Let’s Have a Revolution

I think we need a Revolution just to re-establish the Constitutional order. I’m sure if our Amazona saw this – via Brit Hume – she’d have blown a gasket:

This from the article: “he (Vindman) was deeply troubled by what he interpreted as an attempt by the president to subvert U.S. foreign policy…” There is a huge fallacy in this. Anyone know what it is?

The fallacy is that a President can subvert US foreign policy, of course. Per the Constitution, American foreign policy is whatever the President says it is: good, bad or indifferent. Congress has inputs in that they must agree to pay the monetary cost of the President’s policy and the Senate must ratify any treaties the President makes in pursuit of Administration policy…but the President decides what it is. If the President wakes up tomorrow morning and decides that our foreign policy is to insist that foreigners hop on one foot when negotiating with us, then that is the foreign policy of the United States, the end. And it can only be subverted if someone other than the President tries to change policy.

But this is where we are in 2019 – where we have bureaucrats claiming they run the show and large swaths of American political power agreeing with that assertion. We’ve lost all concept of what the Rule of Law is and that has made our Constitution, functionally, a dead letter. It is only enforced, at the moment, on whim…but we can’t remain free (or even civilized) like that. We have to get back to strict enforcement of the law, or we’re doomed. And if we can’t get that via Trump (mostly by appointing judges) then we are going to have to alter or abolish our current government and start all over again.

A Century-Long Mistake

I’ve been thinking a lot lately about how things are and how we got here – and I think I’ve identified the date when we went off course: September 14th, 1901. The day William McKinley died, a few days after being shot.

Take a look at this last address, made shortly before he was shot – do read the whole thing, but the bit that stands out for me is how he talks at length about the growing inter-dependence of the world while also asserting that our fair trade relations must never be done at the expense of our home production. Get it? We must trade, but we must never harm ourselves in the pursuit of the almighty dollar. This is the sort of speech we got when the President and Congress were trying to serve the interests of the American people – and they were doing what they did out in the open, debating it in public, and working strictly within the Constitutional confines of our government.

People don’t think much of McKinley and even someone as versed in history as I am only have a slight bit of knowledge about him – from a prosperous Ohio family; Civil War service, law, politics and the rise to the top. He is portrayed as unimaginative; plodding. He is entirely overshadowed by the man who succeeded him, Theodore Roosevelt, who is always cast in heroic terms…taking over and reinvigorating the American government. But I think we can see now, at long remove, that having a vigorous American government isn’t an unalloyed benefit. With a slight hiccup under Coolidge in the 1920’s, since McKinley we’ve seen the atrophy of Congressional power; an increasingly Imperial Presidency and the massive expansion of government control – and, over the long term, the imposition of policies which are overtly destructive of the United States.

Theodore Roosevelt came in and had his famous assertion that if the law doesn’t specifically prohibit a President from doing a thing, then the thing can be done. It was a gigantic shift: it started the process of having our system being that of a government with strictly enumerated powers to having a government doing whatever it can get away with. Wilson and FDR just put that attitude on steroids – so much so that even a limited government man like Reagan still blithely exercised powers that Presidents up to McKinley would never dreamed of exercising. But a government without limits is a government which not only can do anything, it will do anything – and as it will still be a government run by human beings, it will almost certainly end up doing whatever those with the most influence demand. And therein lies our problem.

Realize that today – right now – there are people, right and left, who are demanding that Trump essentially go to war with Turkey because they think it wrong that the Turks are going after the Kurds. Maybe the Turks are wrong; but if the Turks are wrong, then it isn’t for the President to decide if we fight them…or, at least, it isn’t supposed to be the President who decides if we fight: it is supposed to be Congress, which will debate a declaration of war and then vote on it…and if approved, we go to war. But, we’re so far down this road that most don’t even see that – they are so used, that is, to the government just doing things that they are demanding it just do something in Syria. And do something about climate change. And trans people. And illegal immigrants. And so on and on and on.

And think about what we’ve got: a gigantic system of treaties, alliances, agreements, laws, regulations and such which authorize this, that or the other thing and none of it is fully known, hardly any of it was really debated…and it is all in the service of doing something, nobody really knows what…but if we don’t keep things just as they are, disaster will result. Or, so we’re told.

I asserted some while back that President Trump is the most law-abiding President we’ve had since Coolidge: and I’m sure I’m right about that. I do not say the most morally excellent President – first off, I can’t peer into souls and so I’m unable to judge the status of President Trump’s; secondly, because it is irrelevant to whether or not the President obeys the law. And Trump obeys the law. The proof of that is that after years of relentlessly being investigated (often by entirely illegal means) they still haven’t found a crime they can hang around his neck. Hardly anyone could survive that scrutiny…but, Trump has. And if you look at what he says and does, he’s always acting within the law and asking Congress to codify things into law. He isn’t President Pen and Phone. I don’t know if this lawfulness is the result of deep thought on the part of the President or mere instinct – but regardless, Trump has hit upon the first requirement of liberty: adherence to law. That we can only do, via government, what the law says we can do – no more, no less and if you don’t like it, change the law via lawful means.

It is my view that a Republic must strictly enforce its laws – and because of this, the laws must be few and easy to understand; and the government must not attempt to manage the lives of the people because doing so requires a multiplicity of laws, each of which will merely increase government power along with the ability to abuse that power. We cannot, willy nilly, go back to 1901 – but we must go back to it as much as we can, and the first step is to start enforcing all the laws. The laws against illegal entry. The laws against government malfeasance. So on and so forth: it doesn’t matter if they are good or bad laws: if they are on the books, they must be strictly enforced. And it is the strict enforcement of bad laws which will ensure their repeal or modification – keeping in mind that a host of laws are on the books which routinely trip up regular folks and they are kept because they aren’t allowed to trip up the Ruling Class…start having people like Hillary going to jail like a poor swabby who took a wrong picture and all of a sudden our Rulers will be less interested in keeping laws like that on the books.

The next part of a restoration should be, in my view, a disentangling of the United States from the world. We can be an Empire or a Republic: we can’t be both. NATO has to go. The UN has to go. Free Trade has to go – I am going to write up about what McKinley was talking up: Trade Reciprocity, which I think that Trump is on about. I want us to trade with the world – but only in ways that are mutually beneficial. Bring our boys and girls back home. Maintain a second-to-none military force in being. Advise the world that an attack upon the United States is a suicidal act – and then destroy the first nation which tests us on it. If we have alliances, they are to be temporary and serving a particular national goal. No more CIA. No more NSA. No more FBI. Relations with tyrannical States to be kept to a minimum (tyranny and liberty cannot really coexist).

It is time – past time – that we gave up the goals of those who don’t have our interests at heart. This is our country – it is made by us and for us. It is not a world police, nor a dumping ground for the world’s refuse. It is a place where free people debate among themselves and decide via law what course to follow. It is time, that is, for America to be America.

