in America.

All of these people look just like the people they are living with. We saw what this was like in Iraq and Afghanistan. In addition there is a higher probability of members of the resistance existing unseen within the government/military complex.

We look at what people with minimal industrial knowledge were able to accomplish. Their ability to make hand crafted firearms, their ability to create IEDs. All of that knowledge from people that don’t have the same level of education as most of the people that read this blog.

Do not take counsel of your fears, do not despair, no matter what. As history tells us, even at the lowest ebb, when the situation looks bleak and all seems lost, hope endures.

5
12

Power, destruction, death

Quoth Captain Malcolm Reynolds: If somebody tries to kill you, you kill ’em right back.

Middle Earth had its Mount Doom, into which the One Ring of Power could be tossed, ridding that evil from J.R.R. Tolkien’s fictional setting. Real Earth is not so fortunate, but in all other aspects the lessons drawn from his classic apply. It only comes up short in one respect. Tolkien never delved into the psychology of Sauron, Saruman, and the lessor denizens of Middle Earth who lusted after the One Ring’s power, other than to depict the inevitable corruption of the soul their lust produced.

There are two conclusions uncorrupted souls have difficulty accepting, although both experience and logic point uncompromisingly towards them. The first is that those in power and those who lust for it want power for power’s sake, ultimately to destroy and kill. The second is that they want to destroy and kill because they want to destroy existence and kill themselves. We owe the first conclusion to Orwell, the second to Rand. (For a fuller explanation see “The Last Gasp,” Robert Gore, SLL, March 24, 2020.)

This article assumes both conclusions are well-founded and that the second in particular is the key to understanding where the world is now and where it’s going. They offer a realistic assessment of the chances for nuclear Armageddon.

It is no coincidence that the twentieth century witnessed history’s most totalitarian regimes and its bloodiest wars and genocides. By all indications the twenty-first century will extend the connected trends. Power goes hand-in-hand with destruction and death. Governments are based on their capacity to inflict violence; what else can they produce? Rejecting lofty rhetoric and revolutionary rationales, Orwell wrote that: Power is not a means; it is an end. The twentieth century demonstrated that power is a means to inflict incalculable destruction and death. Know them by their fruits—those are the true ends of those who seek and hold power.

Report after report details the injury and death inflicted by the Covid mRNA vaccines, puncturing hollow platitudes and invocations of “Science.” The travesty offers a refresher course we don’t really need: from world leaders down to petty politicians and functionaries, they want to kill us. Those who aren’t killed are to be frightened into compliance with their ghastly and tyrannical edicts, herded like cattle into some other slaughterhouse.

The gelatinous souls who move whatever direction the bowl tilts usually don’t recognize what’s happening until the moment of their execution. Beforehand, a few of the more intellectually adept will argue that the powerful will be limited by their instinct for self-preservation—if they kill too many they’ll end up killing themselves. Perhaps that thought offers comfort, however scant.

But what if the powerful are like those mass shooters whose terror ends only when they turn their guns on themselves? What if mass murder is the means to their desired end: suicide? Someone who kills himself but no one else is to be pitied. Someone who kills innocents before taking his own life perpetrates paramount evil.

Which would give our putative “leaders” not one moment’s pause, being willing representatives of Paramount Evil their own selves.

(Via Dave Renegade)

1

“What are the consequences of not fighting back?”

Ask a silly etc. We already know what the consequences are; we’re seeing them every single day, LIVING them, all up front and in our faces.

Stupid Party: Kevin McCarthy Says GOP Won’t Move to Impeach Biden or Administration Officials

Sorry to have to clue you in so rudely and all, but…suuuuckerrrrrrrs!

In America today, we have a two-party system: the Stupid Party and the Evil Party. The Evil Party sets the agenda and pursues its aims relentlessly and ruthlessly; the Stupid Party registers a polite token opposition and then fully agrees to whatever the Evil Party wants, occasionally only arguing that it can implement the Evil Party’s program more effectively than the Evil Party itself. We saw this play out yet again Wednesday, when Stupid Party House Leader Kevin McCarthy (S-California) downplayed any talk of impeaching Old Joe Biden or any of his cronies if the Stupids retake the House in the midterm elections. McCarthy is still playing by rules that the Evil Party discarded long ago, and that’s why he and his fellow Stupid Party members keep losing.

Close, Robert, but no cigar. What we actually have is the Evil Party and the Evil Party’s Junior-Partner Party, scuttling around doing as they’re told, as any rumpswab worth his salt should. Awkward nomenclature, I admit; might be a more apt choice to swipe a page from the Mad Mullahs Playbook and go with Greater Evil Party and Lesser Evil Party, maybe.

McCarthy declared that Americans don’t “like impeachment used for political purposes at all,” and added that “the country wants to heal” and see a “system that actually works.”

Hopefully, for their own sake, Americans aren’t holding their breath waiting around on any of that to transpire, lest they all keel over from oxygen starvation forthwith.

That means there will be no impeachment proceedings against Biden, or Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary and former Disinformation Governance Board supreme overlord Alejandro Mayorkas, or Gestapo chief Merrick Garland. Leave billions of dollars worth of materiel in Afghanistan for our enemies to use against us? No problem! Open the Southern border so that untold numbers of criminals and terrorists can waltz right into the country? Hey, we all make mistakes. Sic the woke FBI against parents protesting at school board meetings against the far-Left agenda in public schools? We all can get carried away! Impeachment? Forget it. It wouldn’t be the decent thing to do.

When McCarthy was asked if he saw any grounds for impeaching any officials of this lawless and authoritarian administration, he answered: “I don’t see it before me right now. You watch what the Democrats did – they all came out and said they would impeach before Trump was ever sworn in. There wasn’t a purpose for it. If you spent all that time arguing against using impeachment for political purposes, you gotta be able to sustain exactly what you said.”

This chaps my skinny white ass to no end: impeachment is BY DEFINITION POLITICAL. It is an explicitly political sanction, intended to be levied by politicians to redress illegitimate and/or unlawful political actions which were implemented to attain purely political ends. Literally EVERY SINGLE ASPECT of impeachment is political. Maybe on some phantasmagorical dream-planet where all motives are honorable, all politicians noble and above the sordid fray, and all hearts pure as the driven snow you might possibly see a non-partisan impeachment now and then. Regrettably, not a one of us currently resides on that lovely planet. Or anywhere remotely near it, for that matter. Hell, where WE live even the unicorns are cut-rate, kinda grubby and gay-ass.

Well, sure. There shouldn’t be any impeachment for political purposes. The two impeachments the Democrats perpetrated against Trump were travesties of justice; the framers of the Constitution never intended impeachment to be used as a weapon against a political opponent.

I’m kinda dubious of that contention too, Mr Spencer sir. I’m sure they hoped it never would, but I’m pretty confident that they, in their profound wisdom and foresight, suspected that it would anyway sooner or later. Never before or since has anyone understood the nature of government, those fallen sorts who pursue elected office in it, and even the mass of the national polity more comprehensively, more deeply, than they did. Which is why, as with amending the Constitution they bequeathed to us, they made impeachment so difficult to attempt, and even moreso to actually accomplish.

But McCarthy’s assumption that any impeachment proceedings that the Republicans bring if they win back the House in November would be politically motivated in the same way is unfounded.

