Trump should've done what the pastor in your story did. Michael Anton, shortly after the fortified election, wrote a piece advising Trump to hold rallies in all the states where vote counting was halted with Trump holding commanding leads that would disappear in the wee hours of the morning. Instead, he went golfing. Then he led his supporters into the J6 trap. Then he meekly retreated from office.
At this point, it seems inconceivable that populism would ever get a foothold, or even be permitted to do so. Collapse of current institutions, precipitated by disaster (economic/military), followed by an immense struggle against the demonic left seems to be the only path forward. If America's institutions were to collapse and open civil war to break out, China would eagerly pounce at the opportunity, however.
The fact that Trump is *still* silent about the J6 prisoners is astounding. These people came out to support *you*, and you turned your back on them. So much for being a man of the people.
I agree that the only way we get out of this is through a dramatic collapse. It won't be pretty, but it beats slowly sliding into hell.
🗨 ESG is not going away on its own. Woke ideology is not going away on its own. These structures will have to be destroyed, but you can’t rebel against a structure you rely on for your daily survival. You would first have to completely separate from it.
Throughout the late 1990s and 2000s, 31 states passed popular referendums against same-sex marriage being imposed on them by activist judges. The majority had turnout above 50%, in California with Proposition 8 in 2008, it was 79%.
Yet all of these decisions were undemocratically overturned by the Supreme Court in numerous cases, with Obergefell vs Hodges the final nail in the coffin. You'd have expected such an open attack on democracy to enrage society, and create a backlash against gay marriage due to the authoritarian tactics of its advocates.
But did that happen? No. The opposite, conservatives capitulated and surrendered, and considered the issue 'settled'. These days, you will not hear any conservative openly advocate for the repeal of gay marriage.
With this pathetic surrender, they gave the gay's trans activist successors an unlimited amount of smug triumphalism, that however much the people may be against them at first, constant propaganda and judicial imposition would get people to capitulate on any LGBT demand eventually.
I hate any 'conservative' that accepts gay marriage. They rewarded liberal authoritarianism and made them look like weak sell-outs, just 'liberals at the speed limit'. Any conservative movement that is serious about crushing the LGBT leviathan cannot just stop it at its latest advance, but fight back for lost ground. To reclaim our hold on objective reality and biological fact, gay marriage must be repealed.
You wrote, "Democracy - including the “we’re a republic, not a democracy” type of democracy that nevertheless utilises popular voting and participation - is ultimately always going to be a failure."
This is exactly correct. The European blogger Kynosarges had a similar argument in 2019 where he castigated the short-sightedness of right wing populism, which he believes has six major deficiencies:
"1. Right-wing populists have no awareness of the depth of the [societal] problem and the necessity of a massive social transformation.
2. Right-wing populists consider metapolitics irrelevant. They view our plight as strictly a matter of state policy, therefore solvable by the legislative and executive branches (which is understandable given point 1).
3. Right-wing populists do not command parliamentary majorities or sole governments – neither in the past nor in the present, nor likely in the future. They are always in opposition or dependent on coalition partners who are not right-wing populists.
4. The institutional corset of late liberalism narrows the factual scope for political action to such a degree that profound changes are impossible.
5. Right-wing populists offer no grand designs for solutions because they lack a positive alternative framework beyond “liberalism without foreigners” (which is closely linked to points 1 and 2).
6. Right-wing populists are objectively too slow even where they bring about changes. A critical comparison between the development of right-wing populism and demographics during recent decades clearly shows that this approach is impossible solely due to lack of time (ignoring points 1–5)…"
Because of these issues, according to Kynosarges,
"[Right wing populists] have no concept of how to actively solve the problems of late modernity or liberalism. They offer no counter-culture that goes beyond reactionary ideas. They become almost apolitical when they merely retreat into their nation-state bunkers (typical for Poland or Slovakia). They lack a dynamic counter-ideal, and they are not at all equipped to propagate such an ideal to the furthest corners of the West (and beyond), as the chief enemy is (still) capable of doing.
