I’m very far from the only right-wing figure to shake free of the mainstream gatekeepers of the right and reject both the title and the substance of the false political posture of being “conservative,” and for much the same reasons that Karl Denninger points out:
No, I am not a “conservative.”
Why not?
Well, what is it that “conservatives” are allegedly attempting to conserve? That is the seminal question of course, much as someone who claims to be “liberal” should be expected to answer — “What is it you are allegedly attempting to liberate?”
“Conservatives” are certainly not attempting to conserve, for example, the fundamental principle of The Rule of Law. Were they, being allegedly in power at the federal level today, every health care provider who is discriminatorily pricing (e.g. “negotiating” the amount a procedure is paid based on who the insurance firm is, a blatantly felonious act for more than 100 years under 15 USC Chapter 1) would be commercially destroyed and all their directors and officers would be under indictment and facing forfeiture of their entire corporate body of wealth along with all of the wealth each and every director and officer has amassed.
Nor does it stop with health care; under 8 USC Section 1324 every entity who has solicited, harbored or transported illegal immigrants into the United States and suborned perjury through false asylum claims would also be under indictment, subject to civil forfeiture (bye-bye Catholic Charities and dozens of others) and every single one of those people who made such a false claim and is here would be notified that they have 24 hours to get out or be prosecuted for perjury and permanently barred from the United States if, upon examination, their claim is in fact bogus.
Never mind the recent “article” discussing why car insurance is so expensive in many states — ignoring those here illegally driving with no license, insurance and often unable to speak English — and of course in some cases causing wrecks. The insurance companies love this of course because being limited on percentage of revenue by state insurance commissions they are for any set of actions that causes more wrecks or more expensive wrecks since that’s the only way for them to make more money. Since such people have neither money or insurance the only place they can get the funds to fix the car (and fix you) is from you, the law-abiding citizen.
How about Somali migrants? There’s enough fraud already uncovered for dozens or hundreds of indictments. Hell, even back in 2008 this was known when 80% of claimed family relations were proved false by DNA testing! Exactly how many of these people have been expelled? There is no right to be here if you gained entry through fraud, so why haven’t we thrown all of them out if we now have a so-called “conservative” Immigration and State Departments?
Conservatives didn’t conserve the ladies room; they didn’t even manage to conserve the distinction between a man and a woman. They’re certainly not going to conserve either the U.S. Constitution, the United States, or Great Britain. If conservatism is not rejected, they won’t conserve the European nations either. Or, most likely, humanity itself.
This is why I describe myself as a Christian Nationalist rather than a conservative. First Jesus Christ. Then family. Then the nation. But everything, literally everything, springs from the Living Word, including the Good, the Beautiful, and the True. If you don’t understand that, or refuse to accept that, you cannot possibly hope to understand very much about the world around you.
And anyone who urges you to adulterate any of those three things is speaking in obvious deceit and seeking to destroy all three, no matter what he calls himself and no matter how he justifies his falsehoods.
In answer to Mr. Denninger’s question, what liberals are seeking to liberate, whether they realize it or not, is literal Hell on Earth.
Ockham’s Razor suffices to explain why Donald Trump can run for a “third term” as U.S. President in 2028 as well as why the short, fat fake Trump is permitted to continue acting as the president:
In a bold and unapologetic interview with The Economist, Steve Bannon, War Room host and former chief strategist to President Donald Trump, confirmed that a concrete plan is underway to secure the president a third term in 2028.
Dismissing the 22nd Amendment, which limits the presidency to two terms, Bannon emphasized that Trump’s third term is inevitable and essential to “finish the job” of restoring America. “He’s going to get a third term. So Trump ’28. Trump is going to be president in ’28, and people just ought to get accommodated with that,” Bannon stated during the interview with The Economist’s editor-in-chief Zanny Minton Beddoes and deputy editor Ed Carr.
Bannon did not lay out the plan, but said it will be revealed at the appropriate time.
“There’s many different alternatives. At the appropriate time, we’ll lay out what the plan is. But there’s a plan, and President Trump will be the president in ’28,” Bannon said.