And what if it wasn’t? Why, exactly, are we to consider that a good thing, prithee tell? Impeachment is a tool, a weapon, even. If the choice is either to take it up and use it effectively against our enemies or to perish as men without blemish or fault, our honor unbesmirched by petty partisan squabbling, I know which one gets my vote.

What if Biden, or Mayorkas, or Garland actually violated the law? What if they abused their power in persecuting “MAGA Republicans,” purveyors of alleged “disinformation,” and Jan. 6 “insurrectionists”? Could we get any impeachments then?

Of course not; by now, you shouldn’t even have to ask. As a fully-paid-up member in good standing of the Junior Partners In Evil Party, McCarthy is simply fulfilling his assigned role by foreswearing ever confronting his colleagues in any manner that risks upending the Holy Status Quo. He’s doing his job, no more nor less, and doesn’t care a fig whether a few dewy-eyed, scandalized Pollyannas who persist in deluding themselves as to what his and his Party’s real job is feel themselves hard done by because of it.

For McCarthy to wave away even the prospect of impeachment as stooping to the Democrats’ level and engaging in politically motivated prosecution is disquieting on several levels. The most immediate one is the fact that there may indeed be impeachable offenses that warrant serious investigation. Secondary but likewise important is the fact that the Republican establishment these days always seems to be adhering to the “decency” and “civility” that was said to be the hallmark of American politics in bygone days while they’re getting their pockets picked. The Democrats have left “decency” and “civility” in the dustbin of history with the old Democrats of whom they used to be proud, such as Andrew Jackson and Thomas Jefferson (who wasn’t actually a Democrat at all, but they used to claim him). The Republicans should indeed not stoop to their level, but having a Republican president smeared, defamed, framed for crimes he didn’t commit, and vilified in the most extravagant terms for four years and then responding by saying they’re going to do the decent thing and not fight back is just asking for it all to happen again.

Ahhh, NOW you’re getting it. See there, that really wasn’t all that difficult to suss out, now was it?

4

Forbid it, Almighty God!

Ask a silly question.

But Will Elections Change Anything?

If they could, they’d be illegal.

It’s coming up in a fortnight. For many people, all their hopes rest on the outcome. I get it because these seem like very dark times. We cannot live without hope. But we also need realism. The problems are deep, pervasive, scandalously entrenched.

Many people won financially and in terms of power from lockdowns and have no intention either to apologize or give up their gains. What’s more, for that to have happened to this great country – and many great counties – indicates something far more pernicious than a policy error or an ideological mistake.

The fix is going to require vast change. Tragically, the elected politicians may be the least likely to push for such a change. This is due to what we call the “Deep State” but there ought to be another name. It is rather obvious now that we are dealing with a beast that includes media, technology, nonprofits, and multinational and international government agencies and all the groups they represent.

That said, let’s deal here with the most obvious problem: the administrative state.

The plot of every episode of Yes, Minister – a British sitcom that aired in the early 1980s – is pretty much the same. The appointed Minister of the Department of Administrative Affairs waltzes in with a grand and idealistic statement left over from his political campaigns. The permanent secretary who serves him responds affirmatively and then cautions that there might be other considerations to take into account.

The rest follows like clockwork. The other considerations unfold as inevitable or manufactured behind the scenes. For reasons mostly having to do with career concerns – staying out of trouble, advancing through the ranks or avoiding fall down them, pleasing some special interest, obeying the Prime Minister whom we never see, or coming across well in the media – he backs down and reverses his view. It ends as it begins: the permanent secretary gets his way.

The lesson one gains from this hilarious series is that the elected politicians are outnumbered and outwitted on all sides, only pretending to be in charge when in fact the actual affairs of state are managed by experienced professionals with permanent positions. They all know each other. They have mastered the game. They have all the institutional knowledge.

The politicians, on the other hand, are skilled at what they actually do, which is win elections and advance their careers. Their supposed principles are just the veneer put on to please the public.

What makes the series especially painful is that viewers can’t help but put themselves in the position of the Minister of the Department of Administrative Affairs. How would we have done things differently? And if we had, would we have survived? Those are hard questions because the answer is not obvious at all. It seems like the fix is in.

Now, to be sure, in this series all of the players have elements of charm. We laugh at the bureaucracy and their ways. We are delighted by the oddly emerging lack of scruples by the politician. In the end, however, the system seems to work more or less. Maybe this is just how things are supposed to be. It was ever thus and must always be.

Anyone can be forgiven for believing that just a few years ago. But then the last three years happened. The rule by the administrative bureaucracy in every country became highly personal when our churches were closed, the businesses were shut down, we could not travel, we could not go to gyms or theaters, and then they came after every arm insisting that we accept a shot we did not want and most people did not need.

The laughter of the sort Yes, Minister inspired is over. There is far more at stake. But just as the stakes are high, so too the problem of implementing a solution – representative democracy as a means to reobtain liberty itself – is also exceedingly difficult.

Not difficult, utterly impossible. Can there ever be a wrong or inappropriate time to remind ourselves once more of the deathless words of Patrick Henry? I think not.

Mr. President, it is natural to man to indulge in the illusions of hope. We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth, and listen to the song of that siren till she transforms us into beasts. Is this the part of wise men, engaged in a great and arduous struggle for liberty? Are we disposed to be of the number of those who, having eyes, see not, and, having ears, hear not, the things which so nearly concern their temporal salvation? For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know the worst, and to provide for it. I have but one lamp by which my feet are guided, and that is the lamp of experience. I know of no way of judging the future but by the past.

And what have we to oppose to them? Shall we try argument? Sir, we have been trying that for the last ten years. Have we anything new to offer upon the subject? Nothing. We have held the subject up in every light of which it is capable; but it has been all in vain. Shall we resort to entreaty and humble supplication? What terms shall we find which have not been already exhausted? Let us not, I beseech you, sir, deceive ourselves. Sir, we have done everything that could be done to avert the storm which is now coming on. We have petitioned; we have remonstrated; we have supplicated; we have prostrated ourselves before the throne, and have implored its interposition to arrest the tyrannical hands of the ministry and Parliament. Our petitions have been slighted; our remonstrances have produced additional violence and insult; our supplications have been disregarded; and we have been spurned, with contempt, from the foot of the throne! In vain, after these things, may we indulge the fond hope of peace and reconciliation. There is no longer any room for hope. If we wish to be free– if we mean to preserve inviolate those inestimable privileges for which we have been so long contending–if we mean not basely to abandon the noble struggle in which we have been so long engaged, and which we have pledged ourselves never to abandon until the glorious object of our contest shall be obtained–we must fight! I repeat it, sir, we must fight! An appeal to arms and to the God of hosts is all that is left us!

They tell us, sir, that we are weak; unable to cope with so formidable an adversary. But when shall we be stronger? Will it be the next week, or the next year? Will it be when we are totally disarmed, and when a British guard shall be stationed in every house? Shall we gather strength by irresolution and inaction? Shall we acquire the means of effectual resistance by lying supinely on our backs and hugging the delusive phantom of hope, until our enemies shall have bound us hand and foot? Sir, we are not weak if we make a proper use of those means which the God of nature hath placed in our power. The millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us. Besides, sir, we shall not fight our battles alone. There is a just God who presides over the destinies of nations, and who will raise up friends to fight our battles for us. The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave. Besides, sir, we have no election. If we were base enough to desire it, it is now too late to retire from the contest. There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! Our chains are forged! Their clanking may be heard on the plains of Boston! The war is inevitable–and let it come! I repeat it, sir, let it come.

