The post-war liberal, moralist consensus has marred and maligned the very idea of nationalism so irrevocably that it has become synonymous with racism. But it is not racism: it is a love of one’s own, a love which is in fact deeply human. We would do well to remember this fact—especially in the wake of Trump’s reelection and a populist resurgence across the West.
Great speech. One begins to wonder how many writers like Renaud Camus have been defenestrated with little but a shred of merit. The rediscovery of Western thinkers who foresaw the managerial regime and the West's demographic replacement en masse are now worthy of consideration more than ever before.
I guess the problem will be for people to understand this process and resist it without being dismissed and demonized as "right wingers" rednecks, fascists etc. How do we communicate that this anti-colonialist resistance is based on love ,as you defined it, and not on hatred or xenophobia?
By explaining through words and exemplifying through actions that this is the goal. At least to me, actual racism is still distasteful and, at times, abhorrent. This does not include jokes and banter, but it does necessarily involve civility and kindness toward people from other cultures.
As black, liberal-heterodox atheist and linguistics professor John McWhorter explains in his book "WOKE RACISM", there is at least much "racism" on the postmodern woke-left as the right.
Pretty much all of the current rhetoric from the "woke" cultural-left about "racism" is itself "racist", corrupt and incompetent.
Tell the truth: woke-leftism is a mental illness* (or, at least a magnet for the mentally dysfunctional).
Being "demonized" by woke lunatics is meaningless in itself, unless there are other woke lunatics that can impose a negative outcome of some kind on their critics (beyond lying on social media).
Having studied the general pathologies of leftism for over 30 years, there is a significant shift away from woke insanity going on now, but it isn't complete, and probably never will be. Postmodern neo-communist totalitarianism will always appeal to a certain number of people with mental dysfunctions. The trick is to stop them from gaining power to the greatest extent possible.
The metaphor I use is that wokeism/neo-communism/neo-feudalism is a social cancer that destroys social order like gangrene. The only way to treat the gangrene is to relentlessly hack it off (metaphorically speaking) when it is detected.
The larger aim: re-unify as much of the professional, middle and working classes via populism as possible to form a front against woke neo-communism and the elite-left.
Accept that postmodern social conditions will require the development of anti-fragile ways of thinking and acting, including new practices in social institutions. (anti-fragility to techno-economic disruption and the resulting disintegration of hierarchies of curated expertise, including those that provide meaning and purpose.)
-----
* One of the best deep dives into woke mental dysfunction I’ve read.
The system that the elites are trying to replace is far less resilient to trauma and is already collapsing before its construction is complete. The architects had too much hope in a platonic utopia and not enough pragmatic understanding on what makes a resilient culture rather than the one they were designing from aesthetic and solipsistic principles. If the elites had been smart (and perhaps some generations ago they were, but the system they created now seems to be on a zombie autopilot now) they would have aimed at creating an antifragile culture where the bumps, knocks and unexpected trauma made it stronger. Instead they designed and implemented a future for western culture that's drifted inexorably into mediocrity and senesce, easily replaced by a predator culture that's less benign but far more vigorous.
Postmodern woke-left totalitarianism is more parasitic than predatory. It originally exploited techno-economic disruption more than creating it (Lasch). But as time has gone on, and it has gained power, it seeks to reinforce the kinds of disruption that it parasitizes.
-----
One of the best deep dives into woke mental dysfunction I’ve read.
Excellent. I have in the past described our leaders having no loyalty to their historic people/citizenry, which is essentially the same as saying they don’t love them. I believe this reality is just starting to be recognized by normies and perhaps not consciously yet, but there is a buzz in the background that people feel. This needs to be amplified further.
I have no idea why the clarifying reality expressed in Upheaval reports doesn't dominate comment sections across Substack. I suspect, perpetual comment section complaints about the symptoms of the disease, allows a shirking of the personal citizen responsibility necessary to confront the disease itself. The American psyche, both nationally, and on an individual level is wounded. The world is wounded. The vulnerability inherent in accepting the power to heal can be a frightening prospect.
The psyop is real. Its success, the threat, built on repression of the truth, and the injection of fear into the national conversation, is also real. The attempted imprisonment of American consciousness inside the propagandist iconoclastic manufactured hyperrealism of life cancellation, career destruction, rumor, character assassination and, the self-justifyied looting and exploitation of the world's resources, is purely the result of the pathological hypocrisy of those perpetrating it. Possible escape from their cash register sterility, the survival of human moral reason, the lines of moral demarcation that our founding fathers worked hard to include in the American Constitution, are the responsible agents for the emergence of this new "populism". Want a free America? Be a free American.
Criticism of "woke" is not inherent to the structure of substack. Since substack is a version of silicon valley "free speech" libertarianism ("let the marketplace of ideas prevail"), it can obviously accommodate anti-woke perspectives, but that does not mean that they are part of the cultural DNA of the platform.
You are correct and I appreciate the objectivity. (I haven't seen you around lately.) For myself, the UPHEAVAL seems to speak directly to motive. Substack isn't the only purveyor of subscription journalism. We the People have a chance at creating a truth/fact based national conversation and I'm all in on that.
Taibbi, Bari Weiss, Sasha Stone, Glenn Greenwald all banned me for relentlessly complaining about the numerous lunatics, Leftards/communists, AIPAC trolls and bots they allow to run rampant in their comments. Their free speech rhetoric is pure hypocrisy.
I usually check into substack at least a couple of times a week, sometimes daily if there is lots of interesting stuff and/or Facebook has put me in “jail”.
