December 3, 2015 § 21 Comments
Modern people have a terrible attitude of entitlement, of which they are mostly unaware. Sure, they can see where those bad people over there feel entitled; but they don’t see it in themselves. It may be obvious to other people, but to the entitled the world just looks so unfair and wrong when it doesn’t hand them what they want on a silver platter.
The form taken by this entitlement attitude depends on the person and what he takes for granted. Modern sluts feel entitled to free contraception and the right to murder their own children as a ‘backup’; baby mommas feel entitled to promiscuous sex with bad boys and food, shelter, education, domestic safety and HDTV for their fatherless children; college girls feel entitled to have ‘safe spaces’ and to punish their mutually drunken lovers as ‘rapists’ when they regret their hookups; libertarians feel entitled to functioning sovereign marketplaces and communities with low or nonexistent taxes; usurers feel entitled to profits without the concomitants of investment in property; and in general people who are terrible followers feel entitled to good leaders.
I’m sorry to inform all of these entitled modern people that there is no free lunch. Liberals feel entitled to the benefits of living under authority without actually having to live under real authority; as a result they are ungovernable and get the lousy leadership they deserve.
Every man is both leader and follower. It is important to be a good follower: not a yes-man toady, which is a form of cowardice, but loyal — even when leadership is bad. The form of this loyalty will vary based on the institution in question and the circumstances, and like all things it has its limits. But we didn’t get to where we are today through an excess of good followership and loyalty.
I don’t speak for other men, but being under my authority is a privilege that is offered to very few people. Only very particular circumstances can result in someone being under my authority. When those circumstances obtain, my subjects get my total commitment to their well being. If my authority is challenged – not particular judgments, mind you, since I am as fallible as the next guy, but the legitimacy of my authority per se – then that follower is out. That person and their issues are not my problem anymore. Living under my authority is a privilege: a privilege which can be revoked.
No self-respecting man is interested in leading ungovernable people. Liberals believe in non-authoritative authority, non-governing governance, non-discriminating discrimination. Liberals are inherently ungovernable.
Leadership is like any other human activity; which is to say, it is subject to all of the flaws associated with human beings. It isn’t always true that “you get what you pay for.” Being good followers doesn’t guarantee good leadership.
But being bad followers does guarantee bad leadership.
December 2, 2015 § 9 Comments
The civilization we actually live in is one of white supremacy, that is, one built by and governed by white men. That isn’t to say that it was built solely by white men, obviously. It is just to say that Western civilization is essentially the civilization of white men: it would not have been built without them and cannot carry on without them. If all non-white men suddenly disappeared, Western civilization would be severely hurt but would carry on. If all women disappeared, civilization would end in a generation. But if all white men disappeared civilization would end at the next oil change.
These are extremely politically incorrect observations, of course; but are, I assert, factually correct, which is what matters to me.
The political philosophy of white men is liberalism. Liberalism is constantly making war on history, nature, and tradition on a long march through the generations, protected by a rear guard of conservatives who ensure that the march itself is never questioned.
So when blacks and people of other races muster to the sound of white liberal grievance-mongering trumpets, they are just being the good Uncle Toms they are being told to be.
December 2, 2015 § 25 Comments
Political freedom/autonomy and equality are two modes of the same idea. You can’t have one without the other, and embracing one necessarily implies embracing the other, just as picking up a coin entails picking up both sides of the coin even if you happen to be looking at Heads.
There is no essential difference between liberalism and leftism: they are different baskets of unprincipled exceptions overlaid on top of the same basic commitment to the political philosophy I call liberalism.
Failure to recognize this keeps ‘conservatives’ locked in the mind trap. They naturally, as conservatives, feel loyalty to their ancestors and the thoughts of their ancestors — who happen to be classical liberals. And because conservatism entails a certain acceptance of how things are without thinking them all the way through, conservatives never accept that their revered classical liberal ancestors and the hated leftists/progressives just are the same sort of thing.
As a result, the function of conservatism in society is to preserve and protect liberalism from its own excesses. Conservatives are the abused enablers of progressives and always will be, mopping up the vomit and excrement after the drunken binges to make sure that they can continue.
The only way to put an end to the self abuse is to fully realize and accept the truth: that liberalism and leftism just are the same thing. The conservative disposition, with its built-in tendency to accept things as they are and not think them through to the point of critical insanity, screams against this.
But there are times when it is necessary to peel back some more layers and figure out what is really happening: to understand when certain things are built on a lie and not just accept them as given. There are times when the only option is a sociopathic option.
And if there has ever been such a time, that time is now. When society has gone insane, the place to find sanity is outside the padded walls.
December 1, 2015 § 6 Comments
… those who separate people into two kinds, and those who don’t.
In this post I am going to talk about one kind of people made up of two kinds of people, which gives rise to a third kind. They all end up hating each other even though they all have fundamentally the same loyalties.
The first kind of people are conservatives. Conservatives have what I will call a conservative disposition. A conservative disposition is a tendency to love and respect one’s own people, culture, and traditions, without insisting on thinking things through too much. Most people are born with at least some degree of conservative disposition. It takes certain environmental influences to purge the conservative disposition out of a person, and in any case nobody can think everything through from first principles so even people who philosophize for a living cannot escape from accepting some amount of received wisdom on faith in many areas of their lives.
The second kind of people are liberals. Liberals are people who have reasonably firm loyalties to the political philosophy of liberalism, at least to enough of an extent that they will affirm liberal slogans by default.
Because it is rationally incoherent liberalism is unstable. Situated in actual reality this means that as things ‘progress’, as liberalism revolutionizes social institutions and alters its own context, new generations of liberals end up despising older generations of liberals, rejecting them as illiberal or inauthentically liberal. We tend to call the newer generations of liberals ‘leftists’ or ‘progressives’ and the older generation ‘liberals’.
So we end up with ‘classical’ liberals and ‘modern’ liberals. Naturally people with more of a conservative disposition will admire their ‘classical’ liberal ancestors as the congenital source of their liberal ‘tradition’. The fact that these ‘classical’ liberals rejected their own ancestors and traditions creates too much cognitive dissonance to think about — and as I mentioned at the beginning of the post, the conservative disposition recognizes that life is too short to be able to think everything through to first principles anyway.
And that is how you end up with a society in which everyone is strongly loyal to liberalism, and yet still despise each other and see each other as tyrants.