An interesting article by James Kirkpatrick on the divisions that Trump is causing in the Republican Party.
From a strategic perspective, I consider the destruction of the Republican Party as a competitive force in U.S. politics to be the most important objective at the present time. The GOP in its present form is a coalition of the Sunbelt insurgency that formed the original basis of “movement conservatism” when it emerged in the 1950s, the neoconservatives that took over the leadership of the GOP in the 1980s and 1990s, and the Christian Zionists who serve as the party’s “base” (i.e. useful idiots). Noam Chomsky discussed the real nature of U.S. “conservatism” here.
Trump’s populist-nationalism is challenging this coalition from the top just as the “alternative right” is challenging “movement conservatism” from the margins. Some neocons have even threatened to form a third party if Trump gains the GOP nomination. While I’m not convinced that would actually happen, the splintering of the GOP into two parties, one populist-nationalist party (similar to the parties of this kind in Europe) and one party reflecting the neoconservative/plutocrat/evangelical alliance would be wonderful from our own revolutionary anarchist perspective, because it would essentially render the right-wing incapable of achieving electoral victory on a national level in the United States, or at least forming a stable coalition that could remain competitive for very long. This would in turn mean that the totalitarian humanist coalition represented by the Democrats would unquestionably be the dominant political force in US politics.
The inability to achieve electoral ability and the tightening of the grip of totalitarian humanism would lead to growing frustration and disaffection on the Right, and an increase in sympathy for more radical ideas like secession. Meanwhile, the totalitarian humanists’ persistent use of the Right as a bogeyman would become ever less credible the more the right-wing continued to lose power on a national level. Cleavages on the Left would increasingly begin to emerge (“cracks in the PC coalition,” as I call them), and a growing split would likely develop between the more establishment-friendly statist-progressive Democratic Party-oriented branch of totalitarian humanism, and the more extremist “social justice warrior” branch of totalitarian humanism found in academia and in left-wing ghettos. The ultimate goal, of course, is for so much political fractiousness to develop that the state collapses altogether.
It’s a sign of Conservatism Inc.’s desperation that they are turning to Ted Cruz to stop Donald Trump. With Jeb! a joke, Christie floundering, Carson cratering, and Rubio’s “momentum” looking like wishful thinking by the consultants, even “Establishment” Republicans recognize they may need Ted Cruz, the Texas Senator who has been the bête noire of Capital Hill Republicans since he entered office, to save the Party and the “Movement” from Donald Trump. But the question for patriots outside the Beltway: is it more important to save the existing “Conservative Movement”—or build a new one to save the country?
Desperation can be seen in the speed with which Conservatism Inc.’s bigwigs are moving to consolidate behind Cruz. At the heart of this effort: the Religious Right organizations, spearheaded by Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council (like us, a “hate group” according to the $PLC). Perkins summoned dozens of conservative leaders to form a collective known as “The Group” to unite and marshal their support behind one candidate early in the primaries. After heavy debate, they choose Cruz over Rubio in a meeting at Northern Virginia hotel.