Beddoes responded, “I’m trying to understand the coherence of the things you’ve just told me in the last few minutes. On the one hand, you’ve said the Constitution is fit for purpose. Secondly, you said that President Trump needs another term, even though the 22nd Amendment makes pretty clear that he cannot have another term.”
“Why does it make that clear?” Bannon asked.
“Because he’s in his second term already,” Beddoes said.
First of all, there is no reason for President Trump to “respect the Constitution” considering the myriad of ways that the US federal government fails to respect it in any way, shape, or form and everyone in the world of politics knows that.
Second, the most obvious and logical explanation for Trump being able to serve another term is that despite his three electoral victories, he hasn’t served a second term yet. Which might explain why the white hats are content to let the short fat Trump pretend to be the President until the end of 2026, given the specific wording of the relevant Amendment.
No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once.
Trump can probably prove that he has been elected to the office of the President more than twice already, but on both occasions he was prevented from acting as President “for more than two years of a term” to which he was elected. If he can establish those facts before the Supreme Court, there would be no legal justification to prevent him from a) serving out the last two years of the current term and b) being elected to what would actually be his second term and fourth electoral victory.
Friedrich Nietzsche was a lunatic and his philosophy was little more than pompous Gamma self-inflatery. But one of his observations was not merely cogent, it explains Clown World’s tendency to enervate its allies and
That which does not kill me makes me stronger.
Japanese literature is full of the talented samurai who leaves his liege lord, either voluntarily or dismissed under a cloud of social disapproval, disappears into the mountains or the small villages of the western provinces, and spends several years teaching poetry or performing menial labor in order to survive as a masterless ronin. Eventually, he is summoned back into martial society by someone, where his talents, strengthened and hardened by his years of solitude, allow him to win success on the battlefield and in the courts.
In like manner, those of us who were banished by mainstream publishing houses have prospered considerably more in the era of ebooks and artificial intelligence than the hothouse flowers who are wholly dependent upon the publishing infrastructure to sell their books for them.
And the world of German politics is proving no different, as the repeated attempts of all the mainstream parties to shun, slander, and even legally outlaw Alternative für Deutschland have only resulted in AfD becoming the obvious future of Germany.
The last ten years of German politics have been one unending nightmarish festival of failure and stupidity. All the establishment parties have taken turns implicating themselves in this amazing shitshow, while religiously sparing the AfD any association with their unprecedented failures. The firewall lends truth to the AfD’s name; it has allowed Alternative für Deutschland to become the only conceivable political alternative in Germany. As things get worse and voters grow more desperate for alternatives, the AfD just becomes stronger. The firewall is an AfD-maximising machine.
The firewall is only really bad for the people who invented it and who alone have the power to end it. I speak here of the centre-right Union parties, the CDU and the CSU. They maintain the firewall not because it helps them or because it is a good idea or even because the AfD are evil fascists, but because the firewall has been endified.
In 2018, when the CDU first set up the firewall, it had a coherent purpose. It was supposed to be a means of keeping the AfD small by dissuading CDU supporters from defecting to their upstart rival. CDU leadership had seen how the rising Green Party ate into the support of the SPD after reunification, and they thought they could prevent the same thing from happening to them. They would have been better off doing nothing at all, because after seven years of firewall the AfD are stronger than the Greens ever were. The whole thing has become a lesson in why you should avoid heavy-handed interventions in complex systems.
Sure, it hurts and it’s scary to find yourself banished from the castle and forced to scrounge, scratch, and claw for survival. But the self-discipline that comes from the experience is absolutely invaluable in the long term.
The most noticeable feature of politics in the West in recent years has been the swift and irreversible demise of traditional conservative parties. The disappearance of these parties has been dramatically illustrated by the grim fates that now await the UK Conservative Party and the Liberal/National Party coalition in Australia.
The Conservative Party governed the UK from 2010 until last year. The Coalition government held office in Australia from 1996 to 2007, and from 2013 until 2022. Both of these parties were soundly defeated at the polls by ideologically unified social democratic parties that were led by uninspiring and pedestrian politicians – namely Keir Starmer and Anthony Albanese.
