Idea — lets use entryist tactics against liberals: that will show them
August 12, 2014 § 11 Comments
Oh, that’s right.
There is already a group of people who think they can ‘agree and amplify’ liberalism’s revolutionary slogans and invest them via nominalist fiat with tradition and common sense to keep them nice and tame.
We call these people “conservatives”.
It may be painful for most to hear, but playing in the political system with the aim of gaining some power in the liberal setup we currently live under is a waste of time. Conservatives have been banging their heads against this wall for 60 years.
That is not to say that reactionaries and Christian radicals should not engage politically, but that the goal of any engagement cannot be geared towards wielding political power, but rather sewing chaos and undermining the system itself.
I accept the collapse/seizure theory, that the best and only logical design for taking control is to prepare for the impending self-implosion of our society, being ready to use violence and capture some appropriate region in which liberalism can be liquidated.
I would hope that as this kind of reactionary thinking spreads (as it appears to be doing, particularly among dynamic young people), there will begin to be many more face-to-face meetings of like minds, and eventually perhaps a descending of adherents into an area where they may engage in local politics and education, to prepare for the opportunity where we will seize the levers of power and create a society that is thoroughly illiberal.
[…] Source: Zippy Catholic […]
I’m beginning to believe that the reason conservatives in the past seventy years (maybe even longer) have not had any meaningful success over liberals is because “conservatives” ARE liberals–slow ones, but liberals nonetheless.
I have another theory–technology is inherently liberal. To the extent that conservatives depend on technology, they too are liberals. I haven’t developed this thought at length, but we can see shades of this in this piece of Whittaker Chambers’ correspondence–
If I am incorrect as to whom you were referring I apologize in advance.
Libertarians *are* Liberals. Since Liberalism means ‘an ideology or political outlook founded upon a devotion to individual liberty and general equality’ is *must* be Liberal. While I do understand that each nation develops its own meanings and words for internal politics I continually marvel at how Americans struggle to grasp that the contention between their Democratic and Republican parties is a struggle between a Middle-Left group and a Centre-Left group. yes, there are some Centre-Right adherents to the Centre-Left party and some Far-Left adherents to the Middle-Left party, but the platforms are what they are.
But the confusion seems to afflict even Right and Far-Right Americans – I see Traditional Catholics who attend Latin Mass who can defend laissez-faire Capitalism (a Liberal concept) and Libertarian candidates at length.
And that is, I think, part of Zippy’s point – if Conservatives merely *accept* Liberal language it can confuse issues and attempting to use Liberal tactics of relativism can lead to such errors of speech and thought that the sentiment “only laissez-faire economics is truly Conservative” is something readily encountered in discussions with people who truly believe they are the Far Right – by accepting the tactics of relativism some people no believe that ‘a ideology or political outlook founded upon a devotion to individual liberty and general equality’ means *Conservative*.
Some liberals do tend to worship technology because it tends to be materially empowering: it expands the range of material choices. The Colt 45 was called the Equalizer for a reason.
But to borrow a phrase, technology doesn’t kill sanity, liberalism kills sanity.
I am not talking about libertarians at all, though your point does stand. It should be fairly obvious that libertarian is a species of liberal since both words have the same root.
As for a conservatism that isn’t merely a vintage liberalism… I think all hope of true “throne and altar” conservatism in the Anglosphere died when Charles I was murdered.
Hold tight to the white rose and do not despair
And in the very first comment, Mark Citadel proposes a bunch of liberalism as a way to somehow create an illiberal-topia.
Some still think they can use the political system to win power and destroy liberalism. You’ll recover from this delusion soon I hope. You’ll realize voting does you no good.
Liberalism had to destroy illiberalism in order to assert itself.
It is only logical that illiberalism has to destroy liberalism in order to assert itself.
Or liberalism will destroy itself.
In my view any attempt to DO SOMETHING!!!, beyond just spreading the truth around where we can, is virtually certain to backfire.