It is in vain, sir, to extenuate the matter. Gentlemen may cry, Peace, Peace– but there is no peace. The war is actually begun! The next gale that sweeps from the north will bring to our ears the clash of resounding arms! Our brethren are already in the field! Why stand we here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!

Indeed. American liberty was won at the muzzle of the gun and the point of the sword. T’was ever thus; I can recall offhand not a single instance when corrupt and fraudulent “elections” such as ours have ever been sufficient to the task. The miserable curs of Our Side’s chattering class who preemptively abjure any resort to the very dear coin with which our Founding Fathers bought freedom for their posterity disgrace themselves by their pusillanimous break with true American history. They insult the bloody sacrifice made by our Founders even as they cheapen the very idea of liberty itself with their puling, girlish squee, squee, squee-ing. When Henry asks of them “Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery?” they can but answer in the affirmative, if they have a shred of integrity left about them.

Not that I’m recommending anybody should rush to this last, most desperate resort, mind. But those who would rule it out forever—as if reclaiming our unique American heritage of freedom and individual self-determination could ever be accomplished as cheaply, easily, and painlessly as merely casting a ballot in yet another sham “election”—have effectively demonstrated for all to see just how little they really value those priceless things, whether they know it or not.

(Via WRSA)

1

The long, hard road back

John Davidson contends that those of us who still call ourselves “conservatives” ought to knock it off already.

Why? Because the conservative project has largely failed, and it is time for a new approach. Conservatives have long defined their politics in terms of what they wish to conserve or preserve — individual rights, family values, religious freedom, and so on. Conservatives, we are told, want to preserve the rich traditions and civilizational achievements of the past, pass them on to the next generation, and defend them from the left. In America, conservatives and classical liberals alike rightly believe an ascendent left wants to dismantle our constitutional system and transform America into a woke dystopia. The task of conservatives, going back many decades now, has been to stop them.

In an earlier era, this made sense. There was much to conserve. But any honest appraisal of our situation today renders such a definition absurd. After all, what have conservatives succeeded in conserving? In just my lifetime, they have lost much: marriage as it has been understood for thousands of years, the First Amendment, any semblance of control over our borders, a fundamental distinction between men and women, and, especially of late, the basic rule of law.

Calling oneself a conservative in today’s political climate would be like saying one is a conservative because one wants to preserve the medieval European traditions of arranged marriage and trial by combat. Whatever the merits of those practices, you cannot preserve or defend something that is dead. Perhaps you can retain a memory of it or knowledge of it. But that is not what conservatism was purportedly about. It was about maintaining traditions and preserving Western civilization as a living and vibrant thing.

Well, too late. Western civilization is dying. The traditions and practices that conservatives champion are, at best, being preserved only in an ever-shrinking private sphere. At worst, they are being trampled to dust. They certainly do not form the basis of our common culture or civic life, as they did for most of our nation’s history.

It’s a very good essay, of which you should read the all. Despite making a solid case for dropping the “conservative” appellation due to an acute case of terminal meaninglessness, however, it’s extremely doubtful that any such change will happen anytime soon. While I do wholeheartedly agree with Dan Gelernter’s conceptual reframing of the current conflict as involving not “Democrat versus Republican” but “America versus politics, people versus government,” the moldy old “liberal” and “conservative” labels are almost certain to be with us for a good while longer yet. They’re just too convenient, too easily understood by almost any politically-aware person for them to be disposed of casually or hastily.

Which, there’s not a thing in the world wrong with that. People need labels for things sometimes, and staying with the tried and true, familiar old nomenclature during the transition can be helpful in all sorts of ways. Yes, the old liberal-conservative dichotomy has become stale and imprecise, particularly after the Left misappropriated “liberal” from its rightful owners to disguise their iniquitous designs on American liberty. So stipulated. Nonetheless, the various alternatives Our Side’s punditry has tried on for size—Patriots, classical liberals, Heritage Americans, Normals, etc—are every bit as imprecise, even incomplete, as well as being somewhat unwieldy.

Again: so stipulated. Those issues aside, Davidson’s argument is about more than just the names we use to call ourselves. One hell of a lot more, in fact.

So what kind of politics should conservatives today, as inheritors of a failed movement, adopt? For starters, they should stop thinking of themselves as conservatives (much less as Republicans) and start thinking of themselves as radicals, restorationists, and counterrevolutionaries. Indeed, that is what they are, whether they embrace those labels or not.

Whatever the term or image, the imperative that conservatives must break from the past and forge a new political identity cannot be overstated. It is time now for something new, for a new way of thinking and speaking about what conservative politics should be. The fusionism of past decades, in which conservatives made common cause with market-obsessed libertarians and foreign policy neocons, is finished. So too is Conservatism Inc. and the establishment GOP it enabled, whose first priority was always tax cuts for big business at the expense of everything else. The election of Donald Trump in 2016 heralded a populist wave and the end of Republican politics as we knew it, and now we are in uncharted waters.

To be sure, there has been plenty of talk on the right lately about what should be done differently now. Some, such as Sohrab Ahmari, Gladden Pappin, and Adrian Vermeule (along with a larger cohort of conservative Catholic thinkers), advocate a conservatism that is comfortable with big government and in fact sees it as necessary not only for the common good but to tame what Ahmari recently called the “private tyranny” of woke corporations empowered by unrestrained market forces. Conservative Catholics, he argues, should today claim ownership of a pro-worker, even pro-union political agenda that once belonged to the left, and which produced generations of Democrat-voting Catholic workers.

Indeed, a willingness to embrace government power has been a topic of fruitful debate on the “New Right” in recent years, as it should be. However uncomfortable traditional “small-government” conservatives might be with Ahmari’s argument, it is more or less true.

Put bluntly, if conservatives want to save the country they are going to have to rebuild and in a sense re-found it, and that means getting used to the idea of wielding power, not despising it. Why? Because accommodation or compromise with the left is impossible. One need only consider the speed with which the discourse shifted on gay marriage, from assuring conservatives ahead of the 2015 Obergefell decision that gay Americans were only asking for toleration, to the never-ending persecution of Jack Phillips.

The left will only stop when conservatives stop them, which means conservatives will have to discard outdated and irrelevant notions about “small government.” The government will have to become, in the hands of conservatives, an instrument of renewal in American life — and in some cases, a blunt instrument indeed.

To stop Big Tech, for example, will require using antitrust powers to break up the largest Silicon Valley firms. To stop universities from spreading poisonous ideologies will require state legislatures to starve them of public funds. To stop the disintegration of the family might require reversing the travesty of no-fault divorce, combined with generous subsidies for families with small children. Conservatives need not shy away from making these arguments because they betray some cherished libertarian fantasy about free markets and small government. It is time to clear our minds of cant.

i’m finding it difficult, practically impossible really, to argue with any of that. The proposition that it might be necessary to temporarily abandon a fair-sized chunk of our Constitutional ideals in order to reinstate the Constitution seems contradictory on the surface, and rightly so. The idea of it is distasteful, to say the least. But, well, here we all are.

What Davidson is suggesting is pretty much word-for-word the very thing I’ve said myself for years here, if from a slightly different angle: any serious, pragmatic effort to put our country right again will require us to seize the abominable Statist machine the Left built and use it against them, however unappealing such a tactic is to right-thinking people. If Big Government is what we must have, and for now it is, then let Big Government work FOR us, and not AGAINST us as it has for many decades.