This suggests that voters rejected the conservatives, rather than warmly embracing their social democratic opponents. UK Labour’s rapid fall from grace since last year’s election victory and the party’s current unpopularity confirms the correctness of this view.
More troubling for conservatives in the UK and Australia is the fact that both of these once dominant parties – so shortly after losing office – now find themselves in such acute states of internal disarray and that they have no realistic prospect of regaining office in the foreseeable future. In fact, it is clear that neither party has a viable long-term future at all…
These conservative parties – although in power for most of the past two decades – have resolutely refused to implement the kind of radical economic and social reforms necessary to remedy the serious economic inequalities and social problems that continue to bedevil all Western liberal democracies. In fact, despite their professed commitment to traditional values, conservative parties have – just like their social democratic counterparts – enthusiastically embraced and implemented the economic, cultural, and foreign policies of the new and now dominant global elites.
However, the death of the conservative parties is just the harbinger for the main event, which is the death of Western liberal democracy itself. The only question is if the global elites will somehow manage to hold on to power once their vehicle fails, or, as is much more likely, the new model nationalists will replace them in the West as they have already done in Russia, China, and elsewhere.
It’s telling that none of the self-styled champions of democracy ever advocate genuine direct democracy despite technology that obviously permits it, but instead, always exert their utmost efforts to prevent any and every aspect of direct democracy with the excuse of stopping “populism”.
The modern sacralization of democracy is one of the intellectual abominations of Clown World. And the reasons why the great writers of the past disdained democracy and had such low expectations for it have been more than demonstrated by the rise and fall of the Western democracies. Such as, for example, Zeno of Elea:
The genius of a nation strikes but once in its history. It is its glory and its immortality in the annals of men. It is aristocratic, discriminating, radiant and selective, and abjures all that is mediocre, plebeian and mundane. It is regnant. It is spiritual. It is the flame emanating from the core of the Universe, which is the generation of life. It is the lightning which sets fire to the small spirits of men, and raises them above the field and the plow, the house and the hayfield, in a sudden revelation of grandeur. It is, above all, masculine, for the aristocracy of the soul is purely masculine and never feminine, which is concerned only with petty matters and insistent trivialities. It transcends the humbleness of daily living and stands even the least important of men upon Olympus for a brief hour. It is never democratic, for democracy is a destructive thing, conspired in the inferior minds of envious men.
If that nation which would survive in glory would cultivate only the masculine principle its name in history will be written in gold and blaze through the centuries.
Even real democracy is destructive, so imagine how much worse is the USA’s pseudo-democratic model of “representative democracy” where a fraction of the people participate in rigged elections that pretend to let them choose between one AIPAC-funded candidate and another AIPAC-funded candidate who will then represent the interests of a foreign people and other foreign invaders at the expense of the nation.
It’s no surprise that the so-called “authoritarian” models of Russia, China, and even Iran are proving objectively superior over time as the pseudo-democratic model has not only become sclerotic, but rapidly approaches complete collapse everywhere from France and Germany to the UK and the USA.
Andrew Torba has really been on fire lately. And he says it much better than I ever have:
Let us be clear so there is no confusion and no room for misinterpretation: we are not conservatives.
That word has become a mark of surrender, a synonym for the managed decline of a nation we refuse to abandon. Our allegiance is not to a decaying set of liberal principles, to a faltering democracy that serves global interests, to “lower taxes” or to a “rules-based international order” that has bled our people dry. We will not conserve the hollowed-out institutions of a dying empire.
Our allegiance is sworn to something real, something eternal: to our God, our people, and our homeland. It is the soil beneath our feet, the blood in our veins, and the spirit that calls us to greatness.
We have no interest in conserving a political system mired in bipartisan decay, where two heads of the same beast promise change and deliver only ruin. We will not perpetuate a cycle of foreign wars and endless aid to distant nations while our own communities crumble into dust and despair. We refuse to uphold an economic order that leaves our own citizens struggling, indentured to a global market that despises our traditions, our faith, and our very existence.
