Bloody shovel

Don't call it a spade

Being a Conservative

This Tweet encapsulates perfectly the cuckservative mindset. Cucks are, by any account, more pleasant people than leftists. Usually smarter, or at least with way more common sense. I’d guess most of us have conservatives in our family. Many I guess have married one.

What makes them contemptible, though? What makes them cucks? Their cowardice. It’s one thing to ignore the truth. To just not notice what’s in front of you. It’s another thing to be an evil liar and just spread falsehoods for your own benefit, as leftists do.

It’s a yet completely different thing to be able to notice the truth, admit most of it, and just stop our brain working just when it starts to get interested. To be just that close, to be on reach of the truth, but then… crimestop engaged. That’s what makes the cuck a cuck.

Don’t be a cuck.

Oh, and incidentally, don’t be alt-right either. Why? They are getting purged utterly from the Internet. So let this be a lesson of functional semantics. The only valuable labels are those that work.

Advertisements

48 responses to “Being a Conservative

  1. Pingback: Being a Conservative | @the_arv

  2. ricksean August 17, 2017 at 20:25

    Is it possible to win without being an evil liar who’s just spreading falsehoods for his own benefit ?

    • Robert Brockman II August 17, 2017 at 20:31

      Yes. Not being an evil liar who spreads falsehoods for his own benefit is itself winning.

      • ricksean August 17, 2017 at 22:08

        It would make sense for evil lying winners to put that message in movies to make honest losers think they’re winners.

        • Robert Brockman August 17, 2017 at 22:38

          The problematic phrase here is “evil lying winners.” This phrase is not coherent. The reality that most everyone thinks it is coherent is the primary problem we have, and must be fixed first.

          “evil” implies the existence of some objective standard of goodness, which “evil” is opposed to. Being a “winner” involves making real progress towards becoming excellent, which is to say becoming supremely good. Thus “evil winner” is contradictory. (“evil liar” is not.)

          Spandrell is justified in his contempt for the cuckservatives because they lack the virtue of courage, and lacking virtue is fundamentally not good. Courage is often considered to be one of the most fundamental virtues since it is a prerequisite for most of the others.

          • Robert Brockman August 17, 2017 at 22:49

            Put more concretely, consider the case of Joseph Stalin, arguably the most successful manipulative exploiter in history and a man of considerable intelligence and discipline. He climbed to the top of the pile of skulls that was the USSR and lived a long life. Was he a “evil lying winner”? Would you prefer to live your own life, or the life of Stalin?

            • Contaminated NEET August 17, 2017 at 23:05

              Yes, obviously Uncle Joe was an “evil lying winner.” You can redefine “winner” to mean whatever you like, and sure, by your definition, “evil winner” is contradictory. You could also define “red” to mean “blue,” and “hot” to mean “slow-moving,” and “cat” to mean “automobile.” But nobody’s going to know what you’re talking about, and they’ll lose interest in talking to you pretty quickly.

              • Robert Brockman August 17, 2017 at 23:45

                What definition of “winner” would you propose that is better than mine? In what sense did the Man of Steel “win”? If getting to the top of the pile of skulls is “winning”, why would we want it? More generally, if “winning” doesn’t mean advancing Truth, Beauty, and Virtue, why would we care about it?

                • Contaminated NEET August 18, 2017 at 07:58

                  It’s a little pedantic, but I’m going to go to the dictionary: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/win
                  “intransitive verb
                  1: to gain the victory in a contest : succeed”
                  Yeah, there are other definitions listed, but this is clearly the one we’re talking about, and none of the others resemble your virtue-soaked version except in the vaguest of ways. Clearly, you can “win” by cheating, or by doing evil, or compromising your values, or doing any number of questionable things. Uncle Joe certainly gained victory in plenty of contests against his opponents, not least of which was a little spat called the Great Patriotic War.