The first step on the path to the restoration of our Constitutional Republic is to defeat the Leftists—to destroy them so completely, so utterly, that the very thought of ever daring to rise up against us again is anathema to them. Only after they’ve been crushed can we move on to destroy all their works. And then?

On the transgender question, conservatives will have to repudiate utterly the cowardly position of people like David French, in whose malformed worldview Drag Queen Story Hour at a taxpayer-funded library is a “blessing of liberty.” Conservatives need to get comfortable saying in reply to people like French that Drag Queen Story Hour should be outlawed; that parents who take their kids to drag shows should be arrested and charged with child abuse; that doctors who perform so-called “gender-affirming” interventions should be thrown in prison and have their medical licenses revoked; and that teachers who expose their students to sexually explicit material should not just be fired but be criminally prosecuted.

If all that sounds radical, fine. It need not, at this late hour, dissuade conservatives in the least. Radicalism is precisely the approach needed now because the necessary task is nothing less than radical and revolutionary.

To those who worry that power corrupts, and that once the right seizes power it too will be corrupted, they certainly have a point. If conservatives manage to save the country and rebuild our institutions, will they ever relinquish power and go the way of Cincinnatus? It is a fair question, and we should attend to it with care after we have won the war.

Just so. Human nature being what it is, we well know that those who are attracted to power will fight to hold on to it with grim determination once they’ve gotten their hands on some, regardless of how passionately they once may have advocated for limited government. Throughout history, I can call to mind no government that has ever relinquished power and agreed to its own dismantling willingly and peaceably, based solely on principle alone. The irony is that, at some point, force of arms and violence will still need to be used, no matter what, to complete the task before us. First of all, though, we must win the war. Failing that, this is all just idle chatter.

7

Yes, they’re coming for your children; now, what are you gonna do about it?

Could this turn out to be the final straw—the one that breaks the camel’s back, driving the great mass of heretofore-complacent Americans to get off their duffs at long last and embrace an open, vigorous revolt against their avowed enemies in the federal government of the (former) United States?

For nearly two years, we’ve been told the Covid-19 “vaccines” offer varying degrees of protection while offering varying varying degrees of risks. The trajectory of these two attributes of the jabs have been heading in opposite directions every since their launch. At first, we were told the injections received emergency use authorization because they were 100% effective and offered zero risk. Over time, that effectiveness number has steadily dropped while the risk factor has risen, though the degree to which these numbers have fallen and risen has been shrouded by lies, gaslighting, and a persistent narrative.

The powers-that-be have continuously changed their own narrative, but one thing has remained consistent throughout. They continue to push for every man, woman, and child to be injected as many times as possible.

On today’s episode of The JD Rucker Show, I discussed several stories and played a few videos that highlight while today is a “tipping point” for vaccine tyranny. The perceived mandate by the CDC to force vaccinations on school-age children contradicts every piece of data we have available. Children face infinitesimal risks to Covid and far greater risks from the jabs themselves. On top of that, the jabs appear to have negative efficacy that gets worse with each subsequent shot, draining away immune systems and replacing what God gave us with the abominations of manufactured spike proteins and other chemical toxins.

If we can’t stop this, we can’t stop them at all. By no means does that mean we stop fighting. It simply means our fight is to save a remnant and to prevent tyranny from spreading more quickly.

Dude, we reached that stage long, long ago. Happily, though, there’s at least one state whose governor refuses to bend the knee to Leviathan’s evil, grasping minions.

Guess which one. Go on, guess. I dares ya.

Ron DeSantis: “There Will Be No Covid-19 ‘Vaccine’ Mandate for Children in Our Schools”

The CDC is adding the Covid-19 shots to the Childhood Immunization Schedule. This will compel some states to mandate the jabs for school-aged children. It will also prompt other states who are not locked into CDC guidelines to opt into them anyway.

But not Florida. Not on Ron DeSantis’s watch.

3

Is there really NOTHING they won’t try to meddle with?

Never mind, no need to answer that one.

I’ve written for years and years about how the Climate Temperature Models seem hopelessly broken. So just how broken are they?  This broken:

A major survey into the accuracy of climate models has found that almost all the past temperature forecasts between 1980-2021 were excessive compared with accurate satellite measurements. The findings were recently published by Professor Nicola Scafetta, a physicist from the University of Naples. He attributes the inaccuracies to a limited understanding of Equilibrium Climate Sensitivity (ECS), the number of degrees centigrade the Earth’s temperature will rise with a doubling of carbon dioxide.

File this under “prediction is hard, especially about the future”.  Gosh, it almost seems like the climate system is massively chaotic and difficult to understand, or something…

The black lines are the actual temperatures; the yellow bands are the model’s predicted temperatures. Notice that the actual temperatures have diverged outside the yellow predicted ranges (i.e. recorded actual temperatures are lower than predicted for all temperature data bases and all model groups). Long time readers know that I prefer the UAH satellite temperature record because (a) it is truly global and (b) it is only minimally adjusted.  I have been vocal for a long time that adjustments to the other temperature records are excessive, and may be wildly excessive.

Let me emphasize here that the models have been wrong for 40 years.

Of course they have. “Models” are the bunk, “consensus” is the bunk, and unfortunately, so is the Watermelon scam masquerading as contemporary “climate science.” As I said in the comments section: “How arrogant must we humans be–well, SOME humans, that is–that we can assume our knowledge of how the planetary ecology functions is so complete that we can launch reflecting chaff into space to deflect the sun’s rays, in the name of ‘fixing’ climate change?”

1

Social contagion

Back in the day, to suggest that brainwashing children was an essential component of the Left’s program to inculcate their hatred of America, Americans, and capitalism in future generations was to establish oneself in the minds of most as a paranoiac, a lunatic, and/or a conspiracy theorist with an at best tenuous grasp on reality. But those days are long gone; as it turns out, the conspiracy is real, the program is in place and beavering away…and yes, brainwashing our kids is a YUUUGE part of it. Exhibit A:

It’s a very simple graph, but it speaks to a deep sickness in society. Komodo Health Inc. has tracked over five years, from 2017 to 2021, the number of children who identify as “transgender” (that is, in purely medical terms, they suffer from gender dysphoria) has increased so dramatically that it cannot possibly be an organic development. Instead, we are witnessing the brainwashing of America’s youth—something coming from pop culture, their schools, and their peers.

We all know that young people are impressionable. Their minds are little sponges, they’ve been minimally affected by life’s realities, they are more likely to respond to experiences and information with emotions rather than reason, and they are extremely vulnerable to peer pressure. I’m not even going to spend 20 minutes hunting for authorities for each of those statements. Anyone who once was a child remembers that way of being and thinking, and anyone who has raised a child has seen those factors from a more objective, adult perspective.

Since the 1940s, in less serious (although sometimes still dangerous) ways, we’ve seen children’s undeveloped brains lead them to:

  • Swoon over Frank Sinatra
  • Swoon over The Beatles
  • Swoon over the Bay City Rollers
  • Eat Tide pods
  • Take the cinnamon challenge
  • Take extreme selfies in dangerous locations
  • Use nauseating amounts of Axe deodorant
  • Play the passing-out game
  • Pierce themselves all over

I could go on, but you get my drift. Make something a fad, and there is no end to what children will do. The current fad is worse than anything in the bullet points above because it’s not just coming from children’s peers. Instead, pop culture and their own schools are promoting transgenderism. At a very fundamental level, children are being brainwashed into denying their own bodies.

