Conservatism Is A Dead Ideology
Posted: Wed Mar 29, 2023 12:51 pm
Douglas Mercer
February 21 2021
"I told Buchanan privately that he would be better off without all the hangers-on, direct-mail artists, fund-raising whiz kids, marketing and PR czars, and the rest of the crew that today constitutes the backbone of all that remains of the famous "Conservative Movement" and who never fail to show up on the campaign doorstep to guzzle someone else's liquor and pocket other people's money. "These people are defunct," I told him. "You don't need them, and you're better off without them. Go to New Hampshire and call yourself a patriot, a nationalist, an America Firster, but don't even use the word 'conservative.' It doesn't mean anything any more."---Sam Francis (1994)
Conservatism is a dead ideology. Those still operating under its banners are its pallbearers.
When a movement calls itself "Conservative" it's easy to see if they are successful, if they meet the only test that will ever matter, the test of time. You just have to see what they conserved.
And so the much vaunted modern Conservative Movement, born with Barry Goldwater, taken across the (supposed) finish line by Ronald Reagan, picked up again by Newt Gingrich and his "contract" in 1994, and stewarded by George W Bush as this century opened, how did it do? What did they conserve?
Did they conserve free speech? the right to life? prayer in school? our borders? free association? White majorities? our communities? our educational standards? the jobs of our working class? safe cities? gun rights? respect for authority? the traditional roles of men and women? marriage? morality? Media free of filth? America? Our heroes? Our memorials and statues? Did they conserve any of this? Or is it all gone with the wind?
No, none of it. What they conserved was their speaking gigs, their consultant fees, their access to the media of the fake right, well paying sinecures at the think tanks where they can thunder about the American way of life.
They are fossils. Conservatism is dead ideology. And they are its well-bred pallbearers, squeezing the last bucks out of the rotten corpse. They are the last best hope of nothing.
The Claremont Institute styles itself as a bastion of "Americanism". They feint towards "America First" but are completely clueless as to how radical (and racial) that needs to be. They think they can retreat into what they deem to be a "hard core" civic nationalism, not knowing that that is a contradiction in terms. They are color blind content of their character conservatives who really think that one day unskilled illegals from the Global South and tech workers from India will one day stand up straight and begin reading Locke, and sporting Adam Smith ties. As if that is what we need anyway.
And they would sooner slit their own throats, or ours, than say the word "White."
That is they are fools of the first order.
And now after blacks and Jews and unspeakable Whites turned our country into an industrial scale incendiary device they come out with a jeremiad against "identity politics." What an all fired joke. When a country goes from 90 percent White heading toward 40 identity politics is all there is. Time for Whites to join in full force.
Our laws and governmental policies are riddled with identity politics. Affirmative Action and the slashing anti-White attacks of the Civil Rights division of the Justice Department make sure of that.
Which is why in truth these people are too stupid to live.
Apparently something called the "Claremont Institute for The American Way Of Life is opening its doors." The American Way Of Life is one of those phrases that is worse than vacuous, worse than meaningless, it is pernicious. Enoch Powell said that he supposed we all are recovering from the ideology prevalent when we were young. But they are not in recovery from the conservative ideology of the 1980s, they are celebrating it; for them Regan is always smiling genially and is riding into the sunset, someone is always patrolling the iron curtain, and the conservative three legged stool is so eternally solid that a man can always sit down on it and feel right at home. In this way they put down permanent stakes in what's already obsolete and take up residence in a graveyard.
And of course that three legged stool is in cold storage right next to Clint Eastwood's chair.
The Institute's opening salvo is an essay penned by some idiot named Arthur Milikh. The essay is entitled "A New Conservatism Must Emerge" which makes me think this essay, with a few alterations, could been written any time in the past thirty years. That is they've been and are again peddling the same nonsense they've been peddling for years---but this time they really mean it! The essay give some nods to America First (against immigration and globalism) but mainly every time you think he's about to make a point he says: American Way Of Life! Cherished Ideals! Founding Principles! Best I can see these are liberty, individualism, virtue, and rights. In short, pablum served up in particularly treacly form .