Can group identification and love for one's own ever occur without coming at the expense of looking down on other groups, cultures, and people?
Social identity theory shows us that group identification is almost always tied to boosting self-image—ie instinctively attributing positive traits to one's group and negative traits to outsiders.
As I see it, the only way to break free from this madness—this toxic form of identity and group-based thinking that traps the vast majority of the world’s population, especially in their adopted countries—is to make people care less about their identities and groups.
The problem is that they attach their sense of purpose and meaning in life to identity and belonging (mere accidents of birth), rather than to creation and meaningful work.
This would require jettisoning the most basic elements of human anthropology, everywhere and at all times. It is madness and, worse, doomed in advance to failure. Figure that out and propose something else. Failing that, how can one take you seriously?
Historically outbred gene pools where cousin marriage is banned will evolve toward "classic liberalism" and high-social-trust (such as Constitutional order), abandoning clannish (low social forms) social forms and honor systems. It is a function of genetics. See Henrich's "WEIRD" model, and other recent work in evolutionary psychology.
And you believe that a mere love for one's country can halt millennia of political evolution and structural shifts? The transformation of fundamental anthropological elements is already in motion, driven by the relentless march of technological revolution. You fail to see it, trapped in the present and fixated on surface-level, immediate observations.
See it? The walking wounded are everywhere. The sterility and greed of avaricious corporate tyranny and its weaponization of tech to capture and subvert the healthy human American national conversation our Republic and the world deserves, though brutal, isn't strong enough to overthrow the human moral reason our founding fathers placed in our Constitution. The capture of tech, and the desperate ascent of the psyop, was the result of the leap in tech and communication that made the criminal machinations of international capital, and the corrupt political surveillance bureaucracy that serves it, transparent to reality. This is a new age. The war is, always has been, the suppression of consciousness hence, the current war on free speech and the psyop. Get well. Depart the psyop and live. (In other words--free your mind and your ass will follow.)
No need for a time machine—the patterns of human behaviour tend to be remarkably predictable. History may not repeat itself exactly, but it sure loves a good rhyme.
It doesn't matter (but you are correct, "no universalism is ever really universal"). What matters is leadership and advancing cultural evolution beyond postmodern relativism/nihilism. Here is one example:
At the risk of adding an off note to your inevitable Amen corner, how do you deal with the fact that some native(ist?) cultures don’t deserve unqualified love?
I’m an American, and I’m as proud of Ben Franklin, the Wright Brothers, and Steve Jobs as anyone you know. But I’m not so hot on slavery till 1863, lynching till the 1930s, and gunboat diplomacy—we want Greenland!—to this very day.
Your argument is very intellectually seductive. Couched in pure abstractions, and put positively—we love ours, we don’t hate theirs—who could disagree?
But we all know that to love ours is to hate theirs. After all, their very presence harms what we love by diluting it, changing it, destroying it, no? Isn’t that what you mean but are too careful to say so?
We’ve heard your argument before. The last time, the shorthand for it was “Blood and Soil.” The last time, the “flattening” “replacists” were called “rootless cosmopolitans,” which of course was code for Jews.
I think you are recycling the old libels in more modern language. I would tell you to be ashamed of yourself, but I think you already are. Else why write under a pseudonym?
If someone in your family, who you love, is behaving badly, what do you do? Hopefully deliver some tough love/straight criticism in attempt to get them to better themselves. Indeed you do this because you love them. I never said anything about "unqualified" love, or never criticizing one's own nation. And no, one does not need to hate other people's families because you love your own. But you do put your responsibilities to your own first.
I like your metaphor. Does putting your family first include staging an intervention when a relative wants to make a mixed marriage? Or do you let people be people and simply love the new member of the family, too?
Mixed marriage is going to happen in the modern liberal world. It's programmed to happen.
Ideally, if you are a white guy, you would live in a sociaty that doesn't punish you with no-fault divorce and divorce court rape. Also, you wouldn't have a sexual revolution. LOL.
Legal immigration is allowing neighbors to marry into the family, or to be adopted into it. No one says you shouldn’t love your family most. The issue is whether you open your arms to additions to the family, or just keep inbreeding.
I don’t of course literally mean DNA—I mean new additions to American culture, just like the additions/changes brought by previous waves of immigration from the British Isles, Ireland, Southern Europe, Scandinavia, Eastern Europe, China, etc. You know, the places your own forbears came here from.
As for numbers, I don’t want open borders. But I don’t want closed ones either. I believe there might exist some number between zero and infinity. If I remember my math right.
look, I've lived in Texas my whole life. because of the massive 1200 mile border we share, our state has been the recipient of two very distinct cultures. for the most part, I believe we are the better for it.
however, there is a massive difference between an organic meeting between two porous borders and a ruling elite who is intentionally flooding our country with over 10 million migrants with the express purpose of lowering wages and deracinating the culture of the natives. it’s painfully obvious to me that Biden and friends sought to imitate the EU as fast as possible in order to dilute the population and quell the populist movements that have been springing up in the West the last decade.
in practical terms, we have a massive border with Mexico and Canada that will always see immigrants seeking opportunity here in the US. what we need to address is the current push to intentionally move millions of warm bodies here for political goals.
The minions of "Woke" are paid by criminal finance and the bureaucratic surveillance state to capture, distort and prevent the healthy discussion of serious American social/financial/political issues. Endless "..yeah but.." conversations and meetings of the cackling media collective in which "..everything means everything so nothing means anything.." prevents clear identification of the problem and the creation of actual solutions. The recent Presidential election illustrated this perfectly. No policy, no national conversation about the American future, no idea of who is in charge of the Republic. The assumption that We the People were so beaten down that we would willingly accept rule by edict. The LIE was/is so transparent it is collapsing under its own weight. But, we got lucky. (Trump is reprieve not salvation.)