                  “In what sense did the Man of Steel “win”? If getting to the top of the pile of skulls is “winning”, why would we want it?”
                  Because the alternative is to be one of the skulls in the pile. It’s perfectly obvious that sitting on the pile is preferable to that. You can also do a lot more to advance Truth, Beauty, and Virtue as a living man on top of the pile than as a bleached skull in the middle of it.

                  • Robert Brockman August 18, 2017 at 18:11

                    “Because the alternative is to be one of the skulls in the pile. It’s perfectly obvious that sitting on the pile is preferable to that.”

                    If this is so, then what tactics are not open to us in getting to the top? Why have we not fully aligned ourselves with the people who seem to be winning? By this reasoning, whatever disgust we feel at various Commie tactics is just irrational sentiment. “We must join with Sauron.”

                    “You can also do a lot more to advance Truth, Beauty, and Virtue as a living man on top of the pile than as a bleached skull in the middle of it.”

                    This is the Boromir option. How well has that worked out historically? How often have the people who got to the top of the pile of skulls by adding many to the pile then succeeded in advancing Truth, Beauty, and Virtue?

                    The hidden problem here is that if you get to the top by “dirty” means, you find that you have done so with the aid of key supporters who are very comfortable with such means. (Think Beria.) Shifting away from killing, raping, looting, and pillaging to being a benevolent monarch “alienates the base,” usually leading to someone else in the hierarchy replacing you at the top of the pile.

                    The only victory worth having is achieved by advancing the Good: what is True, Beautiful, and Virtuous. The way to do this is to become excellent, have associates who are excellent, and then take action.

                  • spandrell August 18, 2017 at 18:21

                    And then get beaten, and your wife and daughters raped by the Antifa.

                    Look, nobody is saying that we should do like Stalin and start torturing the kulaks. But you need to win first, before you can run a noble ship. Pinochet was no Stalin. Franco was no Stalin. But they had to kill a lot of people to establish their power. Simple as that.

                  • Robert Brockman August 18, 2017 at 19:43

                    “And then get beaten, and your wife and daughters raped by the Antifa.”

                    Certainly we should use force as necessary to prevent such outcomes. My claim is that being an evil liar (or any other form of personal corruption) increases the odds of such outcomes considerably. Corruption always makes things nastier, and makes the use of force to stop Antifa harder.

                    Here’s my favorite real-life example of what I mean by this:

                    I used to play far too many WWII wargames, the most interesting of which was a game called Enemy at the Gates, a hugely detailed and well-researched regimental-level simulation of the southern half of the Eastern Front around the time of Stalingrad. Huge piles of little paper counters, every turn represented a few days of combat, both sides would typically lose a dozen counters or so per turn. Each removed counter represented 3000 guys — a 9/11 level of death.

                    In the game, as historically, the Soviets had a huge advantage in equipment and manpower and a substantial deficiency in morale and mobility. However, the decisive issue in the Battle of Stalingrad was limited German combat supply and rail capacity — not into the pocket itself, but into the entire theater. In the game, if the Germans are given a 50% increase in rail capacity and combat supply, their mobile forces win the Battle of Stalingrad decisively and most of the huge Soviet armies get cut out of supply and completely wiped out.

                    Historically, German supply was limited by Ukrainian partisan activity. This shouldn’t have been a problem: many of the Ukrainians hated the Commies because of the Holodomor, and greeted the invading Germans as liberators. The problem was that Hitler’s Nazis plundered the region, dispensing the usual atrocities to people deemed insufficiently German regardless of their willingness to cooperate. The partisan resistance to German atrocities caused the large supply problems that likely spoiled Hitler’s chances of success in this decisive theater.

                    This is just one simple example of how Hitler’s *moral vices* defeated him, leading to the largest rape of wives and daughters by Antifa to date:

                    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_during_the_occupation_of_Germany

                    Running the noble ship comes first.

