Read all about it.

In decades, not centuries, we will split apart like the Soviet Union into a loose confederation of autonomous states. People will refer to us like they do that area of the Balkans now known as The Former Yugoslavia, or similarly to the way Russia and its old republics are now known, as the old Soviet Union.

If the goal of this nation is reflected in our motto of E Pluribus Unum, out of many, one; then truly this 200-plus year experiment in representative democracy and melding ethnicities has failed, and failed spectacularly.

Here are some similar sentiments from Michael O’Meara of The Occidental Quarterly and from Christian Reconstructionist Gary North. Read this stuff and then go back and watch the old videos of Jerry Rubin from my last post. Isn’t it interesting that the radical right is now saying a lot of the same stuff as the radical left from the 60s?

Perhaps we need to start holding some academic seminars critiquing “childarchy” and follow up with a sit-in or hunger strike on behalf of “flowers’ rights.”

“Marcuse Is Dead…And We Have Killed Him.” -Quagmire, ATS Reader

Spontaneous Order

AlternativeRight.Com Is Now Live!

Community Organizing and National-Anarchism presentation by Andrew Yeoman

Tribal Anarchism Video Series Parts One, Two, Three, Four

United Anarchism Vs United Nationism

Fall of the New World Order

The Tyranny of “Tolerance”

“Isn’t it ironic that the government can criminally charge citizens with ‘conspiracy’ (an agreement or a partnership, not an action), but when a citizen even mentions that there is ample evidence (provided by the government’s own documents) that the government can and does conspire to commit and does commit various felonies, they are mocked, vilified, and labeled as kooks?

When the government came for militia, I remained silent; I was not militia.
When they locked up the religious conservatives, I remained silent; I was an atheist.
When they came for the bloggers, I remained silent; I was not a blogger.
When they came for the Muslims, I remained silent; I was not Muslim. When the came for me, there was no one left to speak out.”

–Eli Cryderman

“There’s no difference between cops and outlaws.” –Kim Fowley

Wars Do Not Increase Our Freedom by Tom Mullen

The Erosion of Civil Liberties: This President is the Worst Yet by Glenn Greenwald

The Downward Slope of Empire Chalmers Johnson interviewed by Harvey Kreisler

Creating Times Square Terror by Stephen Walt

Is the War Coming Home? by Pat Buchanan

Ending the Neoconservative Nightmare by Daniel Levy

Sympathy for the Devil, BP by Kevin Carson

Anarchism and the Labor Movement by Anna Morgenstern

The Degeneration of America Into a Caste System by Kevin Carson

George Donnelly, Political Prisoner by Thomas Knapp

Strategic Murder by Darian Worden

Idiocracy Rising by William Norman Grigg

When the Personal is not Political by Maury2K

Tea Party Blows Its Cool by Maury2K

White Devil Theory of History by Maury2K

First Greece, Then the U.S. by Gary Barnett

The Death of the Euro by Jim Rogers

A “Duty to Die”? by Thomas Sowell

Elena Kagan, Gun Grabber by David Kopel

Stop Crazed PIG Raids by Paul Armentano

Bill Buckley: The Making of a Warmonger by David Gordon

The Great H.L. Mencken

PIGS on the Attack in Burbank by Tricia Shore

No, the System Did Not Work! by Bill Anderson

Iraq: The Endless Occupation by Justin Raimondo

Obama’s Drug War Strategy: Still a Long Way to Go by Ethan Nadelmann

NYC PIGS Forced to Apologize to Rape Victim by Graham Rayman

New Gay Sex Scandal on the Christian Right by David Rosen

Are Liberals Anti-WASP? by Pat Buchanan

Putting Whitey in His Place by Paul Gottfried

“Movement Conservative” Dinosaurs Still Stuck in the 80s by Dan Phillips

Pro-Immigration Activists Are Their Own Worst Enemy by Filmer

“The Italians were called wops, the Jews were called hymies, I was of course a greaseball, and every Hispanic was a spic. Well, we all got along famously! It was rough, but it was fine.”

-Taki Theodoracopulos

“The “clash of civilizations” is, in a very literal sense, a clash of God and Mammon. The Islamic revolutionaries are driven by a fanatical devotion to their god and the promises they believe he has made to them if only they take up arms on his behalf. The nations of the West are driven by an almost as fanatical devotion to Mammon, that is, to wealth, luxury, power, pleasure and privilege. Further, the culture of the West combines this unabashedly materialist ethos with rejection of strength and discipline in favor of a maternalistic emphasis on health, safety, “sensitivity”, “self-esteem”, “potential”, “personal growth”, “getting in touch with one’s inner child”, “feelings” and other concepts common to pop culture psychobabble. Of course, the socio-cultural ramifications of this is to create a society of weaklings, mediocrities and crybabies.”