Interestingly, it seems that a handful of the "Left coast" elite may be "waking" to the reality that there may be an intentionality behind the dismantled infrastructure, empty reservoirs, crippled fire fighting response and slashed budgets burning L.A. to the ground. If you can spend billions to loot trillions and get the "mark" to pay for it with tax treasure, why not? I don't doubt D.C. perps are already lining up for the rebuild.
The NGO/Mayorkas immigration grift continues to shout down citizen concern, swallow billions in tax treasure, and to Davos benefit, as in Europe, create criminal chaos and instability in major American cities, that as intended, makes the American cultural landscape dangerous and unrecognizable. As a fellow citizen of the American Southwest I think you will agree that the flaw in the machine is its failure to understand that Latin Americans possibly hate tyranny even more than Anglo-Saxons. Depart the psyop and live.
Where we differ, and where I differ with N. S. and his ilk, is on some of the fundamentals implicit in your note and in his post.
1. How the economic elite thinks. I hate to argue from authority, so let’s call this arguing from proximity. My professional career has been in the near-highest reaches of financial services, at the MD level in money-center banks, and at the executive committee level of big software firms. NOBODY thinks in terms of large-scale demographic strategies or bending wage curves. We live in a service economy. Highly-skilled jobs in the service sector are hard to fill with anybody at any price—see the whole H1B visa kerfuffle that has Elon and Bernie on the same side. The issue there isn’t wage levels; it’s skill levels. Similarly, low-skilled jobs are impossible to fill with non-immigrants. Non-immigrants won’t pick fruit or pack meat or empty sewers or prep potatoes in restaurants. Immigrants will, as they always have in every generation in our history.
2. How the Biden Administration thought about the border. Here, I’m depending on reports from people I know in government, principally senior staff to various Democratic Senators. The opening of the spigot was driven by bleeding hearts, not calculating brains. The awfulness of conditions overseas, the desperation of the people clamoring to come in, the hatefulness of the previous Administration’s evil policies all led to a visceral need to reverse course right away. This was coupled with a recognition that the real answer wasn’t at the spigot but at the source, so Harris was dispatched to “fix” Central America, which was of course magical thinking doomed to fail, both practically and politically. Eventually, the policy collapsed and reversed again. But it was never clever Machiavellianism, just soft-hearted soft-headedness.
Yes, and if I remember my social studies right there's a difference between legal and illegal immigration. Perhaps a good first step would be actually to enforce the laws that are currently on the books? In my experience the people in the U.S. who are calling out the immigration problems aren't overly concerned with legal immigration. Of course it's different in Europe, where the elites have made the immigration laws a lot more lax (where they exist at all).
"Blood and Soil" was a perversion of a perfectly valid, virtuous notion: Home and Family. We do well to avoid the former, but shouldn't jettison the latter along with it.
Well for one thing, home and family were near universally celebrated elsewhere without resulting in Nazi-like atrocities.
Also, people who were paying attention at the time could see the difference. There were quite a few traditionalist types in England and America who were initially drawn towards fascism because of the "home and family" connection, but steered clear of it once they discovered what it was really about. If you look at the origins of the term "blood and soil" it goes quite a bit beyond "home and family" or "land and family." Hence the existence of a great many anti-fascist agrarians, then and now.
It isn't necessary to justify the reality that blood, bone, family and soil are the core essentials of human culture. If the woman and child aren't sacred nothing is. The transcendent required for their survival informs the totalit of human history. Accepting that there is an open war on American family, history, culture and myth, being waged by the sterile tyranny of paranoid, corporate surveillance materialists, will allow an approach to the survival of our Republic. It's actually really simple. Slavers have looted enough lives, treasure and labor, and captured enough political systems, that they're going for the brass ring: Totalitarian control of Planet Earth. Unfortunately for them, the American Republic, its Constitution and free citizens have as yet not been totally overthrown. Doubt we're in a war? Look at the people in Europe imprisoned for the crimes of thought and speech. The Scandinavians fleeing their countries after being looted of home and treasure by EU/WEF policy. Is L.A. burning? ---- The woman set ablaze on the New York subway certainly was. All this is consequence and symptom not accident. The psyop is in place to convince free citizens that they are not free. It is the slow numbing of the American psyche, and the slow accumulation of electronic ice. Depart the psyop and live.
Bright light casts a deep shadow. Exploitation of those polarities has been the primary weapon used to subvert the healthy truth/fact based American national conversation We the People deserve. And must actively demand. The war is/has been the repression of human consciousness and the enslavement of free peoples for the exploitation of labor and natural resources. The walking wounded are everywhere. There is the American Republic, its Constitution and the free citizen. Everything else is psyop.
"..snap out of it baby..people are jealous of you..they smile in your face but behind your back they hiss..what's a sweetheart like you doing in a place like this..? B.Dylan
Slavery didn't end in 1863. The 13th Amendment wasn't passed until 1865. Before that it was only eliminated in places not controlled by the Federal government. It was not ended in the slave states that didn't secede nor in the areas of secessionist states occupied by the Union Army. Further, the combination of Jim Crow and the sharecropping system resulted in a form of serfdom that may have actually been worse. 1955 is perhaps a watershed with the Montgomery bus boycott though years of struggle were still needed. Lynching didn't end in the 1930s either. It just gradually morphed into judicial rather than extra-judicial form and persists today. Who knows what is going on regarding Greenland. I don't, you don't and perhaps Trump doesn't. The man is famously transactional so some transaction is likely. I have seen reports that our interest in Greenland provides both a carrot and a stick in our approach to Russia. Like you, I am proud of America but not necessarily the United States.