A Clean Break

As the last few weeks have played out in politics, it has forced me to do a complete re-assessment of how I’ve looked at the world for my entire adult life. To be sure, this reconsideration has been ongoing for about a decade, or maybe a little more, but it has really crystalized out recently. It is time for a complete, clean break with what went before and to chart a new path forward.

What Hunter Biden did is nothing new; it isn’t in the least remarkable. He was merely the recipient of what people in his position routinely receive: a special deal which allows him to be very rich for little or no effort. This way his life can be devoted to what really matters: hanging around with other rich people, attending conferences and galas and generally having a swell time. And if he decided to follow in Daddy’s political footsteps, the way would be cleared for him in some safe seat. If you start looking into it – as Matt and I did in our 2007 book, Caucus of Corruption – you just see that it is everywhere. In that book, for political reasons, we concentrated on the Democrat side of the aisle (given that our goal was to show the absurdity of the Democrats 2006 campaign against a so-called “GOP culture of corruption”), but we could easily have written it about politics, in general.

What it really shows is that people who go into politics – with a few very rare exceptions – are in it for themselves. They want power and money and attention and fame and praise and so they go into politics – and almost invariably, if they are even modestly successful at winning office, wind up richer than they did when they started. And it has been going on for a long time, folks; throughout the Western democracies. Just a small quote from Chesterton about 1910 will suffice to show it:

There are, I believe, some who still deny that England is governed by an oligarchy. It is quite enough for me to know that a man might have gone to sleep some thirty years ago over the day’s newspaper and woke up last week over the later newspaper, and fancied he was reading about the same people. In one paper he would have found a Lord Robert Cecil, a Mr. Gladstone, a Mr. Lyttleton, a Churchill, a Chamberlain, a Trevelyan, an Acland. In the other paper he would find a Lord Robert Cecil, a Mr. Gladstone, a Mr. Lyttleton, a Churchill, a Chamberlain, a Trevelyan, an Acland. If this is not being governed by families I cannot imagine what it is. I suppose it is being governed by extraordinary democratic coincidences.

Funny, huh? How people from the same family can keep winding up on top. Either they are families of geniuses, or someone is making things happen. What are the odds that the son of an American Senator would be just the person an oil company needs to pay $50,000.00 a month to? That the daughter of a President would be just right for that $600,000.00 news gig? Or that another daughter of a different President would prove to be perfect to host the fourth hour of the Today show?

You know that is all bullsh**. I know it is, too. They know it as well. But, it just keeps happening and happening because, well, that’s just the way it is. And it wouldn’t be so bad if they were at least any good at being an oligarchy! Back in Chesterton’s day, there was the cold, hard reality that Winston Churchill was at least as talented as his father, Randolph. There was something there – there was, that is, a justification for Winston getting a leg up (and he did) to enter politics based on his father’s previous efforts. These days, you get to benefit even if the previous person in line was a complete, rotten failure. And rotten failure is all we’ve gotten – and I’m getting very ecumenical in that, by the way. I’m not excusing anyone on partisan grounds any longer.

To be sure, the Republicans I voted for in the past were at least better than the Democrats I voted against (with the exception of McCain: knowing that I’m the co-author of Worst President, please understand that I believe McCain would have been even worse than Obama proved to be). But they were only better in degree, not in kind. I mean, let’s face some cold, hard facts here: President Bush the Younger was re-elected with 51% of the vote in 2004 and came into his second term with high approval ratings and a Republican Congress. With all this, he couldn’t even manage to de-fund Planned Parenthood or NPR! It could have been done, easily, in a budget reconciliation between House and Senate and there would have been nothing the Democrats could have done about it. This was “better” than a President Kerry who probably would have increased PP funding, but not really better in that the taxes of pro-life Americans were still going to fund something they consider abhorrent…and which Bush and the entire GOP campaigned on getting rid of.

I know some will say that this is just our GOPe screwing it’s base and that the Democrats don’t do that. But, they do. Obama was elected in 2008 with 53% of the vote and came into office with a Democrat Congress and a filibuster-proof Senate majority…and he couldn’t even get the single payer health system Democrats say they want. It would have been easy. The GOP could have done nothing to stop it. Enact a 10% payroll tax to fund it and just start passing out the cash to people who need health care. That you and I know it would have been a disaster is neither here nor there – our side had lost the election and the Democrats won all the power they could possibly need to make all Democrat dreams come true…and they couldn’t do something like that. They instead wound up with the abomination known as Obamacare which even if it had worked as planned would still have left millions out in the cold and cost like the devil – but they couldn’t even write something that worked! Meanwhile, not only did Obama not end the wars they campaigned against in 2008, he started new one’s…droning the living sh** out of every poor, brown skinned person they could target (well, those they weren’t letting in as unvetted refugees, that is). A public works bonanza that didn’t create any public works. A slew of new spending which improved nothing. This is what the Democrat voters get for investing their time and effort? Yep – in other words, nothing: but lots and lots for whomever is the crony. Democrat cronies made out like bandits. But your average purple-haired Democrat wanting more safe spaces? Not much.

And as far as the social disintegration we’ve seen over the past 60 years – we’ve been blinded by the Democrats pushing the disintegration that we haven’t noticed the Republicans letting them do it. And when they have power to roll it back, doing nothing of the sort. And now we see in the Epstein case the reason why it might have all been allowed to happen: Lord only knows how many of the high and mighty are caught in that web…but what better way to get out from under that rock than by making the rock legal? By making you, a normal person, the bad guy if you point out some of the disgusting actions?

Illegal immigration to provide votes for Democrats and cheap labor for Republicans. Wars which don’t end in victory or defeat. Enforcing immorality against popular wishes. Providing government sinecures to anyone who will toe the line – and who won’t be got rid of no matter how corrupt or stupid they prove. Accepting money from foreign entities who want the United States destroyed. Both sides, all the time – and on top of being this stupidly destructive, raking it in for themselves, their families and their friends. It is time to bring an end to all that. By peaceful means if possible but, ultimately, by any means necessary. Our peaceful means are President Trump.

Trump isn’t part of the system, you see. Dimwits look at his billions and go, “he must be one of them”. But, the bottom line is that he’s not. He’ll hang out with them. Be friends with them. But he never was of them. He made his own way and got his pile of money…and then looked around and saw, from the 1980’s, what was happening to his country and started to wonder why, and if there were anything he could do about it? He essentially first let Bill Clinton have his chance. Then Bush the Younger. Then even Obama. But he found out something – it didn’t matter who was in charge, they were all in on it, together. That is, regardless of stated political philosophy, the primary goal of nearly everyone in politics was personal enrichment and making sure no outsider pushed his or her way in. Trump decided to push his way in.