Matt Walsh explains very well that we are seeing a complete inversion of the 1990s trend that saw parents, teachers, and the media relentlessly tell kids that they were absolutely perfect and beyond wonderful, with no need to change by even a scintilla. That message extended to their bodies: All young people’s bodies were perfect and beautiful bodies. Al Franken’s only funny character, Stuart Smalley, summed it up: “I’m good enough, I’m smart enough and, doggone it, people like me!”

Now, however, children are being told that, if they feel awkward, different, or wrong (which is completely normal for kids, especially as they go through puberty), they are correct to feel that way. God or Nature made a terrible mistake with them, and the only remedy is hormones that cause permanent sterilization and diseases, combined with permanent body mutilating surgery.

Hey now, ain’t nothing wrong with swooning over Sinatra or the Beatles. Hell, even the Bay City Rollers had their moments.



2
1

Getting away with murder

For shitlib zealots, nothing is off the table.

In reality, leftist groups are the very villains that they claim to be fighting against.

What we have here is a combination of problems – Leftist projection as well as leftist gaslighting combined with radicalization by the media and certain politicians. Leftists are so convinced of the righteousness of their ideology and the “evil” of anyone that disagrees with them that they believe they are justified in any action, including murder.

There is an ancient word for this kind of behavior: Zealotry.

The swirling atmosphere of political elitism and rage that leftists have produced makes all people who oppose them into monsters; not enemies, but “monsters.” The level of vitriol and animosity expressed not only against conservatives, but also moderate democrats that refuse to toe the line is astonishing. It is something you might see in the old world, in places where religious fundamentalism dominates all of society. The kind of seething hatred that leads to mob mentality and the crushing boots of tyrants.

The foundations of our country were built on rebellion against tyranny and injustice, and the only group perpetuating tyranny and injustice in the US today is the political left. Biden, operating under the direction of a host of elitist advisers, was nearly instrumental in the complete destruction of our constitutional freedoms through his covid restrictions and vaccine passport executive order. The mandates and lockdowns were resoundingly supported by the political left as blue states suffered months of oppression well after conservative red states abandoned the mandates as useless.

As noted, it was leftists that were setting fire to cities across America while calling for the destruction of our founding values and the replacement of our current system with a more socialist oriented framework. They do not care about the foundations of our country. Rather, they despise what our nation represents and want to see the erasure of our past to make way for their delusional Utopian future.

Real conservatives stand for constitutionalism, the Bill of Rights, protection of innocent life, limited government, private property, sound money and free markets, equality of opportunity, meritocracy and decentralization. We stand against collectivism, socialism/communism/globalism, the forced equality of outcome and false notions of equity, big government authoritarianism, identity politics and victimhood grifting, entitlement culture, mob rule and centralization.

At the root of it all, though, is the fact that conservatives represent a choice outside of the mainstream narrative that in order for the world to progress we must continue to give up more and more of ourselves and our rights.

Leftist claim we “live in a society” and thus we are required to sacrifice for the greater good. But, who made them the arbiters of the “greater good?” Who said we want to live in their vision of a society? Why is their ideology suddenly the ideology of the future? Maybe, their ideology is actually old, outdated and totalitarian. They don’t represent the future, they represent an archaic and villainous past.

As the political left drives headlong into zealotry there will be more events like the death of Cayler Ellingson. It’s not a matter of if, but when. Maybe Brandt’s attack on Cayler was politically motivated, or maybe it was just a story he made up to explain away his crime. Regardless, the details of the story he chose matter. He painted a tale of Ellingson as a Republican extremist for a reason. He did it because he believed that when people heard this it would vindicate the attack, and in the case of many leftists he is probably right.

This kind of ideology always ends the same way – With moral relativism and the attempted elimination of a group’s ideological detractors. It is in the nature of zealots to destroy what they cannot control. It is also in their nature to attack people and then accuse those same people of being the aggressors. Leftists cannot live with any other group in peace, they will seek to absorb or eliminate, this is what they do, and in the process many people will end up hurt or dead.

Fine, then; if it’s war they want, then it’s war they damned well ought to get—war to the knife, unlimited and unconstrained, without mercy or surcease until only one side is left standing. If casualties there must be, then it’s only meet and just that most of the casualties we can look forward to in the near future be those selfsame Leftist zealots who brought this most unwelcome turn of events down on all our heads.

1

Fascism For Dummies

Know thine Leftist enemy.

It blows my mind how little many of those on the political left know about the insults they hurl at their political opponents, but when you call people fascists or compare the “We’re Number One” sign one sees when their team wins a sporting event to the Nazi salute, you show your own stupidity.

Or you show your own dishonesty, which is just as bad.

Fascism was designed as a ‘middle road’ that recognized three flaws in Marx’s model:

1) Marx’s model provided no incentive system, relying instead on the selflessness of everyone,

2) Marx viewed the communist model as being global, and while a global system may SOUND nice, nothing is implemented at that level. As such, fascism was a national, and not a global, model, and

3) Fascism was not utopian in nature, recognizing governance as a permanent fixture of any system.

The guy who invented fascism (Giovanni Gentile) was not trying to make a brand new political or economic system so much as he was trying to fix Marxism by removing its fatal flaws – primarily the lack of any incentive for anyone to work.

Giovanni Gentile was trying to take Marxism and apply the profit system – tightly controlled by the government – on top of it.

The Nazis were fascists, but they differed from other fascists in one critical area – they defined a ‘nation’ based on ethnicity rather than based on national borders. In other words, it was a very racist form of fascism.

Fascism existed all over Europe and South America before, during, and after WWII. Spain remained fascist until Franco died in the 1980s. Other than Germany, none of the fascist nations had a racist sense of ‘nationalism.’ Other than Germany, they all viewed ‘nation’ as something geographic, and when we look at the primary thing fascism tries to do, which is to have the state take control of the means of production while still allowing a state-controlled profit incentive to incentivize work – riddle me this: what modern political party does that sound like?!?

Three guesses, first two don’t etc. And if you think that’s just some kind of crazy coincidence, you don’t know your Leftists well enough. Try as they might to deceptively label fascism as a phenomenon emanating strictly from the Right, it just ain’t so. The whole mess can be summed up in one insightful sentence.

Fascism does not and cannot come from the American right, as the American right believes in limited government, individual liberty, and free markets – which are the literal opposite of what fascism calls for.

Yep, that’s about the size of it, and tells you all you’ll ever need to know about the Left. Unlimited, all-powerful government; invidious constraints on true liberty and the individual’s right to self-determination; tightly-controlled markets entirely under the thumb of government—these are the foundations on which Left ideology sits. In keeping with the Opposite Rule, under which the very thing Leftists scream most vehemently about the Right doing is exactly what they themselves are ACTUALLY doing…well, as the Good Book tells us, by their fruits ye shall know them, dig?

4
4

Alarums

Tucker expounds on the practicalities of what Major “King” Kong once unforgettably referred to as “nuclear combat toe to toe with the Rooskies.”

The question of who blew up Russia’s energy pipelines to Europe, which is not just a question in the news, it’s a historical question, we’ve addressed it a couple of times already, is not really much of a question anymore. So, on television, they’re assuring you that obviously the Russians did it. Vladimir Putin sabotaged his own pipelines.