Our mission is to build something new. Not a fragile imitation of the past, but an order of strength, clarity, and purpose, dedicated first, last, and always to the national interest. We don’t want to turn back the clock. We want to forge a future worthy of our nation’s legacy.
For over a century now the liberal and conservative establishment have captained this ship. They inherited a vessel of unmatched power and prestige, and with a toxic blend of incompetence, arrogance, and malice, they steered it directly into an iceberg of globalism, demographic decline, and cultural erosion. The steel of the ship groans, the ice grinds against the hull, and still, they toast their success in the captain’s lounge, blind to the icy water rising around their ankles.
We are done begging for a seat at their table.
Those who stand for the Good, the Beautiful, and the True are not conservatives. We cannot be conservatives, because conservatives defend nothing, conservatives conserve nothing, and conservatives stand for nothing.
Conservatives are the rear guard of the godless, globalist, satanic Left. The only function that conservatives serve is their gatekeeping function, and attempting to plant themselves at the head of the parade in order to subvert it and redirect it to harmless directions.
As has been observed many times before, a conservative is simply a liberal of 20 years ago and a progressive radical of 40 years ago. Whereas the things the true Right stands for are either material – blood, land, family, and gold – or timeless – God, Jesus Christ, nation, and truth.
We are not conservatives. We have never been conservatives. And we will never be conservatives.
UPDATE: An apt summary of conservatism on SG:
Posture
Compromise
Surrender
Retreat
Whine
Repeat
UPDATE: A cogent observation about how conservatives are not even our allies, as they are all too happy to join forces with the likes of Stalin and the literal grandchildren of the Trotskyites now known as the neocons.
The same conservatives saying things like “I’ll never ally with THOSE people on the Right” will also claim it was a moral imperative for America to ally with literally Joseph Stalin himself in World War II. They’re not above the Friend/Enemy distinction. They just have different enemies than you do.
Someone who calls himself something like Faggotus Maximus took offense at my contemptuous dismissal of a deceased political whore and purported to attempt what he erroneously calls a “fisking”:
Dear Vox, Once upon a time you were important, very important. You were the first to provide real resistance to the Social Justice Warriors with Gamer Gate. Being first is important. Very important. Your books on Social Justice Warriors have stood the test of time.
You are among the first to achieve real traction getting important ideas into the minds of right wing intellectuals and activists: that conservatism is not enough, that Social Justice Warriors are a cancer that must be eradicated, that free trade isn’t working according to accepted theory, that conservatives need to play hardball and not play strictly by the rules when the the other side is cheating gratuitously.
As in a multi level marketing scheme, you deserve partial credit for those who have run with your ideas — maybe even a few orts of Charlie Kirk’s work when he has strayed into Christian Nationalist territory.
And you have deserved a well deserved rest from activism. You can retreat across the Atlantic to relative safety to focus on your family and on fun hobby projects with my complete blessing, with a bit of pontificating to the next wave of activists when you feel like it.
But that is not all your are doing. You have been repeatedly dismissing those who are are still fighting the good fight. And your repeated claim that those who have done greater things than you are disposable ticket takers is gammafied envy whining on the order of a twink Marxist sociology professor. It is more cringeworthy than your Mary Sue self insert at the end of Alt Hero.
There is more, of course there is more, but it’s always projection with these nobodies and neverweres. First, he clearly doesn’t even know what a “fisking” is, since he doesn’t go methodically through whatever I actually wrote that set him off. This is a false assertion of a faux-fisking. Second, he’s the only one who took any offense. I’m certainly not offended by anything he wrote, neither are any of my readers, fans, supporters, and casual followers. On the level of rhetorical heat to which we have become accustomed since 2001, this barely rises to the 2/10 level.
These are his words, not mine:
“Offense has been taken. Great offense. For some strange reason I find the disparagements of a Benedict Arnold to be more offensive than the gloatings of an open enemy. Offense shall be served.”