The equation of our identity with the liberal state (e.g. the Federal Republic of Germany as the land of the Germans) inevitably leads to disappointments and at best to the realization that this state neither defends nor recognizes our identity, sometimes even destroys it. No Western constitution has a decidedly identitarian foundation, nor is there any trend in that direction. Anyway such a foundation would be incompatible with the self-concept of liberalism (universalism, egalitarianism, individualism) – the left is correct on that point! But right-wing populists believe that liberalism would only need a “right-wing” orientation to solve the problem, thanks to insufficient analysis….
Modernity can only be overcome with the experiences of modernity, not by an utterly impossible return to an earlier or pre-modern era. The profound change that is now necessary is not genuinely political but belongs to the cultural, metapolitical sphere. Such a counter-enlightenment or counter-culture requires – in contrast to the liberalist eclecticism of right-wing populists – a spiritual preparation for a new European myth that binds us to our oldest past and reconciles us with our future. Nothing less than such an attempt at European rebirth is our task and the most promising exit from political modernity."
You are going to have to think much bigger than left/right, conservative/liberal.
Like the sexes, there is an organic binary there, between the diverse social energies and the civil and cultural forms, so getting stuck on one side or the other just feeds the "divide and conquer."
Government, as executive and regulatory function, amounts to the nervous system of the state, while money and banking serve as blood and the circulation system. With public government and private banking, the banks rule, so the only real job the flunkies allowed in have, is running up the debt the banks need to function. The secret sauce of capitalism is public debt backing private wealth.
Capitalism is not synonymous with a market economy. If the medium enabling markets is privately held, we are all tenant farmers to the banks.
Money is a civil contract, between the individual and the community, not a commodity to mine from the community. As a medium, it is a public utility, like roads. We own it like we own the section of road we are on, or the air and water flowing through our bodies. Fat is how the body stores, as well as bone and muscle. What if your body tried storing blood? Basically that's how our system works, as the financial system has devolved into an enormous betting pool, asset stripping any real value from the community.
I could go on, but the reality check is going to have to land like a ton of bricks, before people start thinking bigger than what bathroom they piss in. All this shit is distraction. The real trick is figuring out what they are hiding.
I see populist military veterans as a particularly robust candidate pool. I think the regime sees the same thing, unfortunately. We really need to develop and promote better heuristics for separating the wheat from the chaff. The very personality traits that correspond to resistance to subversion/co-option provide targets for ridicule and cancellation by regime forces (and also correspond to other vulnerabilities). It is perpetually disappointing to see Trump lambasted for his failures by RW pundits lacking this discernment.
Populism needs a sounder intellectual basis. A movement needs staff officers and bureaucrats. For all the complaining about the Deep State, Trump was slow to fill his political appointments.
Also, Trump's rhetoric was great for those who think in terms of raw wisdom and experience, but fell flat when delivered to those who need a theory to believe something; i.e., the college educated.
Basic example, the Republican Party has been in favor of The Free Market for quite a few decades. The harm of tariffs is Econ 101, so even pre-woke liberals were against tariffs, save for a few in heavily unionized districts such as Dick Gephardt. So while Trump and Trump's followers can point to the rusting Rust Belt until they are blue in the face, those trained in theory will just assume that the rust is inevitable or something.
The theory needs to be disproven or at least shown to be inapplicable, as I have done here:
This message needs to be delivered to the Republican think tanks pronto.
Then we need to get to work on reviving the other essential part of populist theory: deficit spending is a subsidy for the already rich. The Populist Right knew this during the 1970s. If figures in heavily in "None Dare Call it Conspiracy", and balancing the budget -- even at the cost of higher taxes -- was a cornerstone of H. Ross Perot's campaign.
Trump should've done what the pastor in your story did. Michael Anton, shortly after the fortified election, wrote a piece advising Trump to hold rallies in all the states where vote counting was halted with Trump holding commanding leads that would disappear in the wee hours of the morning. Instead, he went golfing. Then he led his supporters into the J6 trap. Then he meekly retreated from office.