Milikh is himself one of those "bespectacled theorists" that famed visionary Adolf Hitler scorned. His biography reveals himself to be one of those think tank/conference nerds who studies the Founders and spouts off about Montesquieu and The Spirit Of The Laws from time to time. As for real founding principles foremost among them was keeping a nice, white country something which Milikh and his benighted kind are either ignorant of, in denial about, or too polite or cowardly to mention. Instead he'll be a bore about that liberty and virtue, high sounding words which don't mean a thing in the fact of a brown human tidal wave.
But his bad addiction to the outdated forms of the past and high toned irrelevancy hasn't stopped him from climbing the greasy pole of the intellectual right wing. He's been the associate director at the Heritage Foundation, a former associate director at something with the unpromising name of the Kenneth Simon Center For American Studies, an AWC Family Foundation Fellow, a Lincoln Fellow at the un (esteemed) Claremont itself, and he's been associated with The Federalist Society, the group that gave us Neil Gorsuch who found trans right retroactively tucked away in the 1964 Civil Rights Bill and Brett Kavanaugh who didn't go that far but who in a private message to the public said it was a great day for the gays. Thanks Federalist Society .
All in all an impeccable pedigree for surrender.
That is, he is ideally suited to make the conservative case for being a weenie.
He starts the piece off with a bang: "America is currently engaged in a regime-level struggle." Yes, indeed, the stakes are that high. A new regime, and a new people, are being born before our eyes. Will the old one only fade away? You would think after writing a sentence like that, a sentence acknowledging that that this is a struggle for existence, an existential struggle of friend/foe dimensions that he would drop the pretense and the banality of formulaic time worn phrases. But no. He proceeds with a whimper:
"On one side stands the American way of life, characterized by republican self-government and the habits of mind and character necessary to sustain it. On the other side stands identity politics, which demands the perpetual punishment and humiliation of so-called oppressor groups combined with the unquestioned rule of the so-called marginalized. These two regimes are in conflict and cannot coexist."
Frankly I wouldn't exalt the right in this picture to the dignity of a "regime". Rather it's a nebulous and gaseous nullity, as if when your enemies toss matches in the tinder box of your country and watch the flames grow and grow you responds with "limited government", "self-government", "habits of the heart", as if you approach a revolutionary monster with nothing in your bag but the good old verities. When in truth of course we're long past that. He also makes the fundamental mistake of objecting to what he calls "identity politics" but what Identity Politics really is is simply the races competing for powers and resources. This has been going on for time immemorial and will be going on for time out of mind. Only the unique status of postwar America with its mind boggling wealth could mask this basis reality, though the George Lincoln Rockwells and the William Luther Pierces of the world were not fooled by it. But these Claremonters in their rarefied and airy castles are heirs to the postwar "great consensus" which was basically a broad liberalism about an America triumphant and all differences would be drowned in the "high minded" creed of Americanism. These are the kind of people who will tell you with a straight face don't get in a fight with a pig because you'll both get mud all over you but the pig will love it. Well, when the dark skinned of the world are gathering their forces they're a pig that needs to be put down---so start reveling in the mud. That is, start being racially conscious.
"The regime of identity politics has already conquered nearly all of America’s major institutions and dominates the moral high ground. The universities and schools, Fortune 500 companies, much of the media and image-making industries, Big Tech, and the administrative state are put to use waging war on the American way of life."
Again, he's right on the money until the end: in fact they are waging war on White people . They say so every day, you could look it up. And remember our racial enemies too can stand up straight and spout off about "the American way of life", all the garbage about how all men are equal, we are nation of immigrants, that's the problem with fine phrases, they can mean anything you want them to mean, and a new people will in effect occupy those phrases even while they twist them around to suit their own purposes. Ideologies, languages, nationalities, citizenships, all of these can be changed in the bat of an eyelash, as they pour their rancid wine into the old wineskins. Only race lasts forever, from time immemorial to time out of mind.