And now he’s there – and outside of a precious few (Cruz, Paul…and, oddly, McConnell), he’s nearly alone fighting for one thing: us. The United States of America. We, the people. And everyone inside is furious and terrified and so are lashing back as much as they can hoping that something, anything will turn up to get rid of Trump. And, make no mistake about it, they are already planning on punishing us for electing Trump. They don’t propose to allow this sort of thing to happen again.

I’ve mostly stopped arguing with liberals these days – first off, it is pointless but, secondly, I’m starting to pity them; nearly as much as I pity that shrinking number on the right who still stand aloof from Trump: they simply can’t shake free from the line they’ve been fed. And none of us can get high and mighty about that: to one degree or another, all of us were suckered at one time or another. All of us believed in some aspect of the con being used to keep us confused, frightened and divided while the Ruling Class stays fat and happy. But for those of us who have awakened from the con, it is time for a clean break – a refusal to accept that anything over the past 60 years was any good…a desire, that is, to move forward in an entirely new way, unshackled to whatever we might have said or done in the past. We can see what happened; we can see what needs to be done – we can’t trip ourselves up (nor allow our opponents to slow us down) by fussing over what views we might have expressed previously. Our desire is a Constitutional Republic of free people – our means of getting there must be “whatever works”, not adherence to a dogma which might, upon review, only have been a means whereby the con artists kept us in line in the past. I, for one, will only defend what I find defensible and will attack whatever I see as wrong.

We still have a magnificent window to win this thing and fix our nation – naturally, the first requirement is protecting President Trump. But the next step is just as important: a complete review of everything and asking the question, “Is this good?”. We’ve already learned that so-called “Free Trade” wasn’t what many of us thought it was – take that as your template and ask yourself, “is this thing I’ve adhered to really in the interests of a free people? Or is it something which only serves the well-connected?”. As Lincoln once said, it is time to think anew and act anew: not to create something different (nothing can be more magnificent than the United States, as far as human effort allows), but to recreate what we had, but even better than before. And if that mission requires us to knock a few off their pedestals, then that’s just what will have to happen.

Yeah, I Guess I’m a Revolutionary

I got into a slight Twitter tiff with a friend – and no hard feelings, at all. Just a short exchange which made me realize something: we need to have a Revolution.

It had to do with a discussion surrounding Prince Andrew’s connections to Jeffrey Epstein – which seem rather extensive and continued long after Epstein’s first conviction. Andrew, of course, being the second son of Queen Elizabeth…which means you can’t get more social or economic elite than he is. As the discussion went on, I blurted out (as it were) a desire to confiscate the wealth of people like Andrew and distribute it (via lottery) among the people. This rather upset my friend – being as we’re both Conservative and thus defenders of Property. And I do defend Property…but I also despise a traitor. And that is, first and foremost, what Prince Andrew is: a traitor. A traitor to civilization.

And he’s not alone: he is legion among the Ruling Class. Think of all the people who had connections with Epstein for decades, and continued after his conviction. There is a story in the Daily Mail – British papers still engaging in actual journalism from time to time – about a party at Epstein’s after his conviction which included among the guests Prince Andrew, Woody Allen, Katie Couric, Chelsea Handler and the daughter of a former Australian Prime Minister. This was, as I said, after Epstein’s conviction. From the story, it seems that Epstein has pornographic pictures on the wall and liked to blurt out astonishing sexual crudities during conversation. And this is where the son of the Queen of Great Britain said, “hey, bro, cool place to hang out”.

Prince Andrew lives a life of extreme luxury. He’s worth an estimated 75 million dollars and he’s never had to earn a penny of it – and, remember, he’s the second son of the Queen. As soon as Diana pushed out William in 1982, the chances that Andrew or anyone descended from him would ever sit on the British throne became nil. He’s a biological dead end, as far as royalty goes. But, he’s got 75 million dollars…and all of it, ultimately, because a distant ancestor built a castle in Milan in the 11th century and so became the founder of a dynasty which eventually produced George I. Now, one should never fuss about the good fortune of others – envy is a sin, after all. But you’d think that someone sitting on a vast fortune of unearned wealth who has no particular purpose in life would at least try to sustain the civilization which provided and protects his gigantic privileges. But, no: he’s hanging around with the Pimp to the Stars. And so were lots of other people just as rich and privileged (but most not having the lineage).

And I think that is what has been gnawing at me, unspoken, for many years, now: that those who are in charge of our civilization are traitors to it. Not all of them, of course. There are rich people who do try to live decent lives – even some of the old noble houses (the Hapsburgs, long dethroned, do seem to keep their act together); the Koch family (whom I mostly disagree with, politically) seem to be upstanding as well as generous. But time and again we find that the rich are living lives of gross immorality – and if not directly participating in it, keeping their mouths shut about it. They defend nothing which the common people hold dear – not God; not family; nothing…except their own wealth and position, of course; they are fierce in defense of their money…and their private, secluded, heavily guarded playgrounds where, it would seem, quite a lot of the sons and daughters of the poor are brought in to be abused by the layabout sons and daughters of the rich.

But here’s the thing – if they were just destroying themselves, it wouldn’t be any concern of ours. But people with vast fortunes and social prestige have a gigantic effect on everything and everyone else. If I drop $10 into a collection plate, it is only a ripple…a rich person dropping a million dollars is a tidal wave. And if the money is dropped into the plate of a group out to destroy us (you and me, I mean), then it is horribly destructive. That its dropped to keep the anti-Civilization dogs off the backs of the rich just makes such things an insult on top of an injury. What this tells me is that we can’t just let matters be: we’ve got our billionaire on our side in Donald Trump and he’s one heck of a fighter for us…but he’s one guy, and no later than January of 2025, he’s gone. Meanwhile, these malefactors of great wealth (Teddy Roosevelt’s exquisite phrasing) will still be around…being nauseating and still providing money and prestige for interests which want us destroyed. What do we do? Just let it keep on going?

I can’t say that I agree with that – I can’t say, that is, that my defense of private property extends to the defense of private property being used to destroy what I hold dear (which includes property…it isn’t poor people demanding that zoning laws be changed and property seized by government for transfer to rich developers). It is, in short, time for a Revolution – and kicking over the tables and a chasing of the money-changers out of the Temple. We can no longer endure a Ruling Class which is working directly against our interests…they either have to get on board with us, or be removed. And we won’t get rid of the current Ruling Class if they are able to retain their money…money is power; it is, really, the ultimate power, in any form of government. Whomever commands it has absolute power, unless there’s an equally large sum of money opposed…but we see it that, in general, our entire Ruling Class is on the same side, even if they call themselves variously Liberal or Conservative; all of them are at war with us…with what we want. Which is things like common decency; the Rule of Law; equality under the Law; a defense of faith, family and property.