-Keith Preston

See You in Hell by Grim Reaper

Wasted Years by Iron Maiden

“Life is war and conflict, struggle and strife, from conception till death…Never shall the lion lie down peacefully with the lamb…”

“Why are those who espouse Univeral Love, Tolerance, and ‘Human Brotherhood,’ usually the most screwed up people you’ve ever met, socially and emotionally? Not to mention some of the nastiest and most self-centered narcissists around?”

-Chris Donnellan

“What You Believe is Not as Important as What You Do.”

-Andrew Yeoman

Audio Broadcasts

Alternative Right Radio

Antiwar Radio

October Surprise 1980 Robert Parry interviewed by Scott Horton

In Defense of Militias Jesse Walker interviewed by Scott Horton

The Neocons Are Losing Their Grip Jack Hunter interviewed by Scott Horton

The Paper Money Behind the Empire Ron Paul interviewed by Scott Horton

A Nation of Sheep, Ruled by Wolves, Owned by Pigs

The Revolution Within Anarchism

Forty Years in the Wilderness?

Liberty and Populism: Building An Effective Resistance Movement for North America

Organizing the Urban Lumpenproletariat

National Anarchy and the American Idea

Don’t Talk to the Police

“The king is most wounded by ridicule.” -Thomas Hobbes

Is the purpose of education to inform and to promote critical thinking? Not according to the late leftist-postmodernist philosopher Richard Rorty:

“It seems to me that the regulative idea that we heirs of the Enlightenment, we Socratists, most frequently use to criticize the conduct of various conversational partners is that of ‘needing education in order to outgrow their primitive fear, hatreds, and superstitions’ … It is a concept which I, like most Americans who teach humanities or social science in colleges and universities, invoke when we try to arrange things so that students who enter as bigoted, homophobic, religious fundamentalists will leave college with views more like our own … The fundamentalist parents of our fundamentalist students think that the entire ‘American liberal establishment’ is engaged in a conspiracy. The parents have a point. Their point is that we liberal teachers no more feel in a symmetrical communication situation when we talk with bigots than do kindergarten teachers talking with their students … When we American college teachers encounter religious fundamentalists, we do not consider the possibility of reformulating our own practices of justification so as to give more weight to the authority of the Christian scriptures. Instead, we do our best to convince these students of the benefits of secularization. We assign first-person accounts of growing up homosexual to our homophobic students for the same reasons that German schoolteachers in the postwar period assigned The Diary of Anne Frank… You have to be educated in order to be … a participant in our conversation … So we are going to go right on trying to discredit you in the eyes of your children, trying to strip your fundamentalist religious community of dignity, trying to make your views seem silly rather than discussable. We are not so inclusivist as to tolerate intolerance such as yours … I don’t see anything herrschaftsfreiHerrschaft [domination] of people like me, and to have escaped the grip of their frightening, vicious, dangerous parents … I am just as provincial and contextualist as the Nazi teachers who made their students read Der Stürmer; the only difference is that I serve a better cause.”

I’ve been trying to find out more info about Obama’s latest nominee to the US Supreme Court. Here’s her Wikipedia entry and some relevant commentary from David Yeagley. Assuming that the info in the Wikipedia article is accurate, this is what I find most interesting about Elena Kagan:

During her deanship, Kagan supported a long-standing policy barring military recruiters from campus, because she felt that the military’s Don’t ask, don’t tell policy discriminated against gays and lesbians. According to Campus Progress,

As dean, Kagan supported a lawsuit intended to overturn the Solomon Amendment so military recruiters might be banned from the grounds of schools like Harvard. When a federal appeals court ruled the Pentagon could not withhold funds, she banned the military from Harvard’s campus once again. The case was challenged in the Supreme Court, which ruled the military could indeed require schools to allow recruiters if they wanted to receive federal money. Kagan, though she allowed the military back, simultaneously urged students to demonstrate against Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.

In October 2003, Kagan transmitted an e-mail to students and faculty deploring that military recruiters had shown up on campus in violation of the school’s anti-discrimination policy. It read, “This action causes me deep distress. I abhor the military’s discriminatory recruitment policy.” She also wrote that it was “a profound wrong — a moral injustice of the first order.”

I’m all for barring military recruitment on college campuses. During my days as a student leftist in the 1980s, I was involved in the movement to oppose CIA recruitment on campuses. The reason for this was that the various destabilization and counterinsurgency campaigns in which the CIA played a principal role has resulted in the deaths of millions of people. The reasons to oppose military recruitment on campuses might include, say, the million or so people killed in the present Iraq war, or the invasion of Iraq under false pretenses.

Beyond that, a lot of military recruiting is also done under false pretenses. Some years ago, I was managing a restaurant that had an Army and Marine recruiting office next door. Many of the workers I supervised were high school and college aged, and every day the recruiters would aggressively pursue them as they ventured into the parking lot on their way to work. They would use the wildest lies imaginable as a recruiting tool, like telling one kid that military service would help him advance his preferred career as a rapper (I kid you not. They really said that.)