At one point this deracinated weakling even castigates the right for not having the "manliness necessary to defend the borders." Ha! What it will really take to defend those borders, and defend this country, will require actions of such a draconian magnitude it will send the likes of him quailing. The military at the border with orders to shoot, rounding up thirty million and cranking up the buses, zeroing out immigration and watch capital howl, a root and branch dismantling of the Civil Rights revolution, and putting the White man back firmly in control of Washington DC. Safe to say that's not at all what he had in mind, his chest puffing about manliness notwithstanding. But absent that the machinery for the brown invasion will continue apace and his timid cries for Americanism will be met with a brown boot in the face.
And as you go on in the essay more treacle flows:
"In the struggle between these two regimes, institutional power and political momentum currently favor the Left. The Right, at present, is not up to the fight. A new Right is needed, one that understands itself as rooted in the noble cause of the American Revolution — unabashed and zealous in its determination to restore political liberty and politics itself."
Ah, politics itself. When you have nothing to say just say nothing.
"It must speak clearly and confidently about the effects of radical feminism, “antiracism,” and globalism. It must be prepared to protect its children, its property, and its standards from encroachments. And it must ground its efforts firmly in America’s central principle: equal protection under the law, without exception."
Of course no mention of race, which which is what it should be grounded in, the rest is just shifting sand in an eternal windstorm. And as for the Noble Cause of the American Revolution, there were always two sides to that. The native and instinctual feeling for Whiteness the founders had, and their Masonic and Enlightenment ideals. It was the latter which laid the seeds of dissolution. And it is not surprise that in the Protocols they say that it was the toppling of Kings and Queens and aristocracy in general which was always the first item on their agenda; that is, revolutions are always bad, and their cascading effects can never be stopped. This one just took a while to show its intractable faults.
So while Milikh has vague idea that something bad is happening, at times he labels it semi-correctly, he has no idea what it is at heart; let alone the depth and breadth of its malevolence. As one in denial like all conservatives he will retreat always into the fantasy of the past and present himself as the defender of the old order which is already gone. And that order can never be re-made, nor should it be. If the White man has a future, and he definitely does, it will be forged in new forms, it will be a new order, and a new consciousness, a new people.
And the thing about these conservatives, these pocketers of other people's money, these PR Whiz Kids, and institutional hangers-on, well, if you are too stupid to live in the end you won't.
Which is why conservatism is a dead ideology.
They are its pallbearers.
Let us be its grave diggers.
February 21 2021
"I told Buchanan privately that he would be better off without all the hangers-on, direct-mail artists, fund-raising whiz kids, marketing and PR czars, and the rest of the crew that today constitutes the backbone of all that remains of the famous "Conservative Movement" and who never fail to show up on the campaign doorstep to guzzle someone else's liquor and pocket other people's money. "These people are defunct," I told him. "You don't need them, and you're better off without them. Go to New Hampshire and call yourself a patriot, a nationalist, an America Firster, but don't even use the word 'conservative.' It doesn't mean anything any more."---Sam Francis (1994)
Conservatism is a dead ideology. Those still operating under its banners are its pallbearers.
When a movement calls itself "Conservative" it's easy to see if they are successful, if they meet the only test that will ever matter, the test of time. You just have to see what they conserved.
And so the much vaunted modern Conservative Movement, born with Barry Goldwater, taken across the (supposed) finish line by Ronald Reagan, picked up again by Newt Gingrich and his "contract" in 1994, and stewarded by George W Bush as this century opened, how did it do? What did they conserve?
Did they conserve free speech? the right to life? prayer in school? our borders? free association? White majorities? our communities? our educational standards? the jobs of our working class? safe cities? gun rights? respect for authority? the traditional roles of men and women? marriage? morality? Media free of filth? America? Our heroes? Our memorials and statues? Did they conserve any of this? Or is it all gone with the wind?
No, none of it. What they conserved was their speaking gigs, their consultant fees, their access to the media of the fake right, well paying sinecures at the think tanks where they can thunder about the American way of life.
They are fossils. Conservatism is dead ideology. And they are its well-bred pallbearers, squeezing the last bucks out of the rotten corpse. They are the last best hope of nothing.
The Claremont Institute styles itself as a bastion of "Americanism". They feint towards "America First" but are completely clueless as to how radical (and racial) that needs to be. They think they can retreat into what they deem to be a "hard core" civic nationalism, not knowing that that is a contradiction in terms. They are color blind content of their character conservatives who really think that one day unskilled illegals from the Global South and tech workers from India will one day stand up straight and begin reading Locke, and sporting Adam Smith ties. As if that is what we need anyway.