Why doesn't the "left" critique 1000+ years of attacks on Europeans by Arab/Berbers (colonialists), The Mongolian Hordes (imperialists), and the Ottoman Empire?
Note that European imperialism came about at a precise point in history, 1492, when it was found that regression to Oriental Despotism (from decentralized medieval politics and classical liberalism, see Leonard Liggio) was the most expedient way to tilt up the project of imposing Absolutism (by the Spanish Crown).
Doesn't it seem odd that the "left" isn't aware that it is actually criticizing Oriental Despotism?
Darwin explained that altruism and social cooperation have much more ancient origins.
Peter Richerson, PhD ecology, UC Davis, quotes Darwin (as an example of group selection hypothesis and the neurobiology of sympathy in "primeval times"):
"It must not be forgotten that although a high standard of morality gives but a slight or no advantage to each individual man and his children over other men of the same tribe, yet that an increase in the number of well-endowed men and an advancement in the standard of morality will certainly give an immense advantage to one tribe over another. A tribe including many members who, from possessing in a high degree the spirit of patriotism, fidelity, obedience, courage, and sympathy, were always ready to aid one another, and to sacrifice themselves for the common good, would be victorious over most other tribes, and this would be natural selection (178-179)."
None of it will matter if we don’t start having more kids and bring them up in a way that dismantles the system from the ground up. Being able to revolt is all nice and dandy, but you don’t fight this off by being outnumbered.
Your kIds will be captured by the sacred victim, entitled parasite culture. Human rights is the mechanism, the god. Peer group pressure trumps biology.
Outstanding remarks! Brings to mind what the character ofKing Edward I/ Longshanks in the movie "Braveheart" said about the Scots - "The problem with Scotland, is that it is full of Scots. If we can't drive them out, we will breed them out."
I have thought of the immigrants as settler colonialists for some time, especially those that come illegally. If someone else has expounded upon this theme, this one is the first I’ve seen of a coherent analysis. “Settlers” they definitely are as they don’t intend to leave. I don’t think that the targets of empire made way by destroying their own cultures in advance.
This explains why the "woke" "left" is todays "fascism".
POSTMODERNISM, VIRTUAL REALITY, TROLLS, BOTS AND SOCIAL MEDIA AS PROPAGANDA
Background:
"woke" is part of a larger propaganda (narrative control) and censorship-industrial-complex of a faction (digital capitalism) of the ruling/power elites.
see the #twitterfiles for details
"wokeism" represents the co-opting of "social justice" movements by corrupt elements of the corporate-state, including the military, federal law enforcement, and national security agencies and their proxies, and the educational establishment.
this is one of the best summaries of the situation I've seen:
"The West seems to be the first civilization in history that is in the process of colonizing itself."
Camus, focused as he is on foreign immigration, puts the start of this colonization far too late.
I would say that The West, the successor to Latin Christendom, has been getting colonized for hundreds of years, but not by foreign powers, nor by "regimes" (in the sense of a pejorative synonym for "states" or "governments").
What, then, was this slow-acting, yet rapacious imperial power? The Republic of Letters.
While acknowledging that one can always seek the origin earlier on - every origin has its own origin, every ancestor his own genealogy - Camus locates the start of this process of colonization in the rise of scientific management in the early 20th-century. The enemy, in short, are not foreign invaders; the enemy is economism per se.
Back before the WEF and globalism in general, we were colonized by the East coast with an assist from British capital. Britain is short of capital these days but NYC has plenty. We must separate.
Not a hatred of others but a love of one's own...excellent.
This is what I see as the essence of the populist movement via Trump represent to the American ppl.
The post-war liberal, moralist consensus has marred and maligned the very idea of nationalism so irrevocably that it has become synonymous with racism. But it is not racism: it is a love of one’s own, a love which is in fact deeply human. We would do well to remember this fact—especially in the wake of Trump’s reelection and a populist resurgence across the West.
Great speech. One begins to wonder how many writers like Renaud Camus have been defenestrated with little but a shred of merit. The rediscovery of Western thinkers who foresaw the managerial regime and the West's demographic replacement en masse are now worthy of consideration more than ever before.
Or perhaps, recognize the psyop for what it is and get well. (Pity for the "oikophobic" doesn't require going over the edge of oblivion with them.)
I guess the problem will be for people to understand this process and resist it without being dismissed and demonized as "right wingers" rednecks, fascists etc. How do we communicate that this anti-colonialist resistance is based on love ,as you defined it, and not on hatred or xenophobia?
By explaining through words and exemplifying through actions that this is the goal. At least to me, actual racism is still distasteful and, at times, abhorrent. This does not include jokes and banter, but it does necessarily involve civility and kindness toward people from other cultures.
As black, liberal-heterodox atheist and linguistics professor John McWhorter explains in his book "WOKE RACISM", there is at least much "racism" on the postmodern woke-left as the right.
Pretty much all of the current rhetoric from the "woke" cultural-left about "racism" is itself "racist", corrupt and incompetent.
Depart the psyop and live.
Tell the truth: woke-leftism is a mental illness* (or, at least a magnet for the mentally dysfunctional).
Being "demonized" by woke lunatics is meaningless in itself, unless there are other woke lunatics that can impose a negative outcome of some kind on their critics (beyond lying on social media).