I can’t see how we win the battle if we leave the Ruling Class in possession of their money. If you’ve got a way to leave Soros and his heirs with billions of dollars without their being able to wreck us, then I’m all ears…but unless someone has a way to do just that, then self defense requires us to relieve quite a large number of rich people of their wealth.

The Last Gasp of Never Trump

So, one-term Congresscritter Joe Walsh has decided to challenge President Trump in the GOP primary. I can figure why Walsh would do it: attention hounds do need attention and grifters do gotta grift…I’ve been watching Walsh implode towards this position since 2017 and it hasn’t been a pretty sight. But, he’s going to get media attention and donations and, for him, that is what is must be about. But what about those who engineered his entry?

We must not discount the mere sins of Pride which are likely driving a good portion of this, but beyond the Never Trumpers risking their immortal souls there is, I think, something else behind this: I can’t remotely prove it, but I’m thinking that the selection of the old GOPe money class – seconded by Democrat money bags sowing division – it making one, last effort to recapture the GOP. They only liked the GOP when it was a party of Progressive Light: the Progressive party which wanted low taxes, especially on corporate earnings and large amounts of stored wealth. As far as it went, such people only tolerated gun owners, pro-lifers and such because these people were, by an large, in favor of low taxes. But, all along, these Never Trump types despised their base…considered them hicks and were never going to do anything to help the base’s cause. Trump came along, read the situation precisely as it was (and is), and proceeded to roll over the GOPe simply by speaking to the desires of the GOP base. The real fear of the GOPe types is not just that Trump will be re-elected (though they’d hate that). No: their real fear is that the GOP base will never come back to the GOPe. That after Trump, the GOP will become an increasingly Populist Conservative party and start doing horrendous things like breaking up large corporations; taxing high end wealth; dismantling the education system…you know, destroying everything that keeps GOPe types rolling in wealth and privilege.

So, they’ve been looking not for a way to win, but for a way to show the GOP base that they can’t have what they want. They want to show that Trump was a one-off which only happened because the GOPe was asleep at the wheel and that the GOPe can just whistle up a situation where Trump gets destroyed. After that, the GOP base – in their thinking – will just have to knuckle under and accept a whole string of Mitt Romney’s and Jeb’s and live with the fact that every last iota of the Progressive agenda will be enacted (except high taxes on corporations, of course). Trouble is, they couldn’t really find anyone to go after Trump. In this, I think that the leadership of McConnell and Graham has been crucial: by understanding what Trump really represents, these two (and there are others) have understood that the GOP can win smashing victories for an indefinite period of time…and all it takes is actually doing something for the base. McConnell is cementing his legacy as the most consequential Senate Majority leader in half a century…and he seems to be enjoying the heck out of himself doing it. Why would he want to give that up so that Democrats can take the White House in 2020 just because Orange Man Bad? Why would any serious political leader want to do that?

But now momentum takes over – the Never Trump contingent has to keep going, or admit defeat. Too filled with Pride to admit defeat or error, they just kept going and going and going…until the found Joe Walsh, who seems to be a bit of a raving lunatic. He’s made racist statements in the past – and I’m not talking Progressive versions of racist statements; actual, genuine racist statements. He once tweeted out that if Trump lost in 2016, he’s grab his gun and start shooting. He peddled stories about Obama that would make a paranoid conspiracy theorist blush. The guy, in short, is all over the place…with the only consistency being that he’ll say whatever garners him attention. Being just another trooper for Trump wouldn’t get him anywhere (likely because he’s so mercurial that only an idiot would trust him); so he decided to become anti-Trump…and the Ahoy Boys of Never Trump have now latched on to him. It is going to be fun to watch.

But, mostly, it is going to be fun to see the last of these types. We’ve been sold out by them too many times and for too long. They’ll ride Walsh right out of the GOP and Conservatism, and I believe for good.

Conservatism Recovered

Excellent article by Julie Kelly about understanding what has really happened to Conservatism:

The realignment of the political Right has prompted a public confessional of sorts, a raw acknowledgement that millions of us were led astray by Republiican leaders we trusted, we voted for, and we defended during times of war. We only have ourselves to blame, of course, because we did it with our eyes wide open. But the Trump era is forcing many Republicans to reexamine what we once believed and reassess what actually is true.

In a fiery speech earlier this month at the National Conservatism conference in Washington, D.C., Fox News host Tucker Carlson talked about purging his “mental attic” to dust off the ideas that he had accepted as legitimate over past few decades.

“The Trump election was so shocking . . . that it did cause some significant percentage of people to say ‘wait a second, if that can happen, what else is true?’” Carlson said. “Just look around . . . who are the good guys and who are the bad guys? A lot of the people we’ve been told are good guys are not. Some of them are the worst guys. I’ll let you figure out who.”

One of the crucial things to understand about politics is that it draws layabouts like s*** draws flies. That is, it draws rent-seeking nincompoops who are determined to live well without having to actually produce anything. No political ideology is free from this. Heck, even the most productive companies in the world aren’t entirely free of it. There are always – always – people trying to get a free ride.

Modern Conservatism got its start in reaction to the changes in American governance introduced during the Roosevelt Administration in the 1930s. It was correctly understood that the ultimate result of Roosevelt policies would be the end of the America founded in 1776. It was a movement to roll back the government; stand firm for American defense and defend the family and our social institutions from the remorseless attack of the Left. This movement reached its peak in the election of Ronald Reagan in 1980…and I think we all thought that we really had won. That is, we thought that our ideas had proven correct and that going forward it would just be the increasing implementation of the ideas of Conservatism. We now know that it didn’t work out that way…and it didn’t work out that way because in the wake of Reagan, we got a host of political barnacles who spoke the words of Conservatism, but didn’t really have an interest in carrying out Conservatism. We were consumed by rent-seekers when we needed committed fighters.

But for the longest time, most of us went along with them – they were our leaders, after all. They wrote for prestige magazines. They had best-selling books. TV shows. And they did, indeed, speak the words of Conservatism…but always with a caveat which we ignored or didn’t understand. Now was always not the exact, perfect time to really press for Conservatism. We always had to do something else first, and getting that done invariably meant not fighting a particular battle for a Conservative principle. We were kept on the hook by endless promises that the New Dawn would come, and we’d finally be in the right moment where we could fight the left tooth and nail. But, it never came. Of course, it was never meant to come. The grifters running the Conservative show didn’t want that – because they weren’t really Conservative. They liked their swank gigs and they knew that to keep them they needed to keep talking right, but they weren’t about to go to their liberal friends and explain that they had to actually fight to defend the family, or even to defend the concepts of “male” and “female”.