There will likely be some who ask why I respond to an irrelevance. The reason is that I never use an critic’s irrelevance as an excuse to avoid addressing him. I have debated PhDs and authors of the textbook on the subject concerned and I have debated complete nobodies. Unlike Ben Shapiro, Jordan Peterson, and Nick Fuentes, I do not generate excuses to run from either criticism or debate.
Let’s set another thing straight. I am not a “self described dark lord”. The title of “Supreme Dark Lord” was granted to me by SF grandmaster John C. Wright himself after the editor-in-chief of Tor Books described me as rising “all the way to downright evil” and after my VFM and Dread Ilk forced the tech giants to completely revise their legally questionable terms of service. To this day, I am banned from YouTube and officially barred from setting foot in Google’s Mountain View headquarters. And I am reliably informed by my eyes and ears there that my name can only be spoken in hushed whispers at the headquarters of the Daily Wire.
Now, the truth of my disparagements notwithstanding, I can’t be a Benedict Arnold because I’m simply not on the same side as Charlie Kirk or FM or Brilyn Hollyhand or Nick Fuentes or Ben Shapiro or any other conservative creature who a) is funded by foreign political interests, or b) believes “Judeo-Christianity” is real or c) subscribes to the idea that Western Civilization was ever dependent upon Judaism in any way, or d) asserts that America is an “idea nation” or a “melting pot,” or e) believes in Enlightenment ideals such as “free trade” or “free speech” or “progress” or “equality,” or f) supports the societal normalization of sexual deviancy, no-fault divorce, abortion, and euthanasia.
All of these things are antithetical to civilization in general and Western Civilization in particular. I actively oppose and reject every single conservative who espouses any of those ideas. There is no us.
I am not, and I have never, ever been, a conservative. I explained why in CUCKSERVATIVE; it is merely a posture, it is neither a philosophy nor an ideology. I have never belonged to the Republican Party, or indeed, to any political party or faction. I do not care if the Republican Party, the Democratic Party, or the Democrat-Farmer-Labor Party are currently in power; I publicly dismissed all of them as the bi-factional ruling party back in 2004 and pointed out that the historical USA no longer even existed except in name and geography.
All of which is to say that I cannot retire from activism since I have never been an activist. I am neither a political activist nor a political extremist. I am an intellectual, which is something that is increasingly rare in an age of frauds, political whores, paid propagandists, and charlatans. I do not advocate, I observe and I assess. I do not think in binary terms, but from a probabilistic perspective. I certainly do not expect any political elites to pay attention to, endorse, or accept my observations, much less any of my recommendations, however correct they might be.
As a student of Aristotle, Martin van Creveld, Karl Marx, Friedrich von Hayek, Robert Prechter, Steve Keen, and Peter Turchin, among many others, I don’t view politics as being anything more than a superficial layer of distraction that obscures the real tectonics of human society, which are ultimately material and spiritual in nature. Modern politics across the West is a collection of delusional children playing make-a-wish; one has only to witness the incessant European conferences on how the member-states of the European Union, led by the European Commission, are going to institute regime change in Russia to grasp the fundamentally irrelevant nature of politics today.
This is not to say politics has no influence on society at all. But that influence is limited, indirect, controlled, and inevitably bows before material force and spiritual power. Moreover, there is virtually no link between the will of the people as theoretically represented by their democratically-elected “representatives” and what the people of the nation actually want. Very few, if any, of the institutions and policies of the current US federal government were ever desired by the American people, and yet they were forced upon them anyhow. The same is true of most European nations.
I very much doubt that most of my readers, much less any of my critics, can fathom how low my expectations are. We swim in a sea of willfully delusional retardery and none of the things that obsess most political activists matter in the least; forget who will win the electoral race in the 4th California congressional district or whatever as most people across the West will consider themselves fortunate if they preserve electricity, clean water, and indoor plumbing in their neighborhoods and avoid being roasted over open fires. All polities collapse in time, and the USA is observably approaching the end of its viability as a unitary governing entity. I’m not the first to see this; Wang Hunin observed the same thing years before I predicted a collapse in the 2033 timeframe in 2004.