At this point, it seems inconceivable that populism would ever get a foothold, or even be permitted to do so. Collapse of current institutions, precipitated by disaster (economic/military), followed by an immense struggle against the demonic left seems to be the only path forward. If America's institutions were to collapse and open civil war to break out, China would eagerly pounce at the opportunity, however.
The fact that Trump is *still* silent about the J6 prisoners is astounding. These people came out to support *you*, and you turned your back on them. So much for being a man of the people.
I agree that the only way we get out of this is through a dramatic collapse. It won't be pretty, but it beats slowly sliding into hell.
We do not deserve Anton, but we clearly need him.
🗨 ESG is not going away on its own. Woke ideology is not going away on its own. These structures will have to be destroyed, but you can’t rebel against a structure you rely on for your daily survival. You would first have to completely separate from it.
alt-market.us/esg-dystopia-why-corporations-are-doubling-down-on-woke-even-as-they-lose-billions
Throughout the late 1990s and 2000s, 31 states passed popular referendums against same-sex marriage being imposed on them by activist judges. The majority had turnout above 50%, in California with Proposition 8 in 2008, it was 79%.
Yet all of these decisions were undemocratically overturned by the Supreme Court in numerous cases, with Obergefell vs Hodges the final nail in the coffin. You'd have expected such an open attack on democracy to enrage society, and create a backlash against gay marriage due to the authoritarian tactics of its advocates.
But did that happen? No. The opposite, conservatives capitulated and surrendered, and considered the issue 'settled'. These days, you will not hear any conservative openly advocate for the repeal of gay marriage.
With this pathetic surrender, they gave the gay's trans activist successors an unlimited amount of smug triumphalism, that however much the people may be against them at first, constant propaganda and judicial imposition would get people to capitulate on any LGBT demand eventually.
I hate any 'conservative' that accepts gay marriage. They rewarded liberal authoritarianism and made them look like weak sell-outs, just 'liberals at the speed limit'. Any conservative movement that is serious about crushing the LGBT leviathan cannot just stop it at its latest advance, but fight back for lost ground. To reclaim our hold on objective reality and biological fact, gay marriage must be repealed.
Well said.
You wrote, "Democracy - including the “we’re a republic, not a democracy” type of democracy that nevertheless utilises popular voting and participation - is ultimately always going to be a failure."
This is exactly correct. The European blogger Kynosarges had a similar argument in 2019 where he castigated the short-sightedness of right wing populism, which he believes has six major deficiencies:
"1. Right-wing populists have no awareness of the depth of the [societal] problem and the necessity of a massive social transformation.
2. Right-wing populists consider metapolitics irrelevant. They view our plight as strictly a matter of state policy, therefore solvable by the legislative and executive branches (which is understandable given point 1).
3. Right-wing populists do not command parliamentary majorities or sole governments – neither in the past nor in the present, nor likely in the future. They are always in opposition or dependent on coalition partners who are not right-wing populists.
4. The institutional corset of late liberalism narrows the factual scope for political action to such a degree that profound changes are impossible.
5. Right-wing populists offer no grand designs for solutions because they lack a positive alternative framework beyond “liberalism without foreigners” (which is closely linked to points 1 and 2).
6. Right-wing populists are objectively too slow even where they bring about changes. A critical comparison between the development of right-wing populism and demographics during recent decades clearly shows that this approach is impossible solely due to lack of time (ignoring points 1–5)…"
Because of these issues, according to Kynosarges,
"[Right wing populists] have no concept of how to actively solve the problems of late modernity or liberalism. They offer no counter-culture that goes beyond reactionary ideas. They become almost apolitical when they merely retreat into their nation-state bunkers (typical for Poland or Slovakia). They lack a dynamic counter-ideal, and they are not at all equipped to propagate such an ideal to the furthest corners of the West (and beyond), as the chief enemy is (still) capable of doing.
