Here are some points we need to be thinking about:

-Past partisan cycles indicate that the Democratic Party will be the dominant political party for the next few decades.

-Research on public opinion regarding controversial issues along with prevailing cultural, demographic, economic, and generational trends indicates that the Left will be the winning side in the “culture war” conflict.

-Past times in American history where the gap between socio-economic classes has been extremely wide have been followed by subsequent periods of intensified class struggle resulting in a new settlement and altering of relations between the social classes. Therefore, given the present economic situation, class issues should soon enough surpass culture war issues as the dominant conflict in American society.

-Major conflicts in American society are usually played out within the context of the dominant party, e.g. the civil rights conflict within the Democratic Party during the 1950s and 60s. That means conflict over class issues should emerge not only within the wider society but especially within the Democratic Party at some point in the future.

I’m not a historical determinist, and any number of variables could alter these trends or cycles. But this seems to be as good a model as any to base future predictions on, so long as the model remains flexible and subject to modification or re-evaluation. The question: What does this mean for the future of alternative anarchism?

New post at BANA’s blog from Andrew.

This guy is fairly impressive. He’s a young guy as well, and seems much less doctrinaire that previous generations of libertarians. Yet he retains the radical flavor of libertarianism. Check out his articles here.

Watch it on Youtube. Hat tip to Francois Tremblay.

Jesse Walker on Angelo Codevilla’s The Ruling Class as well as its weakness.

Christians, Tell Me How I’m Wrong by James Leroy Wilson

Police Secrecy by Radley Balko

Against the Current Court System by Francois Tremblay

An Ultra-Left Case Against the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by Charles Johnson

Amusement Parks and Private Property by Stacy Litz

The Growing Pains of the Mexican Drug War by Gavin McInnes

We Need a Revolution, Not a Movement by Chuck Baldwin

The Nazification of the United States by Paul Craig Roberts

Gay Marriage: Who Cares? by Jim Goad

Watch it here.

I have some very serious reservations about protesting a film, book, work of art, etc. but Andrew presents himself and makes his case quite well in this interview.

Let’s bring Holland to America.

For years prohibitionists, including our own Drug Enforcement Administration, have claimed — falsely — that the tolerant marijuana policies of the Netherlands have made that nation a nest of crime and drug abuse. They may have trouble wrapping their little brains around this:

The Dutch government is getting ready to close eight prisons because they don’t have enough criminals to fill them. Officials attribute the shortage of prisoners to a declining crime rate.

Just for fun, let’s compare the Netherlands to California. With a population of 16.6 million, the Dutch prison population is about 12,000. With its population of 36.7 million, California should have a bit more than double the Dutch prison population. California’s actual prison population is 171,000.

So, whose drug policies are keeping the streets safer?

Paul Craig Roberts shines once again.

Do Americans see the irony in the “saving Iraq from tyranny” excuse? The greatest price of the neoconservative war against Iraq is not the $3 trillion or the dead and maimed American soldiers and their broken families. The greatest price of this evil war is the destruction of the U.S. Constitution and American civil liberties.

The Bush/Cheney/Obama National Security State has eviscerated the Constitution and civil liberty. Nothing remains. The fascist Republican Federalist Society has put enough federal judges in the judiciary to rule that the president is above the law. The president doesn’t have to obey the law against spying on American citizens without warrants. The president doesn’t have to obey U.S. and international laws against torture. The president doesn’t have to obey the Constitution that mandates that only Congress can declare war. The president can do whatever he wants as long as he justifies it as “national security.”

The president’s part of the government, the unaccountable executive branch, is supreme. The president can announce, without being impeached, his decision to murder Americans abroad and at home if someone somewhere in the unaccountable executive branch regards such American citizens as “threats.”

Murder first. No accountability later.

I generally consider so-called “right-wing conservatism” to be a dead force in American politics. I suspect Iraq and Afghanistan will be American imperialism’s last great hurrahs. Americans clearly will not accept war if it involves any genuine sacrifices on their side such as high casualites, a direct war tax, the draft, rationing, etc. The U.S. has not fought a war of that kind since Vietnam. America’s imploding economy and mounting fiscal liabilities for entitlements and public debt will render future military adventures like Iraq cost prohibitive. It’s also obvious enough that in domestic American politics social conservatism is a dead dog as well. Organized religion continues to lose its influence, and the old WASP culture continues to disappear. Even the US prison population declined in 2009 for the first time in four decades. There’s also evidence the war on drugs is starting to very slowly recede with initiatives like the marijuana decriminalization referendum in California. Clearly, American culture is now more liberal than ever before with regard to virtually every issue including race, religion, cultural values, sexuality, the environment, and just about everything else. The greatest danger to liberty in the future will not come from reactionary theocratic Christians or right-wing racial supremacists (contrary to what the left-hysterics claims) or even ordinary conservatives, but from the rising forces of totalitarian humanism, the overlords of the managerial-therapuetic state, and the massive police state apparatus and authoritarian legal structures that have been created under the guise of the wars on drugs, crime, and terrorism. It is this apparatus that the totalitarian humanists will inherit and use to advance their own preferred form of tyranny. Thanks a lot for leaving us such a legacy, conservatives. May you all rot in Hell.

Some good economic analysis.

Check out this article on class analysis in particular.

The economic decline is going to be a permanent state of affairs. There’s not going to be any “recovery.” Look for some serious class struggle politics to emerge in the future, and look for it to come from the dissident forces on the Right (no, not the Tea Party idiots, who are basically the older, more right-wing faction of the upper middle class that is on it’s way out politically, culturally, and economically).

Another home run from Scott Locklin.

As an opening foray into social class as right wing concept, I offer a tentative battle plan. The job of the alternative right, as I see it, is to destroy the present upper middle class, and eventually replace it with something better. I’m not advocating feeding them to the wood chipper, though I’m only opposed to that idea on logistical and hygienic grounds. Destroying a social class is a lot easier than it sounds. The counterculture did this to the old upper middle class, and replaced it with … themselves.

Damn! This could be Bakunin or even Marx speaking in the 1860s. The real class enemy is not the inherited aristocracy, but the liberal bourgeoisie upper middle class (e.g. the New Class and David Brooks’ “bourgeois bohemians). This is what I’ve been saying for the last fifteen years. It’s the so-called “radical right” that understands this nowadays, which is why I’ve more or less moved into their camp despite my background and previous associations. The plutocracy proper is not numerous enough to subjugate the entire society all by their lonesome. They require their army of corporate stooges, managerial bureaucrats and, I might add, police, courts, and prisons. I suspect some of these paleoconservative guys would be disturbed to know just how close they are to being full-on classical anarchists.