Politics is not going to fix this.
The irony is that my opinion of FM is not entirely dissimilar to his opinion of me. He thinks I am wasting my time developing new concepts, disproving various historical falsehoods, and publishing a range of books that will last for centuries. I think he is wasting his time trying to build a political coalition on behalf of people under the financial control of global satanists in order to preserve a decrepit polity that cannot survive intact. His interest is in the success of the Republican Party. My interest is in the Good, the Beautiful, and the True.
Only time can conclusively determine who is correct, but regardless, I can’t pretend to care about something that never mattered to me in the first place. And as for those matters that gave offense, I can summarize my views in a succinct manner:
Disagree if you like. Take offense if you wish. The facts are what they are. The Truth is what it is. And nothing you, me, FM, or anyone else says is going to change that.
Veritas incontestabilis stat
UPDATE: Dennis Prager’s fate is more than a little ironic in light of the Black Rider analogy often used for the ticket-takers who have ceased to be useful to their masters. Of course, the fact that I was unaware of this only underlines how little attention I pay to these manufactured entities. Only a short-sighted fool could ever envy what passes for their so-called “success”.
It matters because he has building a cult of personality, teaching insane shit, and injecting mental poison into the Right. His disgusting Charlie Kirk post was but a trigger to write this fisk. He needs to either mend his ways or have his reputation destroyed. Benedict Arnold was once the Continental Army’s most effective general. He’s not remembered as a hero today for some reason. And yes he did hate Charlie. He hates everyone who is more successful than he is, that envious little $#*(@). He denegrates everyone who makes an impact as a “ticket taker.”Vox is not just a mere Black Piller. He is pushing Black Pills, a cult mindset, and assorted insanity using cred built from past real accomplishments.
Again, pure projection. I neither envied nor wanted the “success” that a corpse, a paraplegic, and a suicidal nutjob previously enjoyed. I wouldn’t trade places with Ben Shapiro, Nick Fuentes, or any other well-funded current gatekeeper if I were offered 10x their revenue and the daily services of the entire Dallas Cowboys Cheerleaders squad. Nor would I trade places with successful non-gatekeepers like George RR Martin, Brandon Sanderson, Larry Correia, and John Scalzi. I also don’t hate any of them, but low-status men like FM often confuse contempt and disdain for hate and envy.
The amusing thing is that what FM calls “insane shit” today, a few years from now he will likely pretend to have believed all along. I still remember when most of the readers here thought I was crazy for refusing to celebrate Jordan Peterson as the great intellectual hero of the Right, and when evolutionists thought I was crazy for asking about the average rate of evolution by natural selection. It wasn’t even that long ago when people thought I was crazy for pointing out that the USA could not win a war with either Russia or China, much less a Sino-Russian alliance. I don’t always correctly anticipate the future, but I do have a better track record than most.
Anyhow, the fact that FM believes me to be a Black Piller should suffice to demonstrate that he has no idea what he’s talking about.
When Clown World and its manufactured talking heads are dismissed as fake and gay, this is not merely metaphorical rhetoric. In far too many cases, it is the literal truth.
Conservative Host Leaves Longtime Wife to Marry Gay Lover
Robby Soave, a well-known political commentator and co-host of The Hill’s Rising, has become the latest subject of D.C. chatter after revealing his engagement—to a younger gay partner—shortly after parting ways with his wife of nearly a decade. The 36-year-old, who also appears regularly on Fox News and serves as a senior editor at Reason magazine, proposed earlier this month to Jie Jung Shih, a medical student at Georgetown University.
I’m sure you’re all absolutely shocked by this totally unexpected turn of events. And Soave is hardly the only one. More than a few credible allegations have been made about “conservative” opinion leaders whose names you would definitely recognize. They’re all constructed of pure astroturf.
Trust only the great books and the ideas that have stood the test of time. Trust only that which is Good, Beautiful, and True. Stop paying attention to people simply because they are capable of mouthing one or two phrases with which you happen to agree. Any actor is capable of doing the same. As a general rule, if someone appears on television or is permitted on YouTube, they are almost certainly fake, probably gay, and definitely irrelevant. And while there are, of course, exceptions to the rule, that doesn’t change the fact that the rule is far more reliable than your easily-manipulated emotions.