Those of you reading me here have known that I had my doubts for many years – even stretching back to the Bush the Younger years…and, truth be told, some doubts even in the Clinton years. A gnawing feeling that we were being sold down the river and that not everything we were taught to revere was worthy. But I did keep to being a loyal foot soldier. Partly, of course, because no matter how bad the GOPe squish being foisted upon me, he or she was still miles better than the Democrat. But that was still folly on my part, and I see that now with blinding clarity. It has always been better to suffer even crushing defeat while fighting for what we believe in than to “win” with someone who will merely slow down our defeat. Douglas MacArthur was once asked his formula for defensive war and he gave a one word answer: “defeat”. You can’t win unless you attack – and attacking requires a ruthless willingness to take and inflict pain.

Trump isn’t a Conservative; not remotely. Except in one, crucial aspect: Conservatism is really just common sense, and Trump has bags of that. He’s not someone, I think, who has delved deeply into Adam Smith, Edmund Burke and F.A. Hayek. He’s not, that is, an intellectual of the Right. But, then again, who is? Bill Kristol? Max Boot? David French? If these are our intellectuals, then we’re doomed. Trump isn’t advancing Conservatism in a conscious sense – but by doing what makes sense, he’s advancing it all the same. It is common sense that the judges merely enforce the laws; to do otherwise means there is no law, and thus no chance for justice or mercy or even sanity. The only judges out there who will simply enforce the laws are Conservative judges…and, so, common sense dictates the appointment only of Conservative judges. It’d be stupid to waste even a single life time appointment on a non-Conservative judge because that means you’re just giving the anti-law, insane Left side of the aisle an unearned win and making life harder for yourself going forward.

So it is with act after act. True, it’d be nice if Trump would take on the national debt, but that is something that only concerns a small number of people. Yes, the debt is a looming national catastrophe and if we don’t get a handle on it, we’re going to pay a high price for our profligacy. But Trump isn’t particularly concerned about it and never has been. Can’t ask a man to be what he isn’t. And at the end of the day, the pretend-Conservatives who ran our movement since Reagan also didn’t do a damn thing about the debt. Perhaps Trump’s successor can be made to do what is necessary (it won’t really be hard: at it takes is a good economy and a really very small reduction in overall government spending over a period of 10 years to get to balance and debt reduction). But the bottom line is that outside of the debt, Trump is moving the Conservative ball forward even more effectively than Reagan (who also didn’t tackle the debt). And by doing this – by actually implementing Conservatism – Trump is doing the best thing anyone has ever done for us: exposing the traitors in our ranks.

Remember, these are grifters who merely want to live well without doing anything. They are best friends with their Leftist counterparts, who are also grifting (but who also do advance Leftism…so while the liberal foot soldiers are getting robbed just as blind as we were, at least Leftism is being advanced; this makes the Leftwing grifters the moral superior of the Conservative grifters). It was all fine as long as nothing actually happened in a Conservative sense. Along comes Trump and he starts doing Conservative things and they all had a choice to make: some choose to actually join the side they said they were on…others have decided to join the Left, which they always in fact were part of. For us, it means we have been able to recover Conservatism. We’ve taken it out of the hands of the thieves who stole it in the aftermath of Ronald Reagan…and no longer bound to anything that happened in the past, we are able to jettison even the mistakes that Reagan made, most notably the 1986 Amnesty. But we’ve also given up on nation building and endless war. We no longer desire to defend large corporations. We no longer defend “free trade” which merely meant middle class jobs being sent to Chinese sweated labor. We are able to start counterattacking the advances of the Left.

In my view, it is time to forget 1989 to 2009. It was a wasted 20 years, as far as Conservatism was concerned. Anyone – even the most dyed in the wool Never Trump – is free to join or reject us; we don’t care what anyone chooses and no hard feelings against anyone who repents and gets on board. But we’re now going to fight. We still may lose, but we’re not going to roll over for the Left.

Socialism is Death

Been seeing a lot of our Progressive friends defending Socialism – though most of them add “Democratic” in front of it, as some sort of attempt to soften the blow. Like saying a sh** sandwich is a cheese and sh** sandwich will make it better. But Socialism is death – it is purely evil and has no redeeming qualities whatsoever.

Of course, you and I know that. But, even so, I think it needs to be said – emphasized; said again and again and again until it is drilled into the public mind. And don’t think that the death part of Socialism is things like Stalin’s labor camps or Pol Pot wondering whether killing everyone will improve economic prospects. No: the very idea of Socialism is death. It is anti-human. It can’t do other than destroy.

First and foremost, it must be kept in mind that when a Socialist says things like “justice”, “freedom”, “democracy” the words don’t mean the same thing as when a sane, non-Socialist person uses them. For a Socialist, for instance, “justice” doesn’t mean the equitable enforcement of laws freely enacted by Constitutional means. No – to a Socialist, “justice” means “everyone I hate is punished”. “Freedom” means “I’m free to do whatever I want; you’re not”. “Democracy” means “we hold a vote: if I win, it is forever; if I lose, it means evil people cheated and we have to do it again until I win, and then we never do it again”.

A Socialist doesn’t care whether or not you have a house; food; medical care – he or she might say that is what will be provided, but if it is, it is incidental to the real purpose of Socialism – the punishment of those the Socialist hates. If punishing the object of ire means there’s less housing, food and medical care, that is perfectly ok, because the whole purpose is punishment. To a Socialist, what is non-Socialist is evil…and those who are non-Socialist don’t merely have a different view of what should be done but are, instead, actively evil. There is no other explanation, in the view of a Socialist, for opposition to Socialism.

But, you say, what about those kindly Socialists – Democratic-Socialists! – in Europe who have built up a Welfare State which ensures no one lacks the basic necessities? Surely they aren’t motivated by hate? Sorry, but they are. They were only able to provide the Welfare State because the United States picked up the tab for military defense (and allowed them to cheat on trade with us) – and it was only incidental that the Welfare State provided anything. Offering free stuff did get votes, but that the free stuff was provided (in a way) was of secondary importance. Far more important for the Socialists – even the kindly Democratic-Socialists of Europe – was destruction. Death. They pushed birth control, abortion, divorce, fornication, anti-religious propaganda…they taught the Europeans that their whole history was one, long crime against humanity. Europeans were taught to despise the people who had been their heroes. They were taught to think only of themselves. At the end of it all, people specifically hostile to all Europe was were imported – and given privileged status within the body politic. Small wonder that Europeans have a fertility rate of 1.58, significantly below replacement level. The destruction – death – of Europe is essentially complete. Socialism brought death…and only the immediate abandonment of Socialism can possibly save Europe from extinction.

In the end, it doesn’t matter if your Socialist is a Stalinist packing GULAG full of victims, or if he’s a Democratic-Socialist putting you on the dole and making sure you have easy access to abortion…the result is the same: death. And all of it done to punish – Europe, you see, had to be punished. It was evil, wrong, bad – in the eyes of Socialists, that is. And they were determined that it be destroyed – punished for the sin of not being Socialist.

