"Given the metastatic nature of Liberalism, could there be a non-Liberal state which was not consciously and vehemently and constitutionally anti-Liberal?"
Given the levels of Liberal penetration into the Western brain, such a State would appear monstrous.
---
Next day: The pork roast was excellent. I marinated it overnight in garlic, rosemary and toasted sesame oil. We had it with rice and beans, Italian peas. Klondike bars for dessert and a shot of brandy.
If I am correct --and being Ex Cathedra, I must be, by definition-- that the complexes within the seven-spoked wheel of Liberal ideology are driven by bottomless victimist/egalitarian hatred, resentment and envy, then the only way to oppose them is by force.
And by force I mean --primarily but not exclusively-- the State, which is legal coercion backed up by actual violence, threatened or actual. And in this case, an anti-Liberal regime. What Liberals would call "fascist", their name for anything to the Right of their current party line.
Suppose, for example, that Iceland, with its 300k people and very tight ethnic bonds, were suddenly to declare that Iceland was for Icelanders and arranged the departure of the immigrant foreigners there. This would be proclaimed a "human rights" tragedy. Because, as we know, it is a "human right" for anyone to immigrate to a White country if they feel like it. Perhaps even the Pope would mourn this evil turn of events as he mourned the invading dead Africans at Lampedusa.
Who would dare stand up for the ethnic survival of a bunch of blond northern White people? They would be framed as fascists.
Meanwhile, check out the membership of the UN human rights commission...
Part of my move from conservatism to reaction is noting that even conservatives would be powerless to support the Icelanders once the rhetoric of rights got going. Otherwise they'd fear being called racists.
After all, as some young traditionalists have asked, what social or cultural battle has the Western Right won in the last thirty years? Make a list...
---
4 comments:
Very true. I'm not sure I would want to live in such a country if I saw it for myself. The best we can hope for, I think, is a groundswell movement that leads to multiple constitutional amendments that restore the original intent of the Founders and stems the tide of liberalism. A pipe dream, but these are desperate times. And those lead to desperate measures.
-Sean
Given the voting patterns of the American electorate the only hope for this dream (Levin's book) is a significant awakening among White voters. The coloreds are firmly locked into the Democrat camp.
And as I often point out, it is absolutely forbidden to address Whites as a racial group unless it is a call to repentance from our "racism."
I can't imagine how what you hope for could happen without a stunning social awakening and reversal of the last 50 years.
True. But now we have something that we haven't had for the past fifty years: social media and alternative media outlets. Both are incredible tools, and conservatives, particularly younger ones, are taking full advantage of them: liberal pundits ponder how to "take Twitter back from the conservatives" and dismiss blogging as "not real journalism." They are literally afraid of the conservative influence over new media.
The currently unfettered ability to get news out to a very large audience has been a God-send for conservatives, who can now expose liberal lies faster than the liberals can cover them up. There has been significant attention given to the Trayvon Martin revenge/hate crimes on the internet. I think the Internet may be the catalyst for the conservative renaissance we need. I think our fellow man-loving Hibernian Oscar Wilde said it best: "Man is least himself when he is speaking in his own person. But give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth." As more and more white people start speaking their minds without fear of censure, things will change. Hopefully for the better, but the road there is gonna be ugly.
-Sean
Post a Comment