Wednesday, December 8, 2010
Wednesday, November 3, 2010
You can believe that the majority of those people in Delaware who voted against Christine O'Donnell have far more in common with her than with her silver-spoon multimillionaire opponent Chris Coons. O'Donnell lost because the elite media, whose members themselves come mainly from privilege and hold an aristocratic view of the world, were ruthless in caricaturing her. Their greatest fear isn't Republicans who talk and look like them, but authentic populists like O'Donnell or Sarah Palin who show up their own stances as phony.
If Sarah Palin is to have a chance in two years, she'll have to break the caricature the media has created about her. This means reaching out to those independents, union workers, African-Americans, et.al., who are more like her than they know. Otherwise the good-cop bad-cop game the establishments of both parties play will remain in control.
Friday, October 22, 2010
1.) Socialism; i.e., the Welfare State.
2.) Monopoly Capitalism.
3.) Small-scale capitalist entrepreneurs.
Those in category #3 have been keeping America at the top, through their ambition, innovation, and work.
Striking to me is how after awhile, big Capitalist enterprises begin to resemble the stagnant, bureaucracy-heavy State. General Motors stands as the classic example. I hear all the time from people who've visited Central Europe, countries like Czechoslovakia, about how the destruction wrought from Communism-- environmental and economic devastation both-- can still be seen. Yet, is it any different from the devastation wrought upon Detroit? Detroit was a symbioses of Big Capitalism and Big Government, which created a things-as-they-are mindset. As a child I'd visit with my auto worker dad the union hall. A wonderful memory. very nostalgic. But absolutely anachronistic.
The underclass is sustained-- at a survival level-- by America's socialism. Yet I'd say very few of those subsisting that way like it. In the underclass as much or more than anywhere else you find dreams of creation and success. Hip-hop stars are just one evidence of this. Everyone except academy-brainwashed Lefties want to be in the #3 category. It's aka The American Dream.
Tuesday, October 19, 2010
An argument could even be made that today's "Leftists" aren't on the Left, in that they come from the highest, most aristocratic levels of society, they've cut themselves loose from the mass of Americans-- even from most of the working class-- and their ideas ultimately are about giving more power to tops-down institutions, when the classic Left was about leveling corrupt and hierarchical institutions.
Populist energy today is coming from the Right, from conservatives. For non-Conservative populists, there are no other options. The trick will be not to limit the defense of liberal ideas to conservatives, but to revive and recreate the kind of liberalism which once existed in this country; which can be of and for the downtrodden, and which will also defend the foundations of American culture-- the right to free speech, free of "speech codes" and other illiberal limits-- among them. Including the defense of the idea of America itself!
Monday, October 18, 2010
Rich-b Meghan McCain and her group of aristocrat friends apparently can’t stand populist Delaware Senate candidate Christine O’Donnell, because she’s had “no real success” in any kind of business endeavor. Hmm. Then again, O’Donnell, unlike Meghan, didn’t grow up with the money or background to guarantee success. Can we have one Senator out of 100 who’s lived a life corresponding to that of most Americans?
It’s called democracy, folks.
Thursday, October 14, 2010
Monday, October 11, 2010
Monday, October 4, 2010
One sure way to kill the movement is if the Usual Suspects of Republican status quo business-as-usual system types co-opt the Tea Parties and grab the spotlight.
What's the face of the movement? If it's John Boehner and Meg Whitman, then the many Independents and ex-Democrats who've been intrigued by, and attracted to, the populist insurgency will quickly drift away.
Tuesday, September 28, 2010
Note the description of Colbert's embarrassment at his accent and his upbringing, which he's submerged beneath his alter ego. His dislike of populist Americans and all they stand for is, at its core, a hatred of himself. Or, this is one screwed-up person.
As for his "testimony," it shows the extent to which many on the Left are one-trick ponies. They create a distorted version of a complex issue-- in this case, illegal immigration-- creating a caricature of the opposition which they can then knock down, with accompanying smugness and snarkiness.
SUICIDE OF THE LEFT
The behavior of the Stephen Colberts of the Left weakens their own cause. It reveals the confusion of today's Left. Illegal immigration, after all, hurts no one so much as America's working people-- those the Left feigns to represent-- and benefits no one so much as the very wealthy. The Left, in other words, is warring on the very people who were once their traditional base of support. When they continually insult the bulk of the American public, let them not be surprised at the result!
Tuesday, September 21, 2010
Wednesday, September 15, 2010
The media misreads the victory of Christine O’Donnell over establishment-backed Mike Castle for the Republican nomination for the U.S. Senate in Delaware. It’s a victory for conservatism, sure, but also for populism. Elites in both parties are aghast that this outsider, this “unqualified” (in their eyes) person has received a major party nomination. They fail to see this as a victory for DEMOCRACY, and for the Republic which embodies it. Unfortunately, the career politicians of the machine and their media mouthpieces have long since lost touch with what America was intended to be about.
Monday, September 6, 2010
The rapid political swings in the United States right now, from Right to Left to Right, are similar to the situation in France in the 1930’s. A party is elected and appears completely dominant, giving the illusion that a long-term change has taken place. Within a couple years the dominance is gone.
The way the Obama administration began less than a mere two years ago mimicked in some ways the “Popular Front” victory which occurred in France in 1936.
Author Richard Overy (in The Road to War):
“—the Popular Front parties campaigned on the promise of economic revival and social reform . . . on a promise not to destroy capitalism, but to manage it. On foreign policy there were deep divisions between pacifists, who were mainly socialists, and the other two alliance parties which favored rearmament. . . .”
“The results of the Popular Front, which had aroused such optimism and elan in the summer of 1936, were deeply disillusioning. Social conflict did not go away but intensified. The French economy did not revive, but became plagued by inflation, a mounting deficit and a massive flight of capital. The social programmes could no longer be funded.”
“For the movement elected to restore a sense of unity and social peace, to heal the wounds of post-depression France, produced an almost entirely contrary effect.”
According to Overy, French morale and the French economy only began to revive at the end of the decade under the French nationalist Paul Reynaud. But by then of course it was too late.
Saturday, September 4, 2010
Thursday, September 2, 2010
The biggest misconception people had about President Obama when he was elected was that he had anything to do with change. That’s not why he was put in there. He’s a creature of the system. His task was to hold the center—to sustain and strengthen the status quo. Which means, the central institutions of the political status quo, from the pillars of elite media (Obama is their creation) to the ever-growing institutions of the federal government with all the accompanying train of that government, from government contractors to government unions to pseudo-government institutions like Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac. Of course, also the government-sustained Federal Reserve-run banking system. Obama’s task is to keep the whole mess together. He’s not an agent of change—unless you think more state power is change! The irony of the situation is that it’s conservatives who are more comfortable with change, in the sense that they realize this country was created to allow flexibility and change. (Aka freedom.) The freebooting mindset can adapt to—nay, thrives on—change. This may be why the Republican party is being transformed by its populists, while the other major party, progressively elitist, progressively slows, coagulates, bureaucratizes, hardens.
Monday, August 30, 2010
I also hope to document the very real changes in American culture and society which I see about to take place.