We’re not far behind Europe – but, also, much better positioned to save ourselves from that fate. But part of saving ourselves from that fate is to start speaking firmly about Socialism. It isn’t a different means to a mutually desired end: it desires an end which is evil: namely, the end of the United States. That a Socialist USA might still have the name “United States” doesn’t really matter…it’ll just be a dead thing which hates what the United States actually is, with a population sunk into indifference and rapidly being replaced by people who have no connection to the country.

The Socialists – however they label themselves – are evil. They are the harbingers of death. Even if they don’t know it. Even if, that is, a particular Socialist you meet is someone merely gulled by the words of Socialism. Doesn’t matter if your murderer intended your death or only caused it accidentally – you’re still dead. All Socialism must be stopped. Eventually, every aspect of Socialism must be eliminated. And all Socialist ideology condemned to the point where no decent person would dream of adhering to it. It was a gigantic, anti-human mistake. And it has to go.

Pre-Trump, Conservatism Was a Grift

Back in March of 2017, I was of the opinion that the Never Trumpers were mostly just dismayed by Trump’s personality and that most of them would eventually realize that Conservative victory was more important than hurt feelings. As Trump’s policies have been vigorously Conservative, it would only make sense that anyone who wants Conservative victory would sign on with Trump.

And, man, I hate finding out that I was a sucker.

Today, it was announced that Jonah Goldberg is leaving National Review to found a new outfit with former Weekly Standard Editor-in-Chief Steve Hayes. They say they’ll be Trump-skeptical and opposed to partisan boosterism. So, yeah, they’ll be out there vigorously tearing down anyone who can help Conservatism while helping Democrats in any way they can. They’ll likely still shill for “free trade” agreements and low corporate taxes, but that’s because most liberals are in favor of such things. You can rely on it that over the first six months or so in business, these “Conservatives” will “evolve” on issues like abortion and gun control.

Let’s pause for a moment here and review a bit of what Trump is doing:

1. Remaking the Courts in a solidly conservative manner.
2. Reducing onerous regulations.
3. Tax cuts.
4. Working to de-fund Planned Parenthood.
5. Pushing back against the emerging Trans agenda.
6. Rebuilding our military might.
7. Standing by Israel in deed as well as word.
8. Destroying one after another of the Progressive heroes of our era.
9. Exposing the hypocrisy and dishonesty of the MSM like no one ever has.
10. Reviving the Rule of Law.

As far as I can tell, there’s not much missing there from what Conservatism has said it wants. Now, to be sure, Conservatism is still largely in favor of so-called “free trade” and Trump is obviously against it, but that’s just one thing…and it’s not like he’s trying to erect permanent barriers to trade. His whole thing is using tariffs as a weapon to force our trade partners to be fair: in the end, Trump wants free trade, as well…though he clearly recognizes the national security aspect of the matter: if we could get 100% of our steel cheaper in foreign markets, we’d still want a very large steel industry here at home. But, still, that is just one thing – and we Conservatives are getting so much else, what is there to complain about? Apparently enough to convince Goldberg and Hayes to found a new media outfit to fight Trump…but fight him on what?

That’s the thing: they want to fight Trump and that means they want to fight Conservative victory. I’m not buying some bullsh** story about how Trump is so immoral that we have to stop him. I doubt that Hayes and Goldberg are stupid enough to believe the Trump-Russia drivel (but, hey, maybe they do?). They are fighting Trump while Trump pushes through a Conservative agenda more comprehensive than even Reagan attempted. If you’re fighting Trump, then you simply must not want Conservatism to prevail. And that’s what I think is at the root here: they don’t want Conservatism to prevail. They are revealing themselves as grifters…people who merely said what they figured we wanted to hear as a means to make a buck or two. They never actually wanted Conservatism to win, and that must be because they don’t actually like Conservatism. I’m open to other explanations if anyone has them – but from where I’m sitting, I can only figure that when Goldberg and Hayes and the rest of the Never Trump regiment finished their articles advocating for Conservatism in the past, they smiled and thought to themselves, “that’ll keep the suckers donating for another month”.

For fifty years they’ve been at this. In hindsight, it was probably Nixon who injected the poison into the Conservative movement Buckley founded in the 1950’s. Nixon was not remotely Conservative – he started the EPA, after all – but he knew that he needed Conservative votes to prevail…and he got them. He hired a few high powered Conservative voices, and that was that. Conservative leaders found that there was money and prestige to be had…as long as you sold yourself off to whatever non-Conservative guy was out there willing to pass out the jobs. Reagan, then, was an anomaly: someone who only slipped in because the base loved him so, and Carter collapsed. I think back now on the Reagan years and all the things that didn’t happen. All the things which could have been done to roll back liberalism, and yet none of them were. Reagan, after all, kept Nixon’s EPA, and Carter’s Department of Education. There’s some old video, I think, of Trump ripping into Reagan back in the day – I think I see why he might have done that: Reagan was great and he’ll never be forgotten, but he had a lot of opportunities which slipped by unused. And now I wonder who in the “Conservative” movement helped those opportunities to be lost?

The old movie line goes, “once is an accident; twice is coincidence; three times is enemy action”. Conservatism has blown potential victory many more than three times. We’re not that stupid nor are we that incompetent. The only thing we’ve won on is the gun control issue – but, please note, that wasn’t won by Conservatism, as such, but by gun owners, themselves, fighting it out tooth and nail against the same liberal Establishment which Conservatism gets beaten by day in and day out. We can’t even muster up the grit to keep boys out of the girls’ bathroom. Or, at least, we couldn’t until Trump came along. Prior to Trump, we just kept losing – and looking back on it in hindsight, I can only assume that our defeat was the result of sabotage. This is not to say that we were destined to win, but it is to say that in conflict after conflict with the left, we just kept throwing in the towel. Why? Why give up? Why did we quit?

I think we all should have woke up a bit when National Review fired John Derbyshire. To be sure, the offending article by Derbyshire was a bit out there, and I thought so as soon as I read it. But, still, it was just an opinion. It could be countered with other opinions – but no one on the right did that. He was just fired, defined as a racist and never spoken of again. But, we all could be forgiven for not catching on at that point because, as I said, Derbyshire’s article was way outside the norm. But a couple years later, Mark Steyn was also out at National Review and, while the issues were varied, the final trigger was Steyn repeating a couple old jokes from Bob Hope and Dean Martin about homosexuality (Hope: “California just legalized homosexuality; I got out of there before they make it mandatory”; Martin: “How you make a fruit cordial? Be nice to him”). We were shown, right then, that Conservatism was entirely in line with the left when it came to proclaiming certain subjects forbidden territory…and, what, then is the difference between Conservatism and Liberalism? None that I can see.

