The Sniper's Tower
I’m inclined to oppose the idea of an automaker bailout, but I didn’t adopt this attitude by erecting a libertarian Principle and throwing overboard everything that didn’t measure up. Smells like . . . Leftism.
There may be no cure for Jacobin libertarianism. But with effective treatment its symptoms can be controlled. Once daily find a mirror and while gazing into it recite “The case for the bailout is not contemptible” one hundred times.
Peter Hitchens has plenty of appropriately-directed frustration about a country exalting an “undistinguished and conventionally Left-wing machine politician” as a “sort of secular saviour.” Perhaps, though, he ought to be taking the Leftist Idea of America more seriously. As several nimble and astute paleos frequently remark, in a crucial sense America is not disappearing but becoming more and more itself—a notion, a proposition, a concept. No worthwhile opposition can afford to ignore how fundamentally a left-driving egalitarianism is rooted to our very existence. It simply won’t do to burp about how menacing the Democrats are every time we witness another spectacular example of our own social and political decay.
There are plenty of non-liberal/neocon observers whose understanding is more complex and common-sensical, and whose voices, added to the mix, would help facilitate a wider and more realistic appraisal of social and political reality. Steve Sailer is the most obvious example. His book on Obama is a treasure trove of insight, as well as a store of basic facts about the man and his background that our crack squad of mainstream political journalists habitually avoids and ignores.
The finest single piece of writing on the Obama phenomenon appeared as a draft on Dennis Dale’s blog. He’s taken it down, but it was so good it is worth mentioning even if it never reappears to the public. In “Deconstructing Barry, Part I” Dale presented Obama’s campaign as pure kitsch, quoting Milan Kundera:
Kitsch causes two tears to flow in quick succession. The first tear says: How nice to see children running on the grass! The second tear says: How nice to be moved, together with all mankind, by children running on the grass! It is the second tear that makes kitsch kitsch.
All politics contain an element of kitsch, wrote Dale, but Obama’s (continuing) campaign, stripped of its non-essentials, is kitsch. This fact, and the fact of Obama’s success, speaks volumes about the state of our collective imagination, about The Way We Are Now.
I’ve also been reading able, idiosyncratic remarks by Chilton Williamson, Jr. and Tom Fleming. And of course, Taki’s Magazine is fortunate to have Paul Gottfried as its leading house guru.
But none of this high-caliber commentary is going to have any wider significance or influence in the short or immediate term, outside of a few crummy right-wing blogs. Sailer writes in his Acknowledgements that his book is no threat to anyone’s current political interests, but that “It may have an effect on historians a generation from now.” He might as well be speaking about anyone to the right of National Review, a loose constellation of individuals who lack the resources to affect the national imagination. Richard Spencer is a nonrandom example of what we can do with what we have—he is making a valiant effort on a tight budget and producing a sleek, super-intelligent webzine. Yet Taki’s as currently constituted will never have a primary or even tertiary hand in establishing media talking points.
What we need in terms of the practical present, as Paul Gottfried has pointed out, are national newspapers and television stations with which to air a distinct, authentic, and intelligent right-wing message. This means someone will have to solicit the backing of one or several wealthy patrons who will not flee at the first whiff of PC controversy. Such favor cannot be located and obtained in an afternoon. It is a long-term project requiring the sustained and single-minded effort of someone who believes in the possibility of success.
Having obtained reliable funding and a national media outlet, the people in charge would then have to withstand pressure from within their own ranks. They would have to tolerate the variety of allegiances and attitudes that exist to the right of the political/journalistic establishment and avert fratricidal ruin. They would need skin thick enough to withstand the criticism of libertarians, paleos, traditionalists, Protestants, Catholics, atheists, agnostics, and anyone jealous of competing worldviews. So far Taki’s has set a pretty good example in this regard.
I’m not one to criticize those who are more inclined to a contemplative state and an avoidance of messy presentism. We all have to do what makes sense to us, and I can forgive those who imagine that flirting with deep-pocketed donors would just be part and parcel of another embarrassing “conservative movement.” But if someone with different instincts and high degrees of charm, ability, and perseverance could land a heavy-hitting media concern then right-wing viewpoints would suddenly be worthy of mainstream insult and hatred. As things are the Right does not even attract the acknowledgement of disdain.
