Thanks for saying this, Ron. You're right over the target. There is a great amount of political opportunity before us, but the Right risks squandering it if we turn to a political vision based primary on emotional catharsis instead of prudence.
This discussion of "burning it all down" by Ron Dodson is spot on. Back in the 1990s, I imagined a federal constitutional convention done by our generation. My prediction was that we'd be shooting each other in the streets soon after.
A question to ponder: Now, 30 years later, would we be better or worse off in a reset situation?
In many ways this is what happened in the USSR. After the period of the initial oligarhic dismantling of the empire a new order appeared, one where Vladimir Putin is the head of the state and a regulator of the Mafia. Eastern European countries and Russia have this concept in common where we see the state and the Mafia as cooperation via security/ spying agencies. Anyway, the implosion of the empire was everything this article is warning us about. Unfortunately this dismantling of the US empire is happening also but in a more dressed up way. The banksters cabal and the security apparatchiks are rulling the empire giving each other "legal" cover for the theft. From NGOs to too big to fail and forever zio neocons wars it's the same thing... "democracy" is the veil used to masks and appeal to the hipnotizat masses. Insider trading politicians are now common as common as aipac purchasing/control of the political system. This is essentially a spiritual struggle. The West has declared a war on beauty, morality, reality, a deep antichristian stance and has embraced the values of a death cult.
I completely agree with your statement of caution against utopian-minded revolution. But the question, then, is how to combat the environment of despair/meaninglessness which is what makes the call for destructive reset attractive.
In other words, people will put up with an enormous amount of BS as long as they feel like they’re contributing productively to building something they believe in. But the system as constituted seems to do everything it can to deny RW elements any credible sense that what they are doing is generationally meaningful. Even worse, it seems to go out of its way to shove in their faces that any effort they put in will be stolen and given away to people who want to eliminate them (if not immediately, then certainly in the long run).
The ability of the system to read individuals and extract more and more value from them with less and less opportunity to build countervailing bases of opposition certainly makes it seem like any significant progress must depend upon a fundamental degree of dismantling. That path at least provides a clear psychological sense of agency that just waiting around for things to collapse cannot.
@James Poulos has written extensively on this. The answer is spiritual, and the materialist/nihilist impulse will only drive one deeper into despair, even if it is seemingly cathartic.
I appreciate that solution, but my sense of a lot of solid stuff that comes from the Claremont Institute and venues like it us much too heady for the kinds of guys who react positively to the appeal of Revolutionary élan. Moreover, I think it’s a mistake to see “nihilism” as the reason—they WANT something to believe in, and they rightly recognize that the system as constituted actively undermines the conditions for establishing and sustaining communities that nourish the spiritual growth that can become a hub of competing cultural power.
Again, I’m not talking about an elite audience that consumes Claremont material. I’m talking about the average guy who may not have the organizational wherewithal to influence (if not generate or lead) a local spiritual renewal.
In some sense, it’s easy to recommend a spiritual path to the intellectually inclined and treat it as noble perseverance through abstention from material gratification. But there’s a sense in which this is saying to average man that man does not live by bread alone, so let him eat spiritual cake as more and more of what he earns in the sweat of his brow is taken from his plate and given to his enemies.
Anyway, I may be missing the point. I looked over James Poulous’s account, but most of what I see is extensive treatments of the dangers of over-reliance on technology. I certainly agree, but again, where does this connect to the average man who is not facing a crisis of intellectual integrity but rather one of economic survival in a system they every day is more clearly stacked against him?
In botany, there is a plant called an accumulator. It grows by absorbing inorganic metals from the ground. A new system could arise in a similar way, in which segments of critical infrastructure are co-opted and stewarded by hybrid systems.
Thanks for saying this, Ron. You're right over the target. There is a great amount of political opportunity before us, but the Right risks squandering it if we turn to a political vision based primary on emotional catharsis instead of prudence.
Very well-stated my friend.
This discussion of "burning it all down" by Ron Dodson is spot on. Back in the 1990s, I imagined a federal constitutional convention done by our generation. My prediction was that we'd be shooting each other in the streets soon after.
A question to ponder: Now, 30 years later, would we be better or worse off in a reset situation?
In many ways this is what happened in the USSR. After the period of the initial oligarhic dismantling of the empire a new order appeared, one where Vladimir Putin is the head of the state and a regulator of the Mafia. Eastern European countries and Russia have this concept in common where we see the state and the Mafia as cooperation via security/ spying agencies. Anyway, the implosion of the empire was everything this article is warning us about. Unfortunately this dismantling of the US empire is happening also but in a more dressed up way. The banksters cabal and the security apparatchiks are rulling the empire giving each other "legal" cover for the theft. From NGOs to too big to fail and forever zio neocons wars it's the same thing... "democracy" is the veil used to masks and appeal to the hipnotizat masses. Insider trading politicians are now common as common as aipac purchasing/control of the political system. This is essentially a spiritual struggle. The West has declared a war on beauty, morality, reality, a deep antichristian stance and has embraced the values of a death cult.
I completely agree with your statement of caution against utopian-minded revolution. But the question, then, is how to combat the environment of despair/meaninglessness which is what makes the call for destructive reset attractive.
In other words, people will put up with an enormous amount of BS as long as they feel like they’re contributing productively to building something they believe in. But the system as constituted seems to do everything it can to deny RW elements any credible sense that what they are doing is generationally meaningful. Even worse, it seems to go out of its way to shove in their faces that any effort they put in will be stolen and given away to people who want to eliminate them (if not immediately, then certainly in the long run).
The ability of the system to read individuals and extract more and more value from them with less and less opportunity to build countervailing bases of opposition certainly makes it seem like any significant progress must depend upon a fundamental degree of dismantling. That path at least provides a clear psychological sense of agency that just waiting around for things to collapse cannot.
@James Poulos has written extensively on this. The answer is spiritual, and the materialist/nihilist impulse will only drive one deeper into despair, even if it is seemingly cathartic.
I appreciate that solution, but my sense of a lot of solid stuff that comes from the Claremont Institute and venues like it us much too heady for the kinds of guys who react positively to the appeal of Revolutionary élan. Moreover, I think it’s a mistake to see “nihilism” as the reason—they WANT something to believe in, and they rightly recognize that the system as constituted actively undermines the conditions for establishing and sustaining communities that nourish the spiritual growth that can become a hub of competing cultural power.
Again, I’m not talking about an elite audience that consumes Claremont material. I’m talking about the average guy who may not have the organizational wherewithal to influence (if not generate or lead) a local spiritual renewal.
In some sense, it’s easy to recommend a spiritual path to the intellectually inclined and treat it as noble perseverance through abstention from material gratification. But there’s a sense in which this is saying to average man that man does not live by bread alone, so let him eat spiritual cake as more and more of what he earns in the sweat of his brow is taken from his plate and given to his enemies.
Anyway, I may be missing the point. I looked over James Poulous’s account, but most of what I see is extensive treatments of the dangers of over-reliance on technology. I certainly agree, but again, where does this connect to the average man who is not facing a crisis of intellectual integrity but rather one of economic survival in a system they every day is more clearly stacked against him?
In botany, there is a plant called an accumulator. It grows by absorbing inorganic metals from the ground. A new system could arise in a similar way, in which segments of critical infrastructure are co-opted and stewarded by hybrid systems.
shut up boomer
AI detected, opinion rejected
The "belief" that one somehow gets what they want by doing nothing while having zero power or accomplishments sure is something