Having studied the general pathologies of leftism for over 30 years, there is a significant shift away from woke insanity going on now, but it isn't complete, and probably never will be. Postmodern neo-communist totalitarianism will always appeal to a certain number of people with mental dysfunctions. The trick is to stop them from gaining power to the greatest extent possible.
The metaphor I use is that wokeism/neo-communism/neo-feudalism is a social cancer that destroys social order like gangrene. The only way to treat the gangrene is to relentlessly hack it off (metaphorically speaking) when it is detected.
The larger aim: re-unify as much of the professional, middle and working classes via populism as possible to form a front against woke neo-communism and the elite-left.
Accept that postmodern social conditions will require the development of anti-fragile ways of thinking and acting, including new practices in social institutions. (anti-fragility to techno-economic disruption and the resulting disintegration of hierarchies of curated expertise, including those that provide meaning and purpose.)
-----
* One of the best deep dives into woke mental dysfunction I’ve read.
https://open.substack.com/pub/helendale/p/social-justice-word-magic-i-the-gleichschaltung
open. substack. com /pub/helendale/p/social-justice-word-magic-i-the-gleichschaltung
The system that the elites are trying to replace is far less resilient to trauma and is already collapsing before its construction is complete. The architects had too much hope in a platonic utopia and not enough pragmatic understanding on what makes a resilient culture rather than the one they were designing from aesthetic and solipsistic principles. If the elites had been smart (and perhaps some generations ago they were, but the system they created now seems to be on a zombie autopilot now) they would have aimed at creating an antifragile culture where the bumps, knocks and unexpected trauma made it stronger. Instead they designed and implemented a future for western culture that's drifted inexorably into mediocrity and senesce, easily replaced by a predator culture that's less benign but far more vigorous.
Predators often identify their prey by its willingness to run. Stop running.
The ruling class is anything but elite. In many ways that has always been true but it seems worse now.
Postmodern woke-left totalitarianism is more parasitic than predatory. It originally exploited techno-economic disruption more than creating it (Lasch). But as time has gone on, and it has gained power, it seeks to reinforce the kinds of disruption that it parasitizes.
-----
One of the best deep dives into woke mental dysfunction I’ve read.
https://open.substack.com/pub/helendale/p/social-justice-word-magic-i-the-gleichschaltung
open. substack. com /pub/helendale/p/social-justice-word-magic-i-the-gleichschaltung
Excellent. I have in the past described our leaders having no loyalty to their historic people/citizenry, which is essentially the same as saying they don’t love them. I believe this reality is just starting to be recognized by normies and perhaps not consciously yet, but there is a buzz in the background that people feel. This needs to be amplified further.
I have no idea why the clarifying reality expressed in Upheaval reports doesn't dominate comment sections across Substack. I suspect, perpetual comment section complaints about the symptoms of the disease, allows a shirking of the personal citizen responsibility necessary to confront the disease itself. The American psyche, both nationally, and on an individual level is wounded. The world is wounded. The vulnerability inherent in accepting the power to heal can be a frightening prospect.
The psyop is real. Its success, the threat, built on repression of the truth, and the injection of fear into the national conversation, is also real. The attempted imprisonment of American consciousness inside the propagandist iconoclastic manufactured hyperrealism of life cancellation, career destruction, rumor, character assassination and, the self-justifyied looting and exploitation of the world's resources, is purely the result of the pathological hypocrisy of those perpetrating it. Possible escape from their cash register sterility, the survival of human moral reason, the lines of moral demarcation that our founding fathers worked hard to include in the American Constitution, are the responsible agents for the emergence of this new "populism". Want a free America? Be a free American.
Got Constitution? Depart the psyop and live.
Criticism of "woke" is not inherent to the structure of substack. Since substack is a version of silicon valley "free speech" libertarianism ("let the marketplace of ideas prevail"), it can obviously accommodate anti-woke perspectives, but that does not mean that they are part of the cultural DNA of the platform.
You are correct and I appreciate the objectivity. (I haven't seen you around lately.) For myself, the UPHEAVAL seems to speak directly to motive. Substack isn't the only purveyor of subscription journalism. We the People have a chance at creating a truth/fact based national conversation and I'm all in on that.
Taibbi, Bari Weiss, Sasha Stone, Glenn Greenwald all banned me for relentlessly complaining about the numerous lunatics, Leftards/communists, AIPAC trolls and bots they allow to run rampant in their comments. Their free speech rhetoric is pure hypocrisy.
I usually check into substack at least a couple of times a week, sometimes daily if there is lots of interesting stuff and/or Facebook has put me in “jail”.
Can group identification and love for one's own ever occur without coming at the expense of looking down on other groups, cultures, and people?
Social identity theory shows us that group identification is almost always tied to boosting self-image—ie instinctively attributing positive traits to one's group and negative traits to outsiders.
As I see it, the only way to break free from this madness—this toxic form of identity and group-based thinking that traps the vast majority of the world’s population, especially in their adopted countries—is to make people care less about their identities and groups.
The problem is that they attach their sense of purpose and meaning in life to identity and belonging (mere accidents of birth), rather than to creation and meaningful work.
People only migrate in one direction. That ought to tell you something.
Yes, it tells me that the West successfully did it.
This would require jettisoning the most basic elements of human anthropology, everywhere and at all times. It is madness and, worse, doomed in advance to failure. Figure that out and propose something else. Failing that, how can one take you seriously?