I can’t say I’m able to make sense of these learned conservatives who are voicing their support for Obama. If you truly favor one of the two suits generated by our electoral system, then you probably do not need the conservative label to capture the nuance and distinctiveness of your views and attitudes. And if on the other hand you are truly dissatisfied by rituals of “choice” that have displaced authentic exercises of citizenship, but must mouth support for a certain candidate to please polite company, you may have other problems. Perhaps participation in a contact sport will help you worry less about ingratiating yourself to your peers and acquaintances.
I’ll visit my polling place tomorrow and write down Chuck Baldwin’s name. And if there is a public work detail appointed for campaign sign removal on Wednesday, I will be joining.
If you have excess cash and are looking for campaigns worthy of your support, there are at least two candidates in Pennsylvania who could use help and have a chance to win.
The most important and notable is Lou Barletta, running against 12-term incumbent Democrat Paul Kanjorski. Barletta is popular and has been running a strong campaign, while Kanjorski--a well-known sleaze--hasn’t seen good press in months. The good guy probably will win. But unseating an entrenched incumbent is no sure thing, and Barletta’s lead has narrowed in the most recent poll. Lou Barletta for Congress could still use contributions, I’m sure.
In other race, Democrat challenger John Morganelli and incumbent Attorney General Tom Corbett have been trading insubstantial attacks over “ethics” and “partisanship.” Morganelli’s strong anti-immigration stance is not receiving an ounce of attention, even from Morganelli. But it turns out to be a central issue for him. Here’s a little of his testimony before a House subcommittee back in 2003:
Despite the voices of those who naively believe that the influx of this estimated 9 to 13 million illegal aliens into the United States is a positive thing, the fact of the matter is that illegal immigration is having an extremely negative impact upon America at many levels. Unfortunately, the majority of illegal aliens who are here are engaged in criminal activity. Identity theft, use of fraudulent social security numbers and green cards, tax evasion, driving without licenses represent some of the crimes that are engaged in by the majority of illegal aliens on a daily basis merely to maintain and hide their illegal status. In addition, violent crime and drug distribution and possession is also prevalent among illegal aliens. Over 25% of today’s federal prison population are illegal aliens. In some areas of the country, 12% of felonies, 25% of burglaries and 34% of thefts are committed by illegal aliens. The numerous crimes being committed by illegal aliens such as identity theft, fraud and use of false identification is causing havoc with record-keeping systems including but not limited to Social Security, income tax and other compilation of data that we have routinely relied upon for accuracy and identity verification. Just about every day, municipal and state police come in contact with illegal aliens who are utilizing fraudulent documents, false names and other people’s identities. Identification of these individuals is impossible and, quite frankly, many of the illegal aliens committing crimes here in the United States have criminal records from their country of origin which cannot be ascertained because of their continuous use of false identities. Clearly, in addition to being a crime issue, the growing population of illegal aliens in the United States is without a doubt the single most important national security issue facing us. . . .
. . . I believe that both the Republicans and the Democrats are to blame for the present lack of enthusiasm on the part of the government to enforce immigration laws. Business interests that often influence Republican Party politics clearly want cheap labor and often employ illegal aliens in menial jobs paid less than the minimum wage. On the other hand, the Democratic Party continuously at the national level panders to ethnic politics. . . .
Immigration doesn’t rate as an issue for Corbett, but “Protecting the Environment” and “Targeting Gun Violence” do. Conservative Democrats > mainstream Republicans, without a doubt.
On the radio today I heard from members of the House who were speaking about limitations and restraints, and about not automatically doing what our managers and experts are demanding. I can say absolutely and without sarcasm that for me this is a first. Never in my lifetime has the regime deliberately done something sensible, and done it on the basis of realism, rather than on the basis of an obsession with our universal equality and personhood.
It’s likely that this is nothing special in the great scheme of things, and in any case I may be misinterpreting attitudes and decisions. For the moment, though, it seems as if a sizable group of people in the regime are reciting a ruling narrative a little less, and seeing things for what they are a little more, than usual.
If Ron Paul had carried his election campaign outside of the GOP and ran hard to its right, he wouldn’t just be explaining the bank crisis on talk shows right now. He would be picking up votes from people whose sense of regime crisis is deepening. He also would have the chance to impress people with his knowledge of the financial and monetary issues at hand, which surpasses the understanding even of the Fed gurus. As it is, votes of dissatisfaction will go to Barack Obama by default, instead of someone who actually earned them by noticing the nakedness of the emperor from day one of his career.