And they would sooner slit their own throats, or ours, than say the word "White."
That is they are fools of the first order.
And now after blacks and Jews and unspeakable Whites turned our country into an industrial scale incendiary device they come out with a jeremiad against "identity politics." What an all fired joke. When a country goes from 90 percent White heading toward 40 identity politics is all there is. Time for Whites to join in full force.
Our laws and governmental policies are riddled with identity politics. Affirmative Action and the slashing anti-White attacks of the Civil Rights division of the Justice Department make sure of that.
Which is why in truth these people are too stupid to live.
Apparently something called the "Claremont Institute for The American Way Of Life is opening its doors." The American Way Of Life is one of those phrases that is worse than vacuous, worse than meaningless, it is pernicious. Enoch Powell said that he supposed we all are recovering from the ideology prevalent when we were young. But they are not in recovery from the conservative ideology of the 1980s, they are celebrating it; for them Regan is always smiling genially and is riding into the sunset, someone is always patrolling the iron curtain, and the conservative three legged stool is so eternally solid that a man can always sit down on it and feel right at home. In this way they put down permanent stakes in what's already obsolete and take up residence in a graveyard.
And of course that three legged stool is in cold storage right next to Clint Eastwood's chair.
The Institute's opening salvo is an essay penned by some idiot named Arthur Milikh. The essay is entitled "A New Conservatism Must Emerge" which makes me think this essay, with a few alterations, could been written any time in the past thirty years. That is they've been and are again peddling the same nonsense they've been peddling for years---but this time they really mean it! The essay give some nods to America First (against immigration and globalism) but mainly every time you think he's about to make a point he says: American Way Of Life! Cherished Ideals! Founding Principles! Best I can see these are liberty, individualism, virtue, and rights. In short, pablum served up in particularly treacly form .
Milikh is himself one of those "bespectacled theorists" that famed visionary Adolf Hitler scorned. His biography reveals himself to be one of those think tank/conference nerds who studies the Founders and spouts off about Montesquieu and The Spirit Of The Laws from time to time. As for real founding principles foremost among them was keeping a nice, white country something which Milikh and his benighted kind are either ignorant of, in denial about, or too polite or cowardly to mention. Instead he'll be a bore about that liberty and virtue, high sounding words which don't mean a thing in the fact of a brown human tidal wave.
But his bad addiction to the outdated forms of the past and high toned irrelevancy hasn't stopped him from climbing the greasy pole of the intellectual right wing. He's been the associate director at the Heritage Foundation, a former associate director at something with the unpromising name of the Kenneth Simon Center For American Studies, an AWC Family Foundation Fellow, a Lincoln Fellow at the un (esteemed) Claremont itself, and he's been associated with The Federalist Society, the group that gave us Neil Gorsuch who found trans right retroactively tucked away in the 1964 Civil Rights Bill and Brett Kavanaugh who didn't go that far but who in a private message to the public said it was a great day for the gays. Thanks Federalist Society .
All in all an impeccable pedigree for surrender.
That is, he is ideally suited to make the conservative case for being a weenie.
He starts the piece off with a bang: "America is currently engaged in a regime-level struggle." Yes, indeed, the stakes are that high. A new regime, and a new people, are being born before our eyes. Will the old one only fade away? You would think after writing a sentence like that, a sentence acknowledging that that this is a struggle for existence, an existential struggle of friend/foe dimensions that he would drop the pretense and the banality of formulaic time worn phrases. But no. He proceeds with a whimper:
"On one side stands the American way of life, characterized by republican self-government and the habits of mind and character necessary to sustain it. On the other side stands identity politics, which demands the perpetual punishment and humiliation of so-called oppressor groups combined with the unquestioned rule of the so-called marginalized. These two regimes are in conflict and cannot coexist."