Witness the total ineptitude of GOP Inc.’s Charlie Kirk replacement in trying to address the most basic aspects of the problem of legal immigration. He even tried to appeal to Israel Zangwill’s concept of “the melting pot” coined 290 years after the arrival of the Mayflower, as America’s founding doctrine.
And consider how Bari Weiss, the new editor-in-chief of CBS News, could only draw 150 viewers to a recent stream after selling her very valuable blog to Paramount for $150 million. All success in Clown World, be it financial or just fame, is not only fake, but formulaic.
The Nationalist Right in Spain was divided into two camps. One of them read the Republican Left correctly. One of them didn’t:
There were two schools of thought on the Spanish Right in the lead-up to the civil war: Accidentalism and Catastrophism. Accidentalists believed that the serious issues facing the Spanish Republic were not baked into the institution itself, but rather an accident that could be attributed to the early Marxist bent of the first government. The Republic had gotten off on the wrong foot, but Conservatives could and would steer the ship in the right direction once they peacefully won political power through the electoral process and formed a government capable of addressing the Right’s concerns regarding government attacks on the Church and private property. They were strictly committed to following the rule of law and operating within the constitutional framework.
The second group believed the Republic was a catastrophe from the start, and that there could be no saving the Republic from itself. They asserted that the Left would never recognize any non-Leftist government, no matter how much they claimed to uphold the rule of law, because the problem was not with the Republic’s legalistic procedures but rather with the fact that the entire system was merely a facade to facilitate a Socialist and eventually Communist state that would permanently exclude Conservatives from power.
These two camps were largely united in their politics but divided in how to engage in politics. One pursued reform, while the other waited for an opportunity to overthrow the system itself once enough of the Right realized that there would be no voting their way out of this mess.
Most American Republicans are still Accidentalists. And like their Spanish forebears, they are both a) wrong and b) irrelevant. If even an American rump state is to survive the eventual breakup of the USA, it will be the Catastrophists who will be running the show.
Fortunately for Americans, Trump is increasingly showing signs of having embraced Catastrophism.
The anti-American clowns are attempting to play the victim game. But the victim game only works when people actually care about not being identified as the bad guys:
this whole shabby psyop masquerading as a morality play has been being set up for years. the same people who flooded the country with illegal intruders to shift the census, electoral college, congressional seat counts, and to taint voter rolls (often using tax dollars to do it) always knew that the day might come when people got fed up and sought to reverse this.
they also know how incredibly difficult this would be, the draconian actions it would require, and how bad this could be made to look.
they were already prebunking this issue before the election. “if the bad guys win, they will round you up and put you in boxcars! it will be fascism! genocide! they will not follow the law!”
lost in this and absent from the barrage of talking points is the lawlessness, manipulation, and outright aggression ingrained in flooding communities with these groups and then leaving them protected by law and process but unbound by restrictions or standards. the manner in which they were brought in was wildly illegal, and now the selfsame perps demand law be applied.
the whole point is to be so provocative and violent that only violence can serve to resist or constrain it, then they call you violent.
It’s just names. It’s just words. And word magic doesn’t work if you refuse to believe in it. I’ve been called every name in the book. According to my enemies, I “rise all the way to outright evil” and I absolutely accept and embrace my place in their nightmares. My strongest supporters weren’t even named by me, the Vile Faceless Minions were given their title by one of the many bloggers who refused to name me while criticizing me for fear of my “vile, faceless minions” descending upon his blog to tear apart his insipid arguments.
The amusing thing is that once you embrace their attempted insults, once you wear their nightmares as your armor, they immediately reverse course and start trying to claim that you aren’t really what they called you. Because their words are meaningless, their words are quite literally senseless.
So do what you do and accept whatever ridiculous label they want to apply to you as you go about your business without hesitation or regard for anything they do or say.