Well, it is all exposed, now: no one is so blind that they cannot see the truth that the pre-Trump Conservatism was useless, if not deliberately baleful. The grifters are leaving us – well, more accurately, they are packing their bags and getting out as we show them the door. None of us know what will happen going forward – Trump may win or lose in 2020. But we’re done with the Never Trump losers. They are free to break out the kneepads for whomever is paying them to shill for the Establishment. We’re now busy with other things – that whole tearing down the Establishment and winning Conservative victory. It is a relief, actually. At least, now, we know that if we lose, we lose because we got beaten…not because our “leaders” waved a white flag.

Thinking About the Ruling Class vs Everyone

Over in Britain, the Brexit vote in Parliament has been delayed – because it probably would have gone down to crushing defeat and forced PM May’s ouster. I have no sympathy – she negotiated a deal which essentially kept the EU in power over Britain…except that, now, Britain wouldn’t even have a say in the EU. This, to me, was a feature, not a bug: the idea being, I’m guessing, that eventually the British people could be convinced that they must rejoin the EU. The plain fact of the matter is that no “deal” needs to be negotiated. All the British government has to do is say, “we’re out” and they’d be done. But that would only have happened if anyone in the British Ruling Class gave a damn about the will of the British people.

Meanwhile, over in France, les Deplorables have been conducting some pretty impressive riots. Seems that the French people have also had it with their Ruling Class selling them down the river. We’ll see how this comes out – personally, I’m hoping it develops into a genuine revolution.

Naturally, the Ruling Class is saying that the Russians are behind the French protests.

Still seeing lots of people speaking in favor of Experts. Ross Douthat has an interesting thing to say on that:

…meritocrats are often educated to be bad leaders, and bad people, in a very specific way — a way of arrogant intelligence unmoored from historical experience, ambition untempered by self-sacrifice. The way of the “best and the brightest” at the dawn of the technocratic era and the “smartest guys in the room” decades later, the way of the arsonists of late-2000s Wall Street and the “move fast and break things” culture of Silicon Valley…

Do read the whole thing. Mostly because you won’t agree with all of it. The bottom line is a fundamental irresponsibility. That they really lack merit and are often wrong isn’t the biggest problem: the biggest problem is that they never have to pay a price. Sowell often points this out in his books: those who propose to do all sorts of odd things are never the people who have to suffer the consequences. I came across a sorta-Conservative guy on Twitter (I’m guess he’s at least modestly famous, but I had never heard of him before) and he was arguing that America must take charge of the world! Be strong! Get out there and fight…and then I looked at his picture and saw a fairly fit, young man but his bio didn’t seem to include anything about military service. I suggested “you, first” to him: that if he wants America to flex her muscles in the world, that he go out and be that muscle…and get back to us once he was deployed.

Mixed right in with that was a small debate with a much beloved (and extremely liberal) friend where he was sort of on the side of Experts. I rejoined that the more stupid a person is, the more vital it is that they be consulted on the major issues. Experts build atomic bombs: morons drink beer and eat chips. On the whole, the more beer-drinking and chip-eating we do, the better off we are.

Chesterton once opined that it was disturbing how few politicians are hanged. And there is more in that than the mere healthy desire to kill those in charge from time to time. The larger issue is that a price must be paid for our follies…and every now and again, it would be salubrious to have those who promoted the follies be first up the scaffold. FDR, George C. Marshall and Ernest King are honored in the United States these days…you can find out all sorts of details about them and stand in rapt admiration over their deeds…but, you’ll find out less about the guys who were buried after dying of dysentery in a squalid, Japanese POW camp, even though the people ultimately responsible for those deaths were, precisely, FDR, George C. Marshall and Ernest King. You know: they made horrible, stupid mistakes…and then got other people, less famous, to pay the blood price to repair their errors. It would be simple justice if, every now and again, the FDR’s, Marshall’s and King’s swung from lamp posts.

But getting that done is very difficult. The problem is that you need people who can have a say but who don’t want to say much. Once upon a time, the Catholic Church tried it – at the peak, they managed to have King Henry II of England flogged for murdering St. Thomas Becket. To tell you how that came out, long term, one only needs say that Henry VIII had St Thomas’ bones scattered. The trouble is that people who care deeply about politics are those who tend to rise in politics…and they’re never terribly interested in fixing things; nor can they be relied upon to hang themselves are regular intervals.

So, Revolution is the only way out of this mess. We here in the United States are fortunate in that we have built in mechanisms which allows us alter or to abolish our government without the necessity of engaging in bloody revolution. Unless, of course, we get a situation where the Ruling Class tries an end run around the Constitution by, say, removing a popularly elected President on bogus charges. We’ll see how that plays out.

But make no mistake about it – we are entering, globally, a revolutionary time. It is a complex battle which pits those who make and do against those who consider themselves smarter than those who make and do. It is your local plumber against the CEO of a Fortune 500 company, if you want it in a nutshell. The victory for our side comes when we successfully demonstrate that the Ruling Class is both corrupt and illegitimate – that is when they’ll be turned out of power.

Defending Civilization

Right around 380 AD, the Roman Ruling Class thought everything was going well. Oh, sure, there were some problems. It was getting harder to collect revenue even as taxes rose. For some reason, even with a vastly increased bureaucracy, government business was taking longer and longer to get done. They didn’t seem to have enough money to do any really big construction projects. There was a persistent lack of recruits for the Army. But, you know, things were fine. Emperor was ruling, bureaucrats were bureaucrating, peasants were peasanting. What could possibly go wrong?

Thirty years later, Alaric sacked Rome.

Here’s something interesting for you to think about – I wanted to check my dates on all that, so I went to Wikipedia. When I searched “barbarian invasions”, I got an entry entitled “Migration Period”. It does note that it was called “Barbarian Invasion” by, you know, the people destroyed by the Migration…but the main title is Migration Period. Gotta just love how PC is infecting everything. We’re not even allowed to call things what they were – because the “Migration Period” was a social, political and economic catastrophe where civilization was destroyed by barbarians who wanted the wealth of civilization but who hadn’t the slightest idea how to create and maintain wealth.

And that is why I sat down to write today – because I want to talk about civilization, its defense and its destruction. There are many parallels between ancient Rome and ourselves, but don’t stretch the point too far. Rome, at least, never had anyone in Rome arguing that the Barbarians are better than the Romans. It takes a bit of modern stupidity to deny the obvious and claim that barbarism is better than civilization. The Romans never got that sophisticated. But make no mistake about it, the barbarians without and the barbarians within are seeking the overthrow of our civilization. We are, I think, just shy of a new barbarian flood – but I still think we’ve got enough time to stop it.

And I think a good place to start is if we stop denying the value of civilization.