                  • spandrell August 18, 2017 at 21:07

                    Plundering Ukraine wasn’t just some arbitrary nastiness of Hitler personally. The war was tight and winning hearts and minds takes time and men that the German high command considered it didn’t have. It was bad strategy, of course. Winning over the peasantry is Chinese warfare 101. But you still have to impose your authority when necessary, and most often than not that requires iron, fire and duplicitous schemes.

                  • A.B. Prosper August 19, 2017 at 01:46

                    Truth, Beauty and Virtue is a peacetime luxury

                    We are in the middle of a cold civil war and you aren’t getting out alive without dirty hands when , not if, when it goes hot

                  • Sam J. August 23, 2017 at 20:48

                    “…Historically, German supply was limited by Ukrainian partisan activity. This shouldn’t have been a problem…”

                    Something I bring up when I hear anyone talking about supplies and Stalingrad is some passages from Irvings books on WWII. Goering promised Hitler that that he could deliver so many tons of supplies by air to the pocket in Stalingrad. I think he ended up delivering something like 10% of what he promised or less. Goering KNEW he couldn’t deliver but refused to tell Hitler. It would be interesting to see what would Hitler have done if he would have known this. It may have been that he would have pulled back. That might have won him the war as Stalingrad was huge loss.

          • ricksean August 17, 2017 at 23:41

            It is perfectly possible to be an “evil lying winner” when you win and lead your people to its destruction.

            The contempt for cuckservatives is IMHO ill advised. The cuckservatives are many things, but they are good and maintaining their power and status, at least in the short & medium term. In the long game, they’re fucked, as they’ll go down with the rest of the West. But in the meantime they’re doing good, at least for themselves.

            The uncucked right may have many virtues, and certainly has a plan for long term survival, but that plan is moot if it doesn’t work short/medium term. And so far that’s what happened. The Trump hand has been overplayed, and the uncucked right is losing power and status fast.

            The cuckservatives are the existing power structure on the right, and they cannot be avoided or coerced. Trying violent revolutionary tactics simply alienated them, and now the uncucked right is fighting on two fronts. You can blame their cowardice but they’re not acting irrationally, they’re doing what worked for them all their life, they’re conservatives after all.

            For me the only guy who seem to be doing a reasonable compromise is Tucker Carlson. It’s way too soon to go anywhere right of him in public. The left didn’t legalise gay marriage in one election, you need a 50 year plan.

            • Robert Brockman August 17, 2017 at 23:59

              Leading your people to destruction is not winning by any definition of winning in which winning is worth having. The value of the power and status of the cuckservatives is the extent to which it can be used to promote good things, starting with the survival and flourishing of their people.

              If the cuckservatives cannot use their power and status to lead their people *away* from destruction, what good is it?

            • Ludwig von Neetgenstein August 18, 2017 at 03:04

              Well, we don’t have 50 years. The cold civil war is about to go hot, and you can’t afford to have coward allies in a war: it is far more preferable to have disproportionately stronger enemies than to have weak allies because the latter will break formation and ranks in the face of a remotely credible bluff.

              First rule of warfare: without morale, you have nothing (even more so in 4GW). That’s why, as Jim says, “female soldier” is a contradiction in terms: their first instinct is to fuck the enemy combatants. Cucking, psychologically, is very similar to this phenomenon: their first instinct, in the face of hostility, is to sabotage their side to score ‘mercy points’ –which they deservedly won’t get– with the enemy.

              All the left has in its arsenal is cucks. Everything else they have pales in comparison. All our side needs to do is stand firm, hold the line, and say NO. When eventually they go for Trump’s head, all he has to do is say NO (call his supporters to arms), and we will win.

              The problem with cuckservatives is that they create mass-scale cucking as a schelling point: no point in forming ranks if your peers are attacking you for not breaking ranks. What’s great about Trump is that he’s kingly: he personally takes risks, denounces the cucks in our ranks, and forces them to self-expose. What’s great about Cville events: cucks in our ranks are openly endorsing Maoists. I think this is approaching Trayvon Martin levels of mass redpilling. Also, I can’t wait for the media chimpout when the Dodge Challenger guy is acquitted: it will make them redpills rain.