Historically outbred gene pools where cousin marriage is banned will evolve toward "classic liberalism" and high-social-trust (such as Constitutional order), abandoning clannish (low social forms) social forms and honor systems. It is a function of genetics. See Henrich's "WEIRD" model, and other recent work in evolutionary psychology.
https://weirdpeople.fas.harvard.edu/
And you believe that a mere love for one's country can halt millennia of political evolution and structural shifts? The transformation of fundamental anthropological elements is already in motion, driven by the relentless march of technological revolution. You fail to see it, trapped in the present and fixated on surface-level, immediate observations.
See it? The walking wounded are everywhere. The sterility and greed of avaricious corporate tyranny and its weaponization of tech to capture and subvert the healthy human American national conversation our Republic and the world deserves, though brutal, isn't strong enough to overthrow the human moral reason our founding fathers placed in our Constitution. The capture of tech, and the desperate ascent of the psyop, was the result of the leap in tech and communication that made the criminal machinations of international capital, and the corrupt political surveillance bureaucracy that serves it, transparent to reality. This is a new age. The war is, always has been, the suppression of consciousness hence, the current war on free speech and the psyop. Get well. Depart the psyop and live. (In other words--free your mind and your ass will follow.)
I like how you claim knowledge of the future and use it as an argument from authority. Do you, by chance, own a time machine? May I borrow it, if so?
No need for a time machine—the patterns of human behaviour tend to be remarkably predictable. History may not repeat itself exactly, but it sure loves a good rhyme.
"You can use a friend where a dollar won't spend." Ligntnin' Hopkins
It doesn't matter (but you are correct, "no universalism is ever really universal"). What matters is leadership and advancing cultural evolution beyond postmodern relativism/nihilism. Here is one example:
https://metarationality.com/stem-fluidity-bridge
At the risk of adding an off note to your inevitable Amen corner, how do you deal with the fact that some native(ist?) cultures don’t deserve unqualified love?
I’m an American, and I’m as proud of Ben Franklin, the Wright Brothers, and Steve Jobs as anyone you know. But I’m not so hot on slavery till 1863, lynching till the 1930s, and gunboat diplomacy—we want Greenland!—to this very day.
Your argument is very intellectually seductive. Couched in pure abstractions, and put positively—we love ours, we don’t hate theirs—who could disagree?
But we all know that to love ours is to hate theirs. After all, their very presence harms what we love by diluting it, changing it, destroying it, no? Isn’t that what you mean but are too careful to say so?
We’ve heard your argument before. The last time, the shorthand for it was “Blood and Soil.” The last time, the “flattening” “replacists” were called “rootless cosmopolitans,” which of course was code for Jews.
I think you are recycling the old libels in more modern language. I would tell you to be ashamed of yourself, but I think you already are. Else why write under a pseudonym?
If someone in your family, who you love, is behaving badly, what do you do? Hopefully deliver some tough love/straight criticism in attempt to get them to better themselves. Indeed you do this because you love them. I never said anything about "unqualified" love, or never criticizing one's own nation. And no, one does not need to hate other people's families because you love your own. But you do put your responsibilities to your own first.
I like your metaphor. Does putting your family first include staging an intervention when a relative wants to make a mixed marriage? Or do you let people be people and simply love the new member of the family, too?
Mixed marriage is going to happen in the modern liberal world. It's programmed to happen.
Ideally, if you are a white guy, you would live in a sociaty that doesn't punish you with no-fault divorce and divorce court rape. Also, you wouldn't have a sexual revolution. LOL.
do you have any real proof that N.S is recycling the old blood libels and veiled accusations against Jews or is this a straw man?
what he wrote seems fairly explicit and clear to me. just because you love your family does not mean you hate your neighbor. pretty simple logic.
this is a bad faith argument to make.
Legal immigration is allowing neighbors to marry into the family, or to be adopted into it. No one says you shouldn’t love your family most. The issue is whether you open your arms to additions to the family, or just keep inbreeding.
so yer pro open borders and infinity immigration to prevent inbreeding? is this the hill to die on my friend?
we have well over 330 million people here. that’s enough genetic diversity to avoid a Hapsburg situation.
I don’t of course literally mean DNA—I mean new additions to American culture, just like the additions/changes brought by previous waves of immigration from the British Isles, Ireland, Southern Europe, Scandinavia, Eastern Europe, China, etc. You know, the places your own forbears came here from.
As for numbers, I don’t want open borders. But I don’t want closed ones either. I believe there might exist some number between zero and infinity. If I remember my math right.
I see.
look, I've lived in Texas my whole life. because of the massive 1200 mile border we share, our state has been the recipient of two very distinct cultures. for the most part, I believe we are the better for it.
however, there is a massive difference between an organic meeting between two porous borders and a ruling elite who is intentionally flooding our country with over 10 million migrants with the express purpose of lowering wages and deracinating the culture of the natives. it’s painfully obvious to me that Biden and friends sought to imitate the EU as fast as possible in order to dilute the population and quell the populist movements that have been springing up in the West the last decade.
in practical terms, we have a massive border with Mexico and Canada that will always see immigrants seeking opportunity here in the US. what we need to address is the current push to intentionally move millions of warm bodies here for political goals.
that’s a huge difference no?
Did Michael F. actually read this Lyons report?
The minions of "Woke" are paid by criminal finance and the bureaucratic surveillance state to capture, distort and prevent the healthy discussion of serious American social/financial/political issues. Endless "..yeah but.." conversations and meetings of the cackling media collective in which "..everything means everything so nothing means anything.." prevents clear identification of the problem and the creation of actual solutions. The recent Presidential election illustrated this perfectly. No policy, no national conversation about the American future, no idea of who is in charge of the Republic. The assumption that We the People were so beaten down that we would willingly accept rule by edict. The LIE was/is so transparent it is collapsing under its own weight. But, we got lucky. (Trump is reprieve not salvation.)