I started rolling this around in my head this past Columbus Day when we were treated to the usual round of “Sailor Man Bad” stories about Columbus. So, now I’ll say something that most people simply won’t: it was good that Columbus arrived in the Americas. He set of a chain of events which rescued the Americas from pagan savagery. It is not good that people continue to wallow in ignorance. To be sure, there are better and worse ways to bring civilization, but if the end result is civilization, you’ve done an overall good thing.

Civilization is ordered liberty which allows people to build the means whereby they can live their lives without fear. If you’re unsure if you’ll have food the next day or feel impelled to rip out a beating, human heart to propitiate the gods, then you are living in fear. Things are bad if they are like that. Just about any sort of event which will end fear is a good thing. To say that savages wandering the Great Plains in hope that, maybe tomorrow, they’ll be able to kill a buffalo and so not starve, or that superstitious Aztecs slaughtering people by the thousand was a good thing is to simply deny the plain facts. It was horribly bad how people were getting on in pre-Columbian America. It was better – for them – that Columbus arrived.

The proof of this is that there isn’t a single person – not the most dyed in the wool Native activist – who would trade even the most impoverished life on the Reservation for the life of their pro-Columbian ancestors. Remember, if a Native got an abscessed tooth in 1491, it was weeks of agony and possible death. His descendant just has to spend a few hours in a dentist’s chair. And that is just one of ten thousand things that are better. If anyone is reading this and getting angry, I suggest maybe opening a bag of chips and eating a few to calm down…and then realize the man-hours you’d be expending to just get a potato in pre-Columbian America.

We have to start defending civilization if it is to survive. By refusing to defend it, we’ve allowed the barbarians to gain many footholds in our society. If you see some youngster nearly covered with tattoos and pierced all to heck and gone, go and say hello: you’ve just met a barbarian. That such person might have ancestors going back to the Mayflower doesn’t matter…pagan savages paint themselves blue for a variety of reason, but none of the reasons are because they are civilized. Meanwhile, a civilized person might get one or two tattoos as an interesting eccentricity, but they never paint themselves blue. But that, of course, is a small thing. It is a pity that so many of the young are doing that, but it isn’t the crisis. The Crisis is in the civilized being unwilling to defend civilization…that in the face of barbarians, they cower in fear.

And that is the only way barbarians win – because the civilized are too afraid to fight. Alaric’s army in 410 AD is estimated to be about 40,000. An impressive number of warriors. But the Roman garrison is estimated at only a few hundred…when the population of Rome was many hundreds of thousands! To give you an idea about how that should have come out, take a look at the Siege of Constantinople in 1453: 50,000 Turks were held off for seven weeks by a mere 7,000 defenders…but defenders willing to fight! And the total population of Constantinople at the time was about 50,000. If the Romans of 410 had just decided to fight, they would have put on Rome’s walls at least as many soldiers as Alaric had…he would have had no chance. But, the Roman’s didn’t fight, so the barbarians won. Never do barbarians win in the long run as long as the civilized fight.

Barbarians lose fights because they simply aren’t very good at fighting. This might seem counter-intuitive because barbarians are rated as aggressive: but aggressiveness doesn’t equal fighting ability. At Rorke’s Drift a mere 140 men held off 4,000 for two days…because the 140 were civilized men willing to fight while the 4,000 were barbarians…and in such a situation, it doesn’t matter what sort of men the barbarians are, they are going to lose when faced with civilized men who will fight (another example of this is the Battle of Blood River – somewhat less than 700 against 10,000 to 20,000 and the losses were Civilized 3 wounded, Barbarians 3,000 dead). Barbarians might win a battle here and there, but invariably it is because they not only have overwhelming numerical superiority, but also a Civilized commander who made a terrible mistake. Outside that, the fights are lopsided victories for civilization.

None of this has to do with the moral worth of the men involved, of course. People are people, however they are situated. The civilized don’t win because they are better people, but because they have better organization. The same organization that allows a civilization to rise allows the military force to be effective. The main thing to remember is that if the civilized fight, the civilized win.

And we really do have to start fighting. It is really important because everyone wants civilization. Yes, even that tattooed young savage who just graduated from Wharton and is now at the coffee shop writing her 37th Tumblr post denouncing Patriarchy wants civilization. That is, she still wants someone to deliver the coffee and muffins in a timely manner and has no interest going out and gathering wild wheat and coffee beans to get the ball rolling in the morning. She also wants to destroy civilization, though she doesn’t understand what she’s doing. The barbarians way back when didn’t, either…they loved all that running water stuff the Romans had in their cities, but simply didn’t understand that slaughtering the guys who maintained the aqueducts would have a bad effect as soon as there was a break in the water system. Barbarians, past and present, share that childlike attitude…never being and to quite connect cause to effect. If we don’t fight, we lose it all. And while there might be a bit of satisfaction in imagining Ivy League savages wandering witless in deserted cities as they starve, we really don’t want to go there.

As for me, I’m going to get the ball rolling by remembering to honor Columbus. And Cortez who destroyed the inhuman Aztec Empire. And to really twist the knife, I’ll spare a kind thought for people like Garnet Wolseley, 1st Viscount Wolseley who chastised the barbarian Ashanti when, in the manner of barbarians, they started kidnapping and assaulting people. Sure, you can call Sir Garnet a bad man – but the main thing is that he stood between civilization and barbarism and defended civilization. Civilization is always better. To be sure, the Ashanti today probably curse Sir Garnet’s name. But the fact is that once 3 million Ashanti lived in pagan poverty with slavery, and now 12 million mostly Christian Ashanti are free and increasingly prosperous. And these modern Ashanti owe this transformation to the fact that back in 1874, Sir Garnet burned Kumasi and forced the Ashanti to accept British rule. Maybe Sir Garnet was one of the worst people who ever lived – doesn’t matter: what he did freed a people from barbarism and got them on the path to civilization.

And we have to start being more like that – not apologizing for being civilized. Fighting for civilization. Pointing out that the worst mistakes of the civilized are nothing compared to what barbarians do. We also need to note that even worse than barbarians in nature, as it were, are people who were once civilized and got re-barbarized. Just as the worst predators against Christian ships were once Moorish ships captained by ex-Christians, so the worst barbarians are those who were once civilized but have opted to join barbarism. It is such people who invent an Auschwitz or a GULAG…and even when being on their best behavior, come up with ideas like Planned Parenthood. The formerly civilized are vastly more effective in their barbarism than those who are born to it. After all, a guy who is just a barbarian might actually want something good…but a person who consciously rejects civilization only wants bad things to happen.

But all barbarians, natural and created, have to be opposed. Have to be destroyed, ultimately. No one can be permitted to remain in barbarism, if any way can be found to pull them out of it. A barbarian is bad, in prospect if not immediately. Because make no mistake about it, if we don’t stop the barbarians, they will stop us. It is very much an all or nothing game. Either we win, or they do. There’s no halfway compromise between civilization and barbarism.