Posts Tagged ‘conservatism’

What do conservatives conserve, and who do their values help other than their egos?

Teaching Table Manners to Cannibals
Matt Parrott


“Traditionalist conservative Roger Scruton recently penned an excellent article, “Bring Back Stigma,” which vividly chronicles the decline of social stigma and the absurd and insufferable consequences of living in a shameless society. It’s a fine read, but it’s also paleoconservative in the worst possible way. He dabbles in heresy with his lamentation that “the only binding law is the law of the market.” In doing so, he deserves credit for performing the revolutionary act of identifying capitalism as a cardinal cause of our misfortune rather than the solution contemporary “conservatives” and libertarians imagine it to be.

Imagine how infuriating it would be, though, to go to a hospital where the doctors eloquently opine on every symptom of the disease, describing each blister and boil with elegance and flair. Imagine sitting there on the table in the gown for hours and hours as they describe the similarities between your own condition and the condition of former patients, validating your suffering and even providing insightful perspectives and prognoses. Mr. Scruton fully agrees that the current social order is derelict and diseased, but he’ll never diagnose it. He’ll never prescribe a treatment. All he can do and all he will ever do is lament that things are not as they ought to be.

The time has long past for a Burkean retreat to the past. There’s no norm left to conform to. The wise old men and little old ladies of today formulated their politics during the height of the Sexual Revolution. To be conservative is to embrace vintage liberalism. Taboos against identitarianism, hierarchy, and antisemitism are baked into all but the most ancient and marginalized Western traditions. It would be nice if we could merely ape all the symptoms of a healthy and cohesive community, but you can’t cure a disease by willing away or suppressing its effects. Diseases are cured by isolating the root causes and the mechanisms, then resolving those problems.

“In essence, his argument is that we must take risks and make sacrifices on behalf of a community which is virulently opposed to everything we stand for. His prescription is worse than useless, it’s harmful. It’s enabling a decadent and alienated anti-community. We set ourselves up as their prudish foils, expose ourselves to their contempt, and make their lives easier with our unreciprocated altruism. It’s like helping a whore put her skirt back on after each performance and fancying ourselves champions of modesty and virtue. It’s like trying to teach a cannibal table manners while he’s boiling you in his pot.”



Read Full Post »

I don’t really follow American White Nationalism, but this piece from CounterCurrents (a site where I’m a persona non grata BTW) documents how what were once mainstream conservative positions became marginalised into ‘political extremism’ and the cowardice and sentimental moralism of Conservatives is outright complicit. In fact the whole piece of Hood’s demonstrates this so perfectly that there seems little point in selecting paragraphs or sentences from it to highlight his points.

And I don’t know what to think about Rockwell, as he was obviously a genius in his understanding of America’s cowardly ‘conservatism’ and in the nature of the Jewish Question as arising from secularised rather than religious Jews (the last part is confirmed as true by reading Kevin MacDonald), but made stupid mistakes. His use of Nazi imagery as a kind of ‘crazy wisdom’ was an ingenious way to get attention, but the association of a hated and recently defeated enemy with authentic American patriotism, merely made him an easier target for the cowards than were subversives like the Black Panthers.

Hood castigates Rockwell for thinking that the majority of Americans were secretly supportive of his own positions. Now I’m not an American and nor was I there at the time (I’m 21), but surely more Americans then were supportive of opposition to integration than were supportive of it. Sure most people are politically apathetic until a social issue comes and hits ’em in the face, but still, there are more nonelite whites than there are white elitists, and Rockwell’s intuition about public opinion was therefore broadly correct. However I suspect Hood was referring to Conservative pundit opinion. And on this he’s right, the great distinction between then as now was between elite and nonelite whites not people’s professed political parties. Metropolitan conservatives feel closer to liberals than they do to the interests of working class whites who have lost out the most from multiculturalism – besides that, they’re safe in their own ivory towers.

And yet despite the fact his support was grassroots, and despite his support for programs such as medicare, Rockwell – who associated fascism with state monopoly of the economy – never pushed for a socialistic policy as did the National Socialists in Germany, who successfully poached support from the ‘Mosaic German’ Communists this way. Even though most Americans at that time and now are averse to the word socialism, intelligent people will realise this to be simple Cold War conditioning along the lines of Pavlov’s Dogs. Understandably, most Americans at the grassroots level will desire socialistic policies as were provided by the NSDAP in Germany and the Fascists in Italy. Were American racialists more vocally social-minded – “We’re more concerned than corporate puppet Obama!” – they’d have more support from disadvantaged whites. And had Rockwell had less of a hangup about economic collectivism himself, who knows what America might be like today?

Rockwell as Conservative
Gregory Hood

“While Rockwell (accurately) saw the white race as the necessary root of America’s achievements, conservatives identified the secondhand products of Constitutionalism or limited government as paramount. The idea that these values were doomed to destruction in a non-white America simply did not register. Though Rockwell recognized the stupidity and impotence of the conservative approach, he didn’t have an effective response other than calling them stupid or cowards.

Commander Rockwell missed two critical opportunities. First, though he recognized the need for racial and class unity, Rockwell never presented a concrete program that outlined an economic and governmental alternative to American conservatism or progressivism. His National Socialism was almost exclusively focused on race, and his campaign for Governor in 1965 did not offer anything besides a promise to defeat the Civil Rights Movement. Though the later NSWPP program made a nod towards an “honest economy,” George Lincoln Rockwell never gave white workers a reason to support him besides opposition to integration. Attacks on financiers, corporate fraud, and capitalist sponsorship of the Civil Rights Movement were largely missing from his propaganda, which made it easier to paint the party as a publicity student, rather than a serious ideological movement.”

Read Full Post »

Meta Lane Blog

facts are good

Regulus Seradly

4 out of 5 dentists recommend this WordPress.com site

Destroy Zionism!

Exposing the World Parasite

Counter-Revolutionary Traditionalism

This blog is run by a reclusive bachelor in his late 20's who spouts political incorrect rhetoric