              • ricksean August 18, 2017 at 08:51

                You had to have and take 50 years. Without a party, without organisation, without leaders in the good places, how are you going to win ? The ‘cucks’ command the police, the military, the justice, the schools, the universities, the churches, the media. Even if you say NO!, they’ll say you said YES! and fuck you regardless.

                The cucks in your rank now supporting their worst enemy is not a good sign at all, they’re understanding how fucked you are, and are pleading for mercy to not be associated with you anymore.

                And trump is completely overplaying his power. He’s taking all the risks, and putting himself on the frontlines every day. He should send goons take the heat, and go out for the killing blows. Why didn’t he sent Pence or some cuckservative to say there’s some fine guys marching with the nazis ? It would have forced the other cuckservatives to defend his platform by defending their own.

                And the dodge challenger guy ? Never going to be acquitted, you are deluded.

              • Howard J. Harrison August 18, 2017 at 10:56

                What’s great about Cville events: cucks in our ranks are openly endorsing Maoists. I think this is approaching Trayvon Martin levels of mass redpilling.

                I hope that you are right. What evidence? (My question is not a challenge but a request for information).

              • Robert Brockman August 18, 2017 at 18:23

                ” it is far more preferable to have disproportionately stronger enemies than to have weak allies because the latter will break formation and ranks in the face of a remotely credible bluff.”

                This exactly.

                “All the left has in its arsenal is cucks. Everything else they have pales in comparison. All our side needs to do is stand firm, hold the line, and say NO. When eventually they go for Trump’s head, all he has to do is say NO (call his supporters to arms), and we will win.”

                As Worf would say, “The Borg have neither honor nor courage. *That* is our greatest advantage.” That said, we should be careful not to underestimate the capability of the commies.

                “What’s great about Trump is that he’s kingly: he personally takes risks, denounces the cucks in our ranks, and forces them to self-expose.”

                This week he seems to have done his best to speak the truth as he sees it to everyone. Whenever Trump speaks the truth, especially when this risks angering large numbers of people, he becomes much stronger. This is because his followers have evidence that he’s in this for the country rather than himself, they can see he has skin in the game. Demonstrably being willing to take heat like this is a necessary condition for mobilizing people to the point where they will be willing to defend him if things get really ugly.

              • Ludwig von Neetgenstein August 19, 2017 at 04:52

                @ricksean
                It’s a wonder to behold how fast the rank and file of the state apparatus get in line in the face of a populist leader (not necessarily with majority support) who has non-negligible support from elements inside the establishment.

                Example: Gulenist deep state in Turkey, having beaten the Kemalist wing of the Military deep state to a pulp through a series of show trial cum point-deer-make-horse style displays of power, was extremely confident (and rightly so!) about its grip on judiciary, police, education and the rest of non-military bureaucracy in late 2013. Mentioning this organization (funnily referred to as “the Congregation”) was basically the equivalent of “naming the jew” in American msm, in the sense that, if you remotely insinuated they had influence inside the state apparatus, you would instantly be unpersonned, and get the conspiracy loon treatment. Anyone who ever wanted to get a real piece of political power, paid the leader of the gulenist organization (“Hodja”) a very conspicuous visit in his Pennsylvania compound (not making this up).

                Anyway, long story short, “the congregation” decided it was time to remove Erdogan through lawfare, just like they removed the Kemalists from the military. Erdogan responded with criminal defiance. He completely disregarded formal constitutional practices and acted like a sovereign, deciding exception after exception. Warrants were issued by obscure prosecutors, but the police officers that showed inclination to serve them were instantly removed and punished. This created a signaling cascade. Even though the police department was, by credible estimates, more than 50% staffed by members of “the Congregation”, commissioners started violently signaling pro-Erdogan: the ones that had more obvious ties to the congregation were the most ardent signalers.