Frankly I wouldn't exalt the right in this picture to the dignity of a "regime". Rather it's a nebulous and gaseous nullity, as if when your enemies toss matches in the tinder box of your country and watch the flames grow and grow you responds with "limited government", "self-government", "habits of the heart", as if you approach a revolutionary monster with nothing in your bag but the good old verities. When in truth of course we're long past that. He also makes the fundamental mistake of objecting to what he calls "identity politics" but what Identity Politics really is is simply the races competing for powers and resources. This has been going on for time immemorial and will be going on for time out of mind. Only the unique status of postwar America with its mind boggling wealth could mask this basis reality, though the George Lincoln Rockwells and the William Luther Pierces of the world were not fooled by it. But these Claremonters in their rarefied and airy castles are heirs to the postwar "great consensus" which was basically a broad liberalism about an America triumphant and all differences would be drowned in the "high minded" creed of Americanism. These are the kind of people who will tell you with a straight face don't get in a fight with a pig because you'll both get mud all over you but the pig will love it. Well, when the dark skinned of the world are gathering their forces they're a pig that needs to be put down---so start reveling in the mud. That is, start being racially conscious.
"The regime of identity politics has already conquered nearly all of America’s major institutions and dominates the moral high ground. The universities and schools, Fortune 500 companies, much of the media and image-making industries, Big Tech, and the administrative state are put to use waging war on the American way of life."
Again, he's right on the money until the end: in fact they are waging war on White people . They say so every day, you could look it up. And remember our racial enemies too can stand up straight and spout off about "the American way of life", all the garbage about how all men are equal, we are nation of immigrants, that's the problem with fine phrases, they can mean anything you want them to mean, and a new people will in effect occupy those phrases even while they twist them around to suit their own purposes. Ideologies, languages, nationalities, citizenships, all of these can be changed in the bat of an eyelash, as they pour their rancid wine into the old wineskins. Only race lasts forever, from time immemorial to time out of mind.
At one point this deracinated weakling even castigates the right for not having the "manliness necessary to defend the borders." Ha! What it will really take to defend those borders, and defend this country, will require actions of such a draconian magnitude it will send the likes of him quailing. The military at the border with orders to shoot, rounding up thirty million and cranking up the buses, zeroing out immigration and watch capital howl, a root and branch dismantling of the Civil Rights revolution, and putting the White man back firmly in control of Washington DC. Safe to say that's not at all what he had in mind, his chest puffing about manliness notwithstanding. But absent that the machinery for the brown invasion will continue apace and his timid cries for Americanism will be met with a brown boot in the face.
And as you go on in the essay more treacle flows:
"In the struggle between these two regimes, institutional power and political momentum currently favor the Left. The Right, at present, is not up to the fight. A new Right is needed, one that understands itself as rooted in the noble cause of the American Revolution — unabashed and zealous in its determination to restore political liberty and politics itself."
Ah, politics itself. When you have nothing to say just say nothing.
"It must speak clearly and confidently about the effects of radical feminism, “antiracism,” and globalism. It must be prepared to protect its children, its property, and its standards from encroachments. And it must ground its efforts firmly in America’s central principle: equal protection under the law, without exception."
Of course no mention of race, which which is what it should be grounded in, the rest is just shifting sand in an eternal windstorm. And as for the Noble Cause of the American Revolution, there were always two sides to that. The native and instinctual feeling for Whiteness the founders had, and their Masonic and Enlightenment ideals. It was the latter which laid the seeds of dissolution. And it is not surprise that in the Protocols they say that it was the toppling of Kings and Queens and aristocracy in general which was always the first item on their agenda; that is, revolutions are always bad, and their cascading effects can never be stopped. This one just took a while to show its intractable faults.
So while Milikh has vague idea that something bad is happening, at times he labels it semi-correctly, he has no idea what it is at heart; let alone the depth and breadth of its malevolence. As one in denial like all conservatives he will retreat always into the fantasy of the past and present himself as the defender of the old order which is already gone. And that order can never be re-made, nor should it be. If the White man has a future, and he definitely does, it will be forged in new forms, it will be a new order, and a new consciousness, a new people.
And the thing about these conservatives, these pocketers of other people's money, these PR Whiz Kids, and institutional hangers-on, well, if you are too stupid to live in the end you won't.
Which is why conservatism is a dead ideology.
They are its pallbearers.
Let us be its grave diggers.