In spite of managerial democracy’s success at re-educating its subjects, there appears to be enough of a dissatisfied base to support a campaign like Paul’s without him having to remain attached to the Republicans or set up artificial alliances with folks like Cynthia McKinney. Now would have been Paul’s most relevant moment. Too bad.
After many drinks and many useless classes, I finally scraped out of college in May. Now for real life. But where? Like in the Talking Heads song, I’m checking cities out, noticing their good points and bad points, and finding one to live in. It’s not quite The Quest for Community but it will have to do.
I spent the last week visiting Chicago for the first time. Is there a friendlier metropolis? I haven’t found one. For city-dwellers, everyone seemed remarkably down-to-earth. On the crowded streets no one interrupted my stride without politely excusing himself. Cubs fans at Wrigley were great people to watch a game with, whether you were rooting for the home team or the opposing Milwaukee Brewers. Maybe the women seemed less perilously self-absorbed than elsewhere, too, though I could be making that up.
Of course, there’s plenty more to Chicago than Wrigley Field and Michigan Avenue. As a black passenger sitting near me on the Red Line complained to a group of baseball fans, “I don’t care whether you root for the Sox or the Cubs—if you haven’t been to south Chicago, you haven’t been to the city.” I take it he meant the ‘hood, and no doubt he was right. Englewood looks like the kind of place I wouldn’t visit without a badge, a gun, and a few squad cars full of reliable coworkers.
Then there’s the Chicago of Tony Rezko and Jabir Muhammad, which Steve Sailer has written a little about recently. That Chicago is closer to Captain Renault’s Casablanca than anything else in my imagination, though I won’t assume the Second City has anything as redeeming as Claude Rains. It produced Barack Obama, the Jedi for all the forces of baseless hope and unreflective leftism in the galaxy, and for this I award it no points. On the other hand, Chicago is the one place in that galaxy where Obama signs, pins, and shirts don’t bother me so much. The people wearing them may the same human regressions I was forced to cohabit with throughout prep school and college. But they are also rooting for their hometown guy, which doesn’t automatically bother me. In my addled brain such a meager and dubious paradox is enough to earn Chicago one more tally in the “win” column.
Paging Mr. Stooksbury . . .
I very much doubt that Richard is the only rightie who is disappointed in Ron Paul’s display today. Richard is absolutely correct that Paul’s campaign accomplished great things and could have accomplished much more simply by keeping its hand on the throttle and letting its momentum ride. Instead the campaign (Paul or his advisors or both) choked, which makes today’s spectacular display of klutzy irrelevance fantastically fitting. What kind of person has cheerful remarks to make about Paul wrapping up his effort by standing on a stage with Cynthia McKinney telling us to vote?
Vote! Oh, okay . . . I’ll just VOTE! That’s what we all need to do. Vote. I had in mind alot of stuff about constitutionalism and the Federal Reserve, and I think someone mentioned a republic or something. But it’s really as simple as joining up with the College Democrats and getting people registered to cast ballots. I wish someone had told me earlier. I wouldn’t have spent so much time reading old books and trying to understand business cycle theory.
Sheesh.
Voting for McCain because Palin is on the ticket would be like buying a ticket for a Hannah Montana concert because Jimi Hendrix was on guitar. No matter how great Hendrix is he would be obligated to play Montana’s crappy tunes.
Thank you, Mr. Hunter.
I want to be fair to a lady whom I know little about at this point. It’s certainly interesting and a little gratifying to see neoconservatives not getting the presents they wanted. I also have no problem rooting for politicians who have the stomach to hang in and fight for right-wing causes.
Given what we know so far about Palin, however, I’ll be careful to keep my noises of satisfaction in a mezzo piano at the very loudest. We have to wait and see how stable her conservative attitudes are. We have to wait and see what Palin will say about immigration. We have to wait and see whether she will fight to keep her right-wing attitudes, knowing that she will do so as an affirmative action hire in the campaign of a leftward-reaching party and a world-saving candidate. To do anything worth our singing about she’ll have to buck around in her party more than a bit, and even if she has the will to do so there is no assurance that she has the resources or the ability. If she wants to try no one will be rooting harder than I. I also root for the Pittsburgh Pirates.