                Two years and a half later, by August of 2016, you would be unpersonned for suggesting that maybe people shouldn’t be unpersonned for being remotely associated with “the Congregation”. Top media organs were now holding confession sessions for falling for “Hodja’s” tricks.

                Lesson: Media is a schelling point enforcer. Government employees shill the hardest for whoever constitutes the most credible threat against their paychecks. You don’t need 50 years to utterly demolish an existing schelling point, you just need to have the courage to cross the rubicon when the opportunity shows up (and if it doesn’t show up, or if you’re not in a position to *make it* show up, you can’t do shit).

                > The cucks in your rank now supporting their worst enemy is not a good sign at all, they’re understanding how fucked you are, and are pleading for mercy to not be associated with you anymore.

                This media shit storm, like the ones before, will pass. Media shit storms are manufactured by a couple of nodes with true influence, in order to hack your status (social hierarchy) gauge. It’s kindergarten stuff, but it’s brutally effective. “You’re a low status poopy head, because by collectively calling you that, we’re depriving you of social capital, which is another name for status”, “I see you don’t call out Johnny for being a dirty poopy head, comrade, it would be a shame if someone started asking if you’re a low status poopy head too.” You shouldn’t trust your instincts (which will savagely urge you to crumble and submit) when under a signaling siege. Your instincts tell you to cry for being called a “poopy head”, or they nudge you to call your ally a “poopy head”, it whispers: “come on, this is the new paradigm, get with the program”. You outsource your status estimation to intersubjectivity as you normally do, and it tells you “holy shit fam start denouncing filthy poopy heads, like yesterday.”

              • Ludwig von Neetgenstein August 19, 2017 at 04:53

                Medium term effects of Cville:
                (1) Media associating milk toast pundits like PJW with “omg alt right neo-nazis”, and eventually inflating the label to oblivion because that’s just what they do as the incontinent smear artists they are.
                (2) Altright relabelling themselves as “republicans” and gaslighting msm into smearing all republicans as “omg altright neo nazi republiKKKans”.
                (3) Inconveniencing of people associated with the label altright in dealing with internet and payment processing services.
                (4) Moderate white males with non-negligible T-levels discovering the mendacity of the Cville Narrative™, especially after the acquittal of the Challenger guy.

                And yes, I’m very confident the Challenger guy will be acquitted because there’s video evidence clearly showing in sequence: gentle driving – getting hit by a bat and a pole – accelerating abruptly in response (startled). There’s, beyond a reasonable doubt, no premeditation nor intent, because otherwise he could easily cause a truck-of-peace tier carnage. I think this is a very straightforward case of self-defense: if you’re trapped among people with metal bats and rods on their hands, you floor it — especially if they start hitting your car. Come to think about it, maybe I should go ahead and start a prediction market on fairlay, maybe there’s BTC to be made for being right?

                @Howard Harrison
                I don’t have any particular information, but I’m noticing similarities with Trayvon Martin incidence: (1) Media starts off with a ridiculously caricatured and mendacious narrative. (2) Media frenzy. (3) Something cracks the narrative (revelation that CNN edited the 911 call vs. Trump naming the alt-left as the instigator of violence). (4) Peak hysteria: deranged leftist and cuck signaling goes off the rails (Mitt Romney, Rubio endorsing Maoist violence, literally. Domain name registrars kicking unpopular people out). (5) Not guilty verdict on all accounts triggers another round of hysteria.

                I predict that this will cause a round of redpilling in the only demographic that matters: white males. This will make cucks, women, blacks, and queers, who are more susceptible to emotional manipulation, even more hysterical, which is also good for our cause as it makes more white men lose faith in the possibility of productive and rational exchange with these groups.

                @Robert Brockman
                > Demonstrably being willing to take heat like this is a necessary condition for mobilizing people to the point where they will be willing to defend him if things get really ugly.

                Yes. Watch for him signaling his readiness to die for the people as the deep state encroaches.