The equation of our identity with the liberal state (e.g. the Federal Republic of Germany as the land of the Germans) inevitably leads to disappointments and at best to the realization that this state neither defends nor recognizes our identity, sometimes even destroys it. No Western constitution has a decidedly identitarian foundation, nor is there any trend in that direction. Anyway such a foundation would be incompatible with the self-concept of liberalism (universalism, egalitarianism, individualism) – the left is correct on that point! But right-wing populists believe that liberalism would only need a “right-wing” orientation to solve the problem, thanks to insufficient analysis….
Modernity can only be overcome with the experiences of modernity, not by an utterly impossible return to an earlier or pre-modern era. The profound change that is now necessary is not genuinely political but belongs to the cultural, metapolitical sphere. Such a counter-enlightenment or counter-culture requires – in contrast to the liberalist eclecticism of right-wing populists – a spiritual preparation for a new European myth that binds us to our oldest past and reconciles us with our future. Nothing less than such an attempt at European rebirth is our task and the most promising exit from political modernity."
From: https://news.kynosarges.org/full-speed-into-the-void/
You are going to have to think much bigger than left/right, conservative/liberal.
Like the sexes, there is an organic binary there, between the diverse social energies and the civil and cultural forms, so getting stuck on one side or the other just feeds the "divide and conquer."
Government, as executive and regulatory function, amounts to the nervous system of the state, while money and banking serve as blood and the circulation system. With public government and private banking, the banks rule, so the only real job the flunkies allowed in have, is running up the debt the banks need to function. The secret sauce of capitalism is public debt backing private wealth.
Capitalism is not synonymous with a market economy. If the medium enabling markets is privately held, we are all tenant farmers to the banks.
Money is a civil contract, between the individual and the community, not a commodity to mine from the community. As a medium, it is a public utility, like roads. We own it like we own the section of road we are on, or the air and water flowing through our bodies. Fat is how the body stores, as well as bone and muscle. What if your body tried storing blood? Basically that's how our system works, as the financial system has devolved into an enormous betting pool, asset stripping any real value from the community.
I could go on, but the reality check is going to have to land like a ton of bricks, before people start thinking bigger than what bathroom they piss in. All this shit is distraction. The real trick is figuring out what they are hiding.
I see populist military veterans as a particularly robust candidate pool. I think the regime sees the same thing, unfortunately. We really need to develop and promote better heuristics for separating the wheat from the chaff. The very personality traits that correspond to resistance to subversion/co-option provide targets for ridicule and cancellation by regime forces (and also correspond to other vulnerabilities). It is perpetually disappointing to see Trump lambasted for his failures by RW pundits lacking this discernment.
💬 But the biggest problem is that democracy, popular government, egalitarian forms, are easily hackable.
↑↑ Smth smth about great minds and the shared core activity of said minds 😉 ↓↓
🗨 Minority tyranny is the big problem with democratic politics.
brownstone.org/articles/stakeholder-capitalism-is-an-oxymoron
Fascinating anecdote
Populism needs a sounder intellectual basis. A movement needs staff officers and bureaucrats. For all the complaining about the Deep State, Trump was slow to fill his political appointments.
Also, Trump's rhetoric was great for those who think in terms of raw wisdom and experience, but fell flat when delivered to those who need a theory to believe something; i.e., the college educated.
Basic example, the Republican Party has been in favor of The Free Market for quite a few decades. The harm of tariffs is Econ 101, so even pre-woke liberals were against tariffs, save for a few in heavily unionized districts such as Dick Gephardt. So while Trump and Trump's followers can point to the rusting Rust Belt until they are blue in the face, those trained in theory will just assume that the rust is inevitable or something.
The theory needs to be disproven or at least shown to be inapplicable, as I have done here:
https://rulesforreactionaries.substack.com/p/free-trade-isnt
This message needs to be delivered to the Republican think tanks pronto.
Then we need to get to work on reviving the other essential part of populist theory: deficit spending is a subsidy for the already rich. The Populist Right knew this during the 1970s. If figures in heavily in "None Dare Call it Conspiracy", and balancing the budget -- even at the cost of higher taxes -- was a cornerstone of H. Ross Perot's campaign.