Interestingly, it seems that a handful of the "Left coast" elite may be "waking" to the reality that there may be an intentionality behind the dismantled infrastructure, empty reservoirs, crippled fire fighting response and slashed budgets burning L.A. to the ground. If you can spend billions to loot trillions and get the "mark" to pay for it with tax treasure, why not? I don't doubt D.C. perps are already lining up for the rebuild.
The NGO/Mayorkas immigration grift continues to shout down citizen concern, swallow billions in tax treasure, and to Davos benefit, as in Europe, create criminal chaos and instability in major American cities, that as intended, makes the American cultural landscape dangerous and unrecognizable. As a fellow citizen of the American Southwest I think you will agree that the flaw in the machine is its failure to understand that Latin Americans possibly hate tyranny even more than Anglo-Saxons. Depart the psyop and live.
Thanks for the thoughtful response.
Where we differ, and where I differ with N. S. and his ilk, is on some of the fundamentals implicit in your note and in his post.
1. How the economic elite thinks. I hate to argue from authority, so let’s call this arguing from proximity. My professional career has been in the near-highest reaches of financial services, at the MD level in money-center banks, and at the executive committee level of big software firms. NOBODY thinks in terms of large-scale demographic strategies or bending wage curves. We live in a service economy. Highly-skilled jobs in the service sector are hard to fill with anybody at any price—see the whole H1B visa kerfuffle that has Elon and Bernie on the same side. The issue there isn’t wage levels; it’s skill levels. Similarly, low-skilled jobs are impossible to fill with non-immigrants. Non-immigrants won’t pick fruit or pack meat or empty sewers or prep potatoes in restaurants. Immigrants will, as they always have in every generation in our history.
2. How the Biden Administration thought about the border. Here, I’m depending on reports from people I know in government, principally senior staff to various Democratic Senators. The opening of the spigot was driven by bleeding hearts, not calculating brains. The awfulness of conditions overseas, the desperation of the people clamoring to come in, the hatefulness of the previous Administration’s evil policies all led to a visceral need to reverse course right away. This was coupled with a recognition that the real answer wasn’t at the spigot but at the source, so Harris was dispatched to “fix” Central America, which was of course magical thinking doomed to fail, both practically and politically. Eventually, the policy collapsed and reversed again. But it was never clever Machiavellianism, just soft-hearted soft-headedness.
Yes, and if I remember my social studies right there's a difference between legal and illegal immigration. Perhaps a good first step would be actually to enforce the laws that are currently on the books? In my experience the people in the U.S. who are calling out the immigration problems aren't overly concerned with legal immigration. Of course it's different in Europe, where the elites have made the immigration laws a lot more lax (where they exist at all).
New editions will be very poor people who don’t like you.
"Blood and Soil" was a perversion of a perfectly valid, virtuous notion: Home and Family. We do well to avoid the former, but shouldn't jettison the latter along with it.
In what way was it a perversion and not just a catchy way of saying the same thing?
Well for one thing, home and family were near universally celebrated elsewhere without resulting in Nazi-like atrocities.
Also, people who were paying attention at the time could see the difference. There were quite a few traditionalist types in England and America who were initially drawn towards fascism because of the "home and family" connection, but steered clear of it once they discovered what it was really about. If you look at the origins of the term "blood and soil" it goes quite a bit beyond "home and family" or "land and family." Hence the existence of a great many anti-fascist agrarians, then and now.
It isn't necessary to justify the reality that blood, bone, family and soil are the core essentials of human culture. If the woman and child aren't sacred nothing is. The transcendent required for their survival informs the totalit of human history. Accepting that there is an open war on American family, history, culture and myth, being waged by the sterile tyranny of paranoid, corporate surveillance materialists, will allow an approach to the survival of our Republic. It's actually really simple. Slavers have looted enough lives, treasure and labor, and captured enough political systems, that they're going for the brass ring: Totalitarian control of Planet Earth. Unfortunately for them, the American Republic, its Constitution and free citizens have as yet not been totally overthrown. Doubt we're in a war? Look at the people in Europe imprisoned for the crimes of thought and speech. The Scandinavians fleeing their countries after being looted of home and treasure by EU/WEF policy. Is L.A. burning? ---- The woman set ablaze on the New York subway certainly was. All this is consequence and symptom not accident. The psyop is in place to convince free citizens that they are not free. It is the slow numbing of the American psyche, and the slow accumulation of electronic ice. Depart the psyop and live.
Blood and Soil as a concept predates the Nazis. They appropriated the concept as they did environmentalism and vegetarianism.
Bright light casts a deep shadow. Exploitation of those polarities has been the primary weapon used to subvert the healthy truth/fact based American national conversation We the People deserve. And must actively demand. The war is/has been the repression of human consciousness and the enslavement of free peoples for the exploitation of labor and natural resources. The walking wounded are everywhere. There is the American Republic, its Constitution and the free citizen. Everything else is psyop.
"..snap out of it baby..people are jealous of you..they smile in your face but behind your back they hiss..what's a sweetheart like you doing in a place like this..? B.Dylan
"I don't care about economy...I don't care about astronomy...but it sure do bother me to see my loved ones turnin' into puppets."
Yep, mesmerize ‘em with talk of home and family while the marionette strings get sewn on….
Except that it ain't the home-and-family folks doin' the mesmerizin'.
At best they're a healthy response, at worst an unhealthy reaction. But they're not the string-pullers.