                • Howard J. Harrison August 19, 2017 at 11:50

                  I can find little wrong with your well-organized analysis, Ludwig. I mean, this is social-political-theory commentary, so none of us can unerringly predict the future, but your mode of analysis holds together pretty well. Thanks for the interesting replies.

    • spandrell August 17, 2017 at 22:05

      Not very likely. But you can wait until all the liars are ripping themselves out, and then put some order with the minimum amount of lies.

      • Robert Brockman August 17, 2017 at 23:50

        Blofeld: “Siamese fighting fish, fascinating creatures. Brave but on the whole stupid. Yes they’re stupid. Except for the occasional one such as we have here who lets the other two fight. While he waits. Waits until the survivor is so exhausted that he cannot defend himself, and then like SPECTRE… he strikes!”

        (Don’t miss the final irony of Blofeld feeding the winning fish to his cat.)

  3. August Hurtel August 17, 2017 at 20:38

    Reassuring. At least someone knows what’s going on. I worry that Sessions doesn’t, and will just behave as if it is the 80s. Plus the F.B.I. probably needs to be purged, unless various and sundry gov’t officials start getting into trouble.

    Of course, that journalist’s boss should have some words with him.

    • August Hurtel August 18, 2017 at 18:04

      Oh well, there went reassurance. I suppose i can console myself, since I am not sure Bannon’s approach was the best approach, but when I look at McMasters and some of the other jokers in there I am not at ease.

  4. Issac August 17, 2017 at 20:42

    I think the cucks are largely irrelevant. When they run cover for the left, the right looks on with skepticism and the left doesn’t care at all. The best thing the alt right can do is continue antagonizing the left and driving their over-reactive purity spiral. A nation-wide pogrom against colonial monuments would be a massive victory and it appear to be taking shape already.

    • spandrell August 17, 2017 at 20:48

      A massive victory. OK.

      • Matthew Walker August 17, 2017 at 21:27

        You could argue that the left is heading for Year Zero regardless, and so the sooner they get there and the mask comes off, the better the demographic situation will be when the normies realize they have to fight back.

        But the Jews climbed obediently into the railway cars, so let’s not bet on too many normies smartening up.

        Not that the endgame here will be anything like a carbon copy of any particular past singularity. It just seems increasingly likely that these lunatics will goad each other into doing something monstrous on a grand scale, instead of satisfying themselves with gradual Brazilification.

        • spandrell August 17, 2017 at 22:04

          I used to think like that; and I understand the reasoning. But then I had children so I’m not so keen on making the collapse come sooner rather than later. I’m guessing these two kind of attitudes map pretty well to one’s marital status.

          • Issac August 17, 2017 at 22:30

            I’m married and have several children, but I wouldn’t lump my position in with general accelerationism either. Having the left run wild when they aren’t in complete control over the federal government is categorically different from the position that they should be put in control over the federal government in order to truly run amok.

            If they’re given enough rope today, its quite possible they can hang themselves while Trump is still around to man the gallows. If they are allowed to pass under the radar until Trump leaves office, there is quite likely nothing to be done. As we saw in Charlottesville, you can expect anyone outside the Trump cadre to actively abet the revolutionary left.

            • Karl August 18, 2017 at 17:26

              In your talk about the comming collapse you seem to have a very narrow focus. Sure, collapse is no fun, especially if you have small children. But the whole Western civilisation is in this crisis. Some unlucky country will be the first to collapse and that will affect the others, maybe even start a reconquista. For the others it will be impossible to carry on as before. If you are lucky, your country will not be the first to collapse.

              Do you think Merkel could go on as before if a civil war, like the Syrian war, were happening in Sweden or France? Do think Hungary or Poland would have their current stance on Immigration if they wouldn’t clearly see the Problems in Germany, France, Sweden, or Brittain?

              As soon as a Western country collapses, there will be hope for the others.