But apparently Ms. Kagan isn’t particularly worried about any of this compared with the great atrocity of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” In other words, it’s no big deal to recruit unsuspecting youth under false pretense to go engage in aggressive war under even greater false pretenses, and to kill millions of people in the process. But it’s an awful thing to refuse to allow out-of-the-closet homos to join in the fun. Some more examples of Ms. Kagan’s legal wisdom:

First Amendment Center and the Cato Institute later expressed concern over arguments Kagan advanced as a part of her role as solicitor general. For example, during her time as Solicitor General, Kagan prepared a brief defending a law later ruled unconstitutional that would have criminalized depictions of animal cruelty

At her confirmation hearing, Kagan also drew criticism for arguing that battlefield law, including indefinite detention without a trial, could apply outside of traditional battlefields.

This is consistent with what I have been saying for some time about the present direction of American society. The cultural hard left is in the process of becoming a new ruling class, and this is a process that has been building up gradually since the 1970s. This rising cultural hard left has in the process of its ascension abandoned the anti-establishment ideas of 60s radicalism, and instead made its peace with the forces of State, Capital, and Empire in return for ruling class support for the advancement of the hard left’s social agenda. This cultural hard left that is in the process of seizing power through its alliance with the plutocracy and banking cartels has no qualms about using the police/military state it has inherited from past regimes (like those of Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan, may they both rot in hell forever) to eliminate its political opponents. Hence, conventional civil liberties like free speech and the rights of the accused to a fair trial can be compromised or eliminated entirely, yet there must never be a hint of “discrimination” against groups favored by the Left. What this will eventually produce, of course, is a totalitarian state organized as a caste system where individual rights are based merely on group identity, and group rights are based on claims of having been oppressed according to PC ideology.

This is a statement of my positions that I just posted during the course of a discussion on a Facebook friend’s page.

If I had to summarize my outlook in a few points, I’d say my current positions are a synthesis of these:

There are plenty of sidestreams to all of this, of course, but this is the gist of it. Most of my other writings or ideas have to do with strategic considerations, and the practical implications of the above.

While it may be un-PC to be anti-immigration, not even the immigrants get to defy totalitarian humanism.

“It’s also a question of human dignity. The full face veil turns a woman into a walking prison.”

Women will be fined £110 for the first offence.

If they refuse to pay or are caught a second time, they can be jailed for a week.

Does this make any sense whatsoever?

Finally, some common sense on this issue from an anarchist perspective. Good job, Andrew!

Only when cops become irrelevant to communities’ public safety will anarchism become possible.

We should inscribe that last sentence on our battle flag!

Spot on analysis of the Tea Parties from Andrew Yeoman at AltRight.

What’s most surprised me about the Tea Party phenomenon is the vitriolic manner in which prominent social commentators have attacked the protestors. Noam Chomsky, for instance, recently dismissed the Tea Party as a “fascist” movement. Though unlike the current President in office, the Tea Party isn’t demanding more government control over healthcare, the economy, and our daily lives.

At any rate, the best thing the Tea Party has done has been to provoke the “culture warriors” of the Establishment to show their true partisan colors. Eventually, Tea Party activists will notice who is consistently on their side and who is against them.

So says an informal poll from the Code Pink ladies.

This is about what I would have expected. But there’s some light:

The 15 people who wanted to dismantle the web of foreign military bases included Josh Little, a college student from Alexandria, Virginia. Josh said that his grandfather helped overthrow Hitler, but that was 60 years ago and it was high time for us to leave Germany. “I’d say the same for Japan, Korea and all of Europe. They can take care of themselves.”

One of the most sophisticated people I talked to all day was 22-year-old college student Andrew Barth from College Park, Maryland. “The hawks represent the old guard — so do both the Republican and the Democratic parties. With a few exceptions, they all love war and empire. But a small-government movement worth its salt can’t just be anti-Washington, it has to be anti-empire. If not, I’m outta here.”

It sounds like the younger generation of right-wing radicals needs a new home. Here we are.

Good piece on AltRight today from Richard Spencer.

I posted this response, which is in the same vein as some of my other recent comments here:

“…there have certainly been “red scares” in the past, and “Islamic extremists” are on the loose, but the state’s enemies du jour are caricatures of traditionalist Middle Americans. “

I think much of this can be explained by the fact that as traditional forms of out-group hostility (the usual laundry list of isms, archies, and phobias) have become more and more socially unacceptable and politically taboo, the state has had to find new targets in its perpetual quest for self-expansion. The most easy targets are those groups who are unpopular with educated, affluent liberals and the cultural and intellectual elite: religious fundamentalists, “racists,” bizarre cults, gun nuts, poor whites, Southerners, rednecks, supposed “anti-Semites,” on down the line, perhaps intertwined with more conventional outgroups who never made it onto the Left’s Pantheon of the Oppressed: drug users, prostitutes, poor blacks (as opposed to the Obama carbon-copies that liberals prefer). Essentially, these kinds of groups comprise what amounts to “the new niggers” in the eyes of the liberal establishment.