With his nation at war, Putin intentionally destroyed Russia’s most vital national asset. Now why, you ask yourself, would Putin do that? Well, because…actually no one’s explained why Putin would do something like that. Bad people do bad things. That seems to be the idea.

Former CIA Director John Brennan showed up on CNN the other day to add his version of the story and it was clear right away that this was no ordinary cable news segment. Brennan was instead conducting a scientific experiment designed to determine just how stupid CNN viewers are. Now, these are people who believe Joe Biden when he told them COVID was a pandemic of the unvaccinated. These are the ones who think men can become women just by saying, so clearly, they are highly credulous, but the question remains, just how credulous are they? What won’t they believe? Well, in the name of science, John Brennan decided to find out. Watch.

BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN ANCHOR: Do you think Russia is behind the sabotage of the pipelines?

BRENNAN: Well, I think all the signs point to some type of sabotage. These pipelines are only in about 200 feet or so of water and Russia does have an undersea capability, too, that would easily lay explosive devices by those pipelines. I think this is clearly an act of sabotage of some sort and Russia is certainly the most likely suspect.

Do you think the Russians did it? asked the anchor, do you think the man with four bullet holes in his head committed suicide?

Oh, yes, says John Brennan. The Russians are certainly the most likely suspect. Well, of course they are. Did you ever doubt it? Once Putin got done electing Donald Trump president and then finished creating Hunter Biden’s fake laptop and dropping it off at a mac repair shop in Delaware, Putin set about sabotaging his own natural gas pipelines, which were his main source of foreign currency and leverage over Europe.

That’s how tricky Vladimir Putin is. Obviously, his next move will be nuking Moscow, all part of his diabolical plan to achieve world domination by destroying himself.

That’s effectively what John Brennan told CNN’s viewers. Did they believe him? Sure, they did. John Brennan used to run the CIA. He knows which lies work. He’s an expert.

So the question is, where does that leave us? And that’s the problem. This act leaves us, the United States, with no option but total war with Russia. There is no off-ramp now. There is no way out. We are all in, no matter what that means, no matter where it goes.

Are you shocked by this? Was there a vote on this? Did someone ask your opinion? No, but it’s been happening for months in slow motion. It’s been hidden from public view by the near-total blackout imposed by America media outlets so you probably didn’t know any of the details. For example, in March, the Turkish government tried to broker a peace in Ukraine and they came very, very close. Wasn’t reported widely.

..So, that’s the demand. Putin must be removed from office. Putin, of course, has no intention of leaving. You would have to take him out. Now, you don’t have to like Vladimir Putin. You don’t have to like anything about Vladimir Putin. You can hate Vladimir Putin and most Americans do, but you can still understand how totally deranged talk like this is.

Actually, if Putin went ahead and nuked Mordor On The Potomac into oblivion I’d feel obliged to send the man a nice thank-you note. But hey, I’m sure that’s just me. Onwards.

It’s the definition of reckless. Consider their own descriptions. For years, Democrats and the defense establishment they control have told us that Vladimir Putin is crazy and evil and he may be. Let’s assume it’s true. They’ve said it. Is that the man you want to publicly threaten with extermination? This is the man who controls more than 6,000 nuclear warheads. So, if you push him hard enough, why wouldn’t he use those nuclear weapons? Well, by their own description of him, he would.

This is true lunacy. An entire country ignoring led by its leaders, leaders who specialize in ignoring the things that matter, imminent catastrophe. That’s not an overstatement. This is not the inflation rate ticking up two points or a loss of 15% of your 401k and this is a nuclear war.

Busses in New Jersey now have signs warning about radiation poisoning “September is National Preparedness Month. Do you know what you do in a radiation emergency?” No, you don’t. It doesn’t matter.

This is all make believe. It’s all play-acting. If you live in a big metro area, there’s not anything you’re going to do during a nuclear exchange because you’re going to be dead along with most other Americans. The overwhelming majority of Americans will be dead and those who survive will starve to death because all agriculture will be destroyed, along with billions of people around the planet.

So, it’s time to update your assumptions about the technology here. These are not the bombs that flattened Nagasaki. They are incalculably more powerful. You hit New York, you take out Miami.

So, a nuclear war means not that we get to take out the Black Sea fleet. It means the end of the world and people who work around this stuff understand it and they’re really afraid, but no one else seems to have any idea. Why is that?

Taking the Big Picture view of things, I’d suggest that it’s ultimately because We The People have shirked our sacred duty of doing what needs to be done to get our current “leadership” back under proper control.

4

On the other side

“Surprising”? Not if you’re truly awake to who and what American cops are nowadays, it ain’t.

Are Police Complicit in Media’s Attempt to Suppress Political Motive for Teen’s Killing?
How can the police say there is “no evidence” of a political motive when we have the accused’s own words suggesting that it was politically motivated?

North Dakota teenager Cayler Ellingson appears to be the latest victim of left-wing terrorism incited, then ignored by the national media. The lack of curiosity in the press about his senseless and apparently political murder is predictable, but what is surprising is the way local police appear to be following their lead.

Shannon Brandt, 41 and the accused in this case, told the authorities that Ellingson, 18, was a “Republican extremist” and that the two had been in a “political argument” before Brandt ran Ellingson over with his car late one night in September. Brandt told police that he feared Ellingson was calling other people to come and hurt him. But in a perplexing update, the North Dakota Highway Patrol stated there was “no evidence” of a political motive, or even that Ellingson was a “Republican extremist.”

How can the police say there is “no evidence” of a political motive when we have Brandt’s own words suggesting that it was politically motivated? And what is the purpose of the strangely gratuitous statement contradicting Brandt’s subjective, baseless characterization of Ellingson as an “Republican extremist?”

Foolishly, mulishly, the rest of the ‘graph strains mightily to give the cops the benefit of the doubt here, to wit:

The police almost appear to echo, if unintentionally, Brandt’s apparent belief that Ellingson’s murder would have been justified if he were a right-wing extremist. Ellingson’s politics, if he had any at all, are only relevant to the extent that Brandt’s perceptions of them motivated Brandt to kill.

Is the pattern repeating in the Ellingson case? Brandt was initially released on $50,000 bail before his charges were finally upgraded to murder, days later. The police are making what looks like a slipshod PR effort to defuse political controversy by suppressing rudimentary facts. The leftist media are all too happy for the help.

At this stage of the game, they can count on such help from 5-0 just as a matter of course. After looking on in horror and disgust throughout the pAntiFa/BLM riots, when cops all over the country sat on their hands as Real Americans were whaled on by the DemonRat Party’s pet goon squads, then provided said thugs with safe corridors to slip off into the night unmolested by the supposed enforcers of “law and order,” Our Side needs to sober up and dispossess themselves of the comforting fiction that the police are in any way With Us. Perhaps they never really were, I dunno. But it’s all too clear that, if it ever was so, that is no longer the case.

Update! Via Wes Renegade: As with the fish, the rot begins at the head and progresses from there.

Everyone feels it, but not everyone sees it: America’s greatest threat is not from Russia or China or from any other foreign government. America’s greatest threat is from our own government in Washington, D.C. When will the American people get that through their heads?

The globalist devils inside the Beltway manufactured and implemented the Covid scamdemic: the greatest act of tyranny inside U.S. borders since Lincoln invaded the South.

The globalist devils inside the beltway have turned Europe and the world into a giant military encampment with U.S. and NATO bases on the doorsteps of almost every country on the planet, which only incites nations to retaliate.