      • Issac August 17, 2017 at 22:25

        What else would you call the left alienating anyone remotely nationalistic from their potential base? So long as the left continues to move slowly enough along their moral trajectory, the normal average person goes along to get along. Only in moments where that trajectory is moving too quickly to keep up do they realize the game that’s afoot. The pace has already increased remarkably with respect to transgender issues and the culling of even mildly race and sex realist opinions. Further acceleration on the anti-nationalist front can only drive more people into the hinterlands where they at-worst stop voting for the consensus party (DNC) or, better yet, begin to warm to more dissident politics.

        • spandrell August 18, 2017 at 09:53

          This sounds suspiciously like the Chomsky theory of terrorism, where Islamic terrorism is a reaction of US imperialism, which causes so much grief in the world that it “creates 10 terrorists for every one they kill”.

  5. rcglinski August 17, 2017 at 22:02

    In Steve’s defense, I saw video of the unite the right protesters, and I have to say “losers” seems pretty accurate. Zman did an interview recently where he proposed dissident right instead of alt right. I also think alt left is a great label. Typical Trump, really nailed it.

    • Howard J. Harrison August 18, 2017 at 11:28

      Facing superior numbers and superior resources, Richard B. Spencer may indeed lose. Napoleon lost, too, as did Caesar. So also did Patrick J. Buchanan and H. Ross Perot, but I am not sure that their faces are the images that come to mind when the word “loser” is introduced.

      Spencer is a brave man of the upper middle class, a man blessed by nature and circumstance with the gifts and opportunities to have lived a prosperous life. He chose to commit all that to the Cause: They will not replace us. Unlike me, Spencer is a man of action, which means that he will make mistakes. Whatever quibbles one might raise, does honor not make you and me reluctant to abandon such a man?

      I grasp Spandrell’s point: it serves little purpose, as it were, to charge over the cliff with flags flying. I also grasp Rcglinski’s point: the caliber of some of Spencer’s supporters is less high than one could wish. However, let me play Spandrell’s and Rcglinski’s straight man: I wish to be Alt Right as long as Spencer wishes to be Alt Right. I am only ashamed not to have shared Spencer’s danger in Charlottesville.

      Maybe that makes me a loser, too. We shall see.

      • spandrell August 18, 2017 at 12:36

        Ross Perot gave the country to the Clintons, so rather than a mere loser he was something else: a useful idiot.

        Bravery is to be commended, indeed. There’s people out there taking fire under their real names and faces. But if bravery were all it counted, the Japanese would have won WW2. Let us not be the Imperial Japanese Army and kill our best men in suicide attacks, losing the independence of our nation in perpetuity.

        • Robert Brockman August 18, 2017 at 18:29

          Ross Perot dropped out under pressure mid-way through the race, demonstrating insufficient courage. That said, I agree that much more than just courage will be required to deal with the commies.

  6. Pingback: Being a Conservative | Reaction Times

  7. Karl August 18, 2017 at 18:01

    If you give up an established brand simply because it is under attack you are surrendering and give the enemy what they want.

    You worry about being purged on the web? Seriously? Spend more time offline.

    As an example, consider Waldorf education. Not quite a religion, not yet. But they have communities, a different world view, arguably a different culture or at least the beginnings of it. Maybe that’s how religions start or least how a religion can be started.

    S: Sorry, I pressed the wrong button and edited your comment, please repost it if you still have it.

    • spandrell August 18, 2017 at 18:23

      If you give up an established brand simply because it is under attack you are surrendering and give the enemy what they want.

      Disappearing is not surrender. It’s call retreat. And the enemy doesn’t want retreat. It wants open-field battles, where they have all the advantage. See what happened this week.

      You worry about being purged on the web? Seriously? Spend more time offline.

      This is just virtue signaling of a very annoying type. “Oh, stop being a nerd with a blog, and go reach your fellow man!” Look, I do plenty of that. But I very much enjoy the chance of speaking my mind, without censorship to a global audience. I like having this blog, and I hope I can keep on writing it. If you don’t like it, and think I should focus on survivalist stuff; there’s plenty of stuff like that elsewhere.