Slavery didn't end in 1863. The 13th Amendment wasn't passed until 1865. Before that it was only eliminated in places not controlled by the Federal government. It was not ended in the slave states that didn't secede nor in the areas of secessionist states occupied by the Union Army. Further, the combination of Jim Crow and the sharecropping system resulted in a form of serfdom that may have actually been worse. 1955 is perhaps a watershed with the Montgomery bus boycott though years of struggle were still needed. Lynching didn't end in the 1930s either. It just gradually morphed into judicial rather than extra-judicial form and persists today. Who knows what is going on regarding Greenland. I don't, you don't and perhaps Trump doesn't. The man is famously transactional so some transaction is likely. I have seen reports that our interest in Greenland provides both a carrot and a stick in our approach to Russia. Like you, I am proud of America but not necessarily the United States.
Doesn't this replicate and, in a sense, validate the left's critique of European imperialism?
Why doesn't the "left" critique 1000+ years of attacks on Europeans by Arab/Berbers (colonialists), The Mongolian Hordes (imperialists), and the Ottoman Empire?
Note that European imperialism came about at a precise point in history, 1492, when it was found that regression to Oriental Despotism (from decentralized medieval politics and classical liberalism, see Leonard Liggio) was the most expedient way to tilt up the project of imposing Absolutism (by the Spanish Crown).
Doesn't it seem odd that the "left" isn't aware that it is actually criticizing Oriental Despotism?
I wasn't defending the left, rather questioning Lyons' analysis by pointing out its similarity to the left's critique of European imperialism.
Oikophilia when united with the guidelines offered in the Sermon on the Mount can go a long way towards recovering our nations & culture.
Darwin explained that altruism and social cooperation have much more ancient origins.
Peter Richerson, PhD ecology, UC Davis, quotes Darwin (as an example of group selection hypothesis and the neurobiology of sympathy in "primeval times"):
"It must not be forgotten that although a high standard of morality gives but a slight or no advantage to each individual man and his children over other men of the same tribe, yet that an increase in the number of well-endowed men and an advancement in the standard of morality will certainly give an immense advantage to one tribe over another. A tribe including many members who, from possessing in a high degree the spirit of patriotism, fidelity, obedience, courage, and sympathy, were always ready to aid one another, and to sacrifice themselves for the common good, would be victorious over most other tribes, and this would be natural selection (178-179)."
None of it will matter if we don’t start having more kids and bring them up in a way that dismantles the system from the ground up. Being able to revolt is all nice and dandy, but you don’t fight this off by being outnumbered.
A "revolt" doesn't make any sense. What is needed is the development of anti-fragile capacity (anti-fragile to disruption).
Wokeism is parasitism. It flourishes under "unhealthy" conditions caused by techno-economic disruption.
Your kIds will be captured by the sacred victim, entitled parasite culture. Human rights is the mechanism, the god. Peer group pressure trumps biology.
Outstanding remarks! Brings to mind what the character ofKing Edward I/ Longshanks in the movie "Braveheart" said about the Scots - "The problem with Scotland, is that it is full of Scots. If we can't drive them out, we will breed them out."
I have thought of the immigrants as settler colonialists for some time, especially those that come illegally. If someone else has expounded upon this theme, this one is the first I’ve seen of a coherent analysis. “Settlers” they definitely are as they don’t intend to leave. I don’t think that the targets of empire made way by destroying their own cultures in advance.
Anyone remember an 80's parody song called "So Afraid of the Russians"? I think we need a new version -- "So Afraid of the Fascists."
This explains why the "woke" "left" is todays "fascism".
POSTMODERNISM, VIRTUAL REALITY, TROLLS, BOTS AND SOCIAL MEDIA AS PROPAGANDA
Background:
"woke" is part of a larger propaganda (narrative control) and censorship-industrial-complex of a faction (digital capitalism) of the ruling/power elites.
see the #twitterfiles for details
"wokeism" represents the co-opting of "social justice" movements by corrupt elements of the corporate-state, including the military, federal law enforcement, and national security agencies and their proxies, and the educational establishment.
this is one of the best summaries of the situation I've seen:
https://gordonhahn.com/2021/04/29/the-new-american-communo-fascism-and-its-postmodernist-roots/
gordonhahn. com /2021/04/29/the-new-american-communo-fascism-and-its-postmodernist-roots/
excerpt:
The New American Communo-Fascism and Its Postmodernist Roots
April 29, 2021
by Gordon Hahn
also see:
One of the best deep dives into woke mental dysfunction I’ve read.
https://open.substack.com/pub/helendale/p/social-justice-word-magic-i-the-gleichschaltung
open. substack. com /pub/helendale/p/social-justice-word-magic-i-the-gleichschaltung
"The West seems to be the first civilization in history that is in the process of colonizing itself."
Camus, focused as he is on foreign immigration, puts the start of this colonization far too late.
I would say that The West, the successor to Latin Christendom, has been getting colonized for hundreds of years, but not by foreign powers, nor by "regimes" (in the sense of a pejorative synonym for "states" or "governments").
What, then, was this slow-acting, yet rapacious imperial power? The Republic of Letters.
While acknowledging that one can always seek the origin earlier on - every origin has its own origin, every ancestor his own genealogy - Camus locates the start of this process of colonization in the rise of scientific management in the early 20th-century. The enemy, in short, are not foreign invaders; the enemy is economism per se.
Back before the WEF and globalism in general, we were colonized by the East coast with an assist from British capital. Britain is short of capital these days but NYC has plenty. We must separate.