And the globalist devils inside the beltway have turned U.S. energy policies over to an extremist Green agenda that if fully implemented will turn the greatest nation to ever exist into a third world country. In fact, America is already headed in that direction.

America now has undoubtedly one of the most amoral, inept, incompetent and criminal governments, not only in the world today but in world history!

And as far as the mainstream media goes, it is truly nothing more than a Ministry of Propaganda for the Deep State.

I would like to believe that things would get better if Republicans took control of Congress this November and the White House in 2024, but the harsh reality is Republicans have a masterful way of talking a lot while changing almost nothing.

Well, of course. As they see it, that’s their job, their proper role in the whole charade. Accept that once and for all, and everything else will suddenly make perfect sense.

4
2

Know your role, prole

They’re SO much better than you. If you don’t believe it, just ask ’em.

A good deal of political correctness or “woke” totalitarianism is about preventing dissenters from organizing. The hard Left understands the power of creating permanent political organizations with huge financial resources, symbiotic with the mega-State they champion.

You might have some (increasingly limited) ability to express contrary opinions on social media or among friends, but if you cannot organize to effect change by voting for representation and lobbying the administrative State, you have no power.

And in the case of open borders extremism, the elite Consensus supported by well-funded and powerful lobbying groups is a direct assault on the electorate, a nakedly obvious effort to engineer the electorate, making it even harder for anyone to organize against the ruling Party.

The first step was to erase good-faith disagreement with the Consensus by painting dissenters as unthinking racist brutes, and make it all but impossible for dissenters to organize. If dissenters won elections anyway, their votes were nullified by administrative fiat.

How can anyone fail to see this as authoritarianism? Because it uses idealized caricatures of migrants as political props? Is it really that easy to disable all of the safeguards that protect representative democracy and national identity, which are inextricably linked?

Well, once representative democracy itself had been well and truly subverted, yeah. After they’d accomplished that, it was all easy sledding from there.

Maybe that’s the first thing we were tricked into forgetting: no national identity and no borders means no nation, and no nation means no restraints on elite power, no sense of duty to their citizens interfering with the ambitions of politicians.

NOW you’re getting it, Doc. All just part of the plan.

The increase in elite political arrogance since the beginning of the open borders Consensus is palpable. Their lust for power and money grew exponentially, as did their disregard for large swathes of the electorate, who could be looted for funding but ignored as “deplorables.”

Don’t kid yourself for a moment that this attitude and approach only applies to the immigration issue alone; it applies to all issues, across the board, no exceptions.

Is there a single politician on the Left today, in any Western country, who would agree with the proposition that they have more responsibilities to legal citizens of their own countries than to migrants or international organizations? They would all sneer at that notion.

Years of this snowballing arrogance invariably affects the opposition, which is desperate for representation and organization. It’s Martha’s Vineyard times 100,000 every day in border states, but unlike blue-enclave elites, they’re not allowed to complain or take action.

There are more elite Consensuses coming our way – more issues where democracy must supposedly be suspended or subverted, where dissent is silenced and effective political organization is not allowed, where elections become puppet shows. Open borders was a successful test run.

Never surrender the legitimacy of dissent. Never allow the political class to rewrite the rules of debate, political organization, fund-raising, and bureaucracy to make effective opposition to their agenda illegal. Freedom is transitory without the bedrock of nationhood.

At the end of the day, we arrive at the same conclusion: those who were once rightly thought of as “public servants” have lost all fear of incurring the wrath of those they now deem to be their subjects. Until the appropriate fear is restored—yes, by any means necessary—freedom can never be anything more than a chimera, a pathetic self-deception, regardless of how many guns we keep locked securely away in the gun safe at home.

6

Easy fix

Sorry and all, but I’m afraid “failing harderer,” to shamelessly pilfer Robert’s most apt phrase, is NOT gonna cut it.

It is disheartening how many people are pinning their hopes on the next two elections. We still don’t know exactly how the last one was stolen—the thieves were never charged, evidence was never presented, there was no discovery, cross-examination, or verdict in a court of law—but stolen it was. Yet, many believe Lucy won’t pull the football away this time.

In 2020, no one showed up for Joe and Kamala’s appearances while Trump was pulling them in by the tens of thousands. Trump got more votes than any sitting president had ever received, but Biden supposedly beat him by 7 million votes. There were myriad inconsistencies and irregularities, many connected with procedures concocted to deal with the overhyped Covid threat. However, the election was pronounced free and fair, January 6 protestors were arrested and jailed, Trump relinquished the presidency, and that was that, a bipartisan-endorsed end of story.

Everything the Democrats have done since Biden halted the Keystone XL pipeline on inauguration day seems designed to lose votes, and the polls register fading support. Yet, the Democrats are acting as if they have this year’s elections in the bag, just as they did in 2020.

That’s because they do. And that’s because it ain’t gonna be anything resembling a legitimate election, if they have anything to say about it.

Politicians interested in winning legitimate elections don’t appropriate $80 billion three months before the election to hire 87,0000 new IRS agents, some of whom will be armed, to harass tax-paying voters. They don’t conduct a raid on the home of their hated opponent, handing him an issue which solidifies his support. They don’t engage in a Quixotic proxy war on the doorstep of a nuclear power. Their nominal leader doesn’t disparage half the population in a creepy, neo-Nazi setting and speech.

Of course not. Know who does? An emboldened, aggressively tyrannical criminal organization masquerading as a political party, that’s who. Next, Gore poses the biggest gimme-question of our era:

Is it because the vote doesn’t matter, only, per Joseph Stalin, who counts the votes?

Winnah winnah chicken dinnah! Confirmation of my jaded, cynical nature coming right up.

On that score not much has changed. The documentary 2000 Mules came and went; once in a while someone mumbles something about election integrity, and a few states have passed a few laws purportedly ensuring fairer votes (“restricting voter access” in Democratic parlance).

The “who” counting the votes will be, for the most part, the same officials who counted them the last time. Many states will continue to use programmable and internet-connected voting machines. Ranked choice voting is the newest scheme. The Biden administration has opened the southern border for millions of sure-thing Democratic voters. No one will be surprised if a manufactured emergency requires mail-in voting and the rest of the 2020 rigamarole. And no one should be surprised if the Democrats “miraculously” hold on to the House and Senate. Republicans, of course, will shout, “Just wait until 2024!”

That, of course, is because the overwhelming majority of them are willing, active participants in the Grand Scam. and the rest are dewy-eyed dupes. But the really crucial aspect here is the bit I boldfaced.

As I have repeatedly insisted, if We The People truly do want free and fair elections, there is actually an extremely simple, easy-peasey way to get there: do away with every single last voting machine and go back to paper ballots, counted by hand under the eagle-eyed scrutiny of men and women of unimpeachable honesty—election supervisors who care far more about restoring some semblance of integrity and trust to American elections than they do about jockeying for some kind of partisan advantage. Until such frabjous day arrives, alas, we’re stuck with this.

The professed faith in elections dismays. The notion that changing from blue to red will change anything substantive dismays still more. The delusion that government can solve problems created by government, the lack of understanding that it is the mortal enemy of the honest and the productive, dismays the most.