      As an example, consider Waldorf education. Not quite a religion, not yet. But they have communities, a different world view, arguably a different culture or at least the beginnings of it. Maybe that’s how religions start or least how a religion can be started.

      A religion is any cultish organization, and the historical record is quite clear: religion comes before culture. Culture is downstream from religion. I’ve never said we need a New Papacy; for all I know mutated Waldorf schools will become the state religion in 300 years.

      • Karl August 18, 2017 at 18:59

        No, I haven’t saved my post. Doesn’t matter, it’s not worth repeating it anyway. The only important point might be that about branding. I don’t see how you can retrant from a brand. Either you use it or you don’t. If you have stoppped using it, it’s very hard to resurrect the brand again at a later time.

        Of course, the left wants an open field battle. And I agree that in any open field battle the can still crush any opponent. What I fail to see is how using a brand gives them a field battle.

        Most importantly, a brand is needed. You can’t have anything without a name for it. A banner to organize around. And any brand anyone might possibly build, will be attacked and smeared. So what is your solution here? Not being alt-right now. Not being X tomorrow, not Y the day after that?

        You say non-use of the banner “Alt-right” is retreat. OK, how do you want to recover from that retreat?

        • spandrell August 18, 2017 at 19:02

          Surely you’ll give me it’s the time to change tactics.

        • Cavalier August 18, 2017 at 19:43

          The purpose of a flag is to proclaim your army on the open field.

          The purpose of a brand is to proclaim your business on the open market.

          If you’re not declaring war, and you’re not running a business, and the era of democratic politics — of activism and of elections — is over, you don’t need either.

          Take down your American flag, fold it up, sprinkle holy water on it, put it in a casket, and bury it; unfurl the rainbow own and hoist it. Study the catechisms, mouth the words, chant the mantras. Don the vestments, trash the televisions, read old books, make tonnes of money, get hot wives (polygamy is cool now, don’tchaknowit), and have as many hippy-dippy flower-children as you like — nobody dislikes hippies except stuffy old Vaisyas.

          All you have to do is stop antagonizing the antibodies, maaaaan.

        • Robert Brockman August 18, 2017 at 19:53

          MAGA + the stars and bars is the strongest brand right now. The effectiveness of this brand is very strongly tied to the courage, honesty, and diligence of Donald Trump. The good part about this is that Trump has near-total control over this, it’s almost impossible for anyone else to screw it up. The scary part is that if Trump screws up ethically then the brand is completely hosed instantly.

          • Karl August 19, 2017 at 08:19

            Spandrell, I agree that we are presently not successful. What I don’t know is wether the solution is to do something different (change tactic) or to do more of the same.

            Besides I’m not sure what precisely you consider to be the present tactic. What I can see is blogging (which will help, but not suffice, no need to change that), rallies (possibly of dubious value, but so far only a minor part of alt-right efforts). At least in Europe there is also activism, like the ship C-star, banners at places like the Brandenburger Tor calling for a closure of borders (helpful as such things shift the Overtone window, and reach people that never read blogs). Such activism is usually misdemeanor, but under present law no felony. Felonies, like arson are also happening in Europe, although only to a very limited extent. For completeness sake, I also want to point out that right wing parties have been founded and been growing all over Europe. I have no idea what else could be done, except starting a new religion – and I don’t knwo how to do that.

            Cavalier, I agree that the purpose of the flag is to proclaim your army on the open field. But before you get to that stage you need something, a name, a slogan, to call the people who will form your army to come and support your cause. You need an organization otheriwse are army is just rabble. And to have an organization you need a name.

            Robert Brockman, I agree that MAGA + the stars and banners is a very strong brand. It works well in the US, unfortunately it won’t work anywhere else. Canada, Australia and Europo face largely the same problems as the USA. MEGA sounds good in Europa, but somehow it didn’t work. Although some people have tried, I’ve seen stickers with that logo and T-Shirts.

Please comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s