Neither party cares about fair elections because together they constitute the Corruptocracy. The U.S. government is the largest criminal enterprise in history and there’s enough booty to go around. Regardless of who is nominally in power, warfare and welfare-state rackets rake it in. Nothing says “Republican” quite like their failure to repeal Obamacare when they controlled the House, Senate, and presidency, although they voted seven times to do so when Obama was president (and they knew he’d veto the legislation). It’s all for show.

After a denunciation of Trump as an ineffectual egomaniac, some of which I actually agree with, Gore says this:

Violence has no place in the discovery and employment of nature’s laws. Pounding the earth with a club won’t free you from gravity. Discovering the principles governing flight might. Ritual human sacrifice to the rain gods won’t produce water for crops. Devising systems of irrigation and water storage might. Nature is a trove of secrets, but they’re only revealed through inquiry and experimentation, not violence.

Violence has no place in human interaction, except in self-defense. It is fundamentally immoral for one person to initiate violence against another.

Think so? What, then, are we to make of this?

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, —That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness…when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

Precisely so. In a more perfect world, perhaps, things might be different, but in this one, the only way to “throw off such Government” is by resorting to violence. It blows my mind that so many of us revere the Founders and honor their sacrifice and incredible effort in gaining their independence from the Mother Country, yet mulishly denounce the very idea that we, their Posterity, might even dream of availing ourselves of the selfsame methods by which this once-noble nation was created

Robert Gore is a highly distinguished writer and thinker, one of Our Side’s best and brightest, so of course he’s acutely aware of this blaring contradiction in our contemporary consciousness. That being so, he goes on to wrap the rest of his analysis around the words of the Declaration his own self, dubbing our modern self-styled masters the Deficient, which is probably more charitable than they deserve. He closes the essay out thusly:

The order that will emerge from the coming chaos is that of organized resistance, guerrilla war, and rebellion, not the Deficients’ reset. There is little chance that present governments and political subdivisions will be sustained. When the rebels are at the gate and the Deficient realize that they and the few praetorians who haven’t deserted them are outmatched, they’ll do what the Deficient have always done under such circumstances—scatter like cockroaches in a dirty kitchen when the lights go on. Another Deficient deficiency is courage.

This may seem unlikely, but it’s far more likely than the fantasy in which elections and wise politicians lead governments to dramatically reduce their size, shed their powers, and restore a semblance of freedom. When has that ever happened?

But what do we mean by the American Revolution? Do we mean the American War? The Revolution was effected before the War commenced. The Revolution was in the minds and hearts of the people.”

John Adams, 1818

The revolution has been effected. The Deficient, clinging to their copies of The Great Reset, their woke praetorians, and their F-15s, feel it as creeping, nameless fear. The rebels already know in their minds and hearts—it is their Right, it is their Duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future Security. They’ll miss an historic opportunity if they replace old despotism with new. It’s time to give freedom—the system most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness—its chance.

I repeat: ain’t but one way that happens. As the bumper sticker tells us:

Shoot!
It’s true, and you know it

(Via WRSA)

4

Recent Comments

Comments policy

Comments appear entirely at the whim of the guy who pays the bills for this site and may be deleted, ridiculed, maliciously edited for purposes of mockery, or otherwise pissed over as he in his capricious fancy sees fit. The CF comments section is pretty free-form and rough and tumble; tolerance level for rowdiness and misbehavior is fairly high here, but is NOT without limit. Management is under no obligation whatever to allow the comments section to be taken over and ruined by trolls, Leftists, and/or other oxygen thieves, and will take any measures deemed necessary to prevent such. Conduct yourself with the merest modicum of decorum, courtesy, and respect and you'll be fine. Pick pointless squabbles with other commenters, fling provocative personal insults, issue threats, or annoy the host (me) and...you won't. Should you find yourself sanctioned after running afoul of the CF comments policy as stated and feel you have been wronged, please download and complete the Butthurt Report form below in quadruplicate; retain one copy for your personal records and send the others to the email address posted in the right sidebar. Please refrain from whining, sniveling, and/or bursting into tears and waving your chubby fists around in frustrated rage, lest you suffer an aneurysm or stroke unnecessarily. Your completed form will be reviewed and your complaint addressed whenever management feels like getting around to it. Thank you.

Categories

Archives

"Mike Hendrix is, without a doubt, the greatest one-legged blogger in the world." ‐Henry Chinaski

Subscribe to CF!

Support options

Shameless begging

If you enjoy the site, please consider donating:

Allied territory

Alternatives to shitlib social media:

Fuck you

Kill one for mommy today! Click to embiggen

Notable Quotes

"America is at that awkward stage. It's too late to work within the system, but too early to shoot the bastards."
Claire Wolfe, 101 Things to Do 'Til the Revolution

Claire's Cabal—The Freedom Forums

FREEDOM!!!

"There are men in all ages who mean to govern well, but they mean to govern. They promise to be good masters, but they mean to be masters."
Daniel Webster

“A slave is one who waits for someone to come and free him.”
Ezra Pound

“The illusion of freedom will continue as long as it’s profitable to continue the illusion. At the point where the illusion becomes too expensive to maintain, they will just take down the scenery, they will pull back the curtains, they will move the tables and chairs out of the way and you will see the brick wall at the back of the theater.”
Frank Zappa

“The right of a nation to kill a tyrant in case of necessity can no more be doubted than to hang a robber, or kill a flea.”
John Adams

"A society of sheep must in time beget a government of wolves."
Bertrand de Jouvenel

"It is terrible to contemplate how few politicians are hanged."
GK Chesterton

"I predict that the Bush administration will be seen by freedom-wishing Americans a generation or two hence as the hinge on the cell door locking up our freedom. When my children are my age, they will not be free in any recognizably traditional American meaning of the word. I’d tell them to emigrate, but there’s nowhere left to go. I am left with nauseating near-conviction that I am a member of the last generation in the history of the world that is minimally truly free."
Donald Surber

"The only way to live free is to live unobserved."
Etienne de la Boiete

"History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid."
Dwight D. Eisenhower

"To put it simply, the Left is the stupid and the insane, led by the evil. You can’t persuade the stupid or the insane and you had damn well better fight the evil."
Skeptic

"There is no better way to stamp your power on people than through the dead hand of bureaucracy. You cannot reason with paperwork."
David Black, from Turn Left For Gibraltar

"If the laws of God and men, are therefore of no effect, when the magistracy is left at liberty to break them; and if the lusts of those who are too strong for the tribunals of justice, cannot be otherwise restrained than by sedition, tumults and war, those seditions, tumults and wars, are justified by the laws of God and man."
John Adams

"The limits of tyranny are prescribed by the endurance of those whom they oppress."
Frederick Douglass

"Give me the media and I will make of any nation a herd of swine."
Joseph Goebbels

“I hope we once again have reminded people that man is not free unless government is limited. There’s a clear cause and effect here that is as neat and predictable as a law of physics: As government expands, liberty contracts.”
Ronald Reagan

"Ain't no misunderstanding this war. They want to rule us and aim to do it. We aim not to allow it. All there is to it."
NC Reed, from Parno's Peril

"I just want a government that fits in the box it originally came in."
Bill Whittle

Best of the best

Image swiped from The Last Refuge

2016 Fabulous 50 Blog Awards

RSS feed

RSS - entries - Entries
RSS - entries - Comments

Contact


mike at this URL dot com

All e-mails assumed to be legitimate fodder for publication, scorn, ridicule, or other public mockery unless otherwise specified

Boycott the New York Times -- Read the Real News at Larwyn's Linx

Copyright © 2022