Deo volente.

A Conservative in America

I’ve said for a long time that the real reason- the only reason – for a conservative to be mad at the Democrats is that they are failing us as a second party.

You can be mad at individuals or at idiots, an awe-ful lot of whom happen to be Democrats. But you’re not mad because they are Democrats. You get mad at their “policies,” projects, or their activism, most of which seems to fly in the face of political theory about deferential republics.

No, the only thing to be mad at Democrats about is that they don’t give you a choice. You don’t like the way the GWOT is being run? Well, you’re not going to find an solution on the other side of the aisle, where the criticism is worse than the alternatives . Don’t like the Senate’s lack of resolve on immigration? Are you in awe that anyone can contemplate national sovereignty without secure borders? Don’t look now, but a Democrat Senate won’t help things.

So there’s no alternative on the issues that matter most. Do a similar comparison side by side on the economy, Iran, North Korea, the Dollar / Euro, South America, judicial activism, or any other serious issue.

The Republican party is the only place where there is actual debate and actual alternatives. The problem is that the debate happens over time in a Darwinian manner rather than at the voting booth. If only you could pit Republican against Republican – then maybe you’d hear a real solution to, say, the border fence that is so needed, or whether a strong dollar is better than a weak dollar. Instead you can choose the dollar, or you can choose the barter system. It’s really no choice at all.

It’s almost like someone asking you whether you’d vote for him or her for president. I’m serious, folks – I’ll take the rabbit.

So this November, I’m taking the rabbit. Don’t get me wrong – there are substantive candidates who deserve the vote, and there are candidates to vote against. But really, there isn’t a choice so much as a decision.


October 27, 2006 Posted by | Philosophy - General, Politics | Leave a comment

75 Virgins if you _Just_ kill yourself

Dear Mr. Homicide Bomber,

Whether your weapon is a belt, a bus, a car, or an ambulance, I would like to make you an offer on behalf of the West.

You can have 75 virgins if you’ll just kill yourself. That’s 4 more virgins for simply putting a gun to your own head, or taking the bomb to an unpopulated culvert and detonating it there.

It’s important that you succeed. You are welcome to film it or not, to do the suicide note, or not. But it is important that the event ends with your demise. Otherwise, the 4 virgins are off the table.


The West

Continue reading

October 20, 2006 Posted by | GWOT, Philosophy - General, Terrorists | 2 Comments

The Conversation of the West – The Pope as a Western Leader

This last week has had one major headline … that the Pope has angered Muslims the world over with his comments at the University of Regensburg (full text).

There are two points that are not being made clear about this. A number of observers are quick to dismiss Benedict’s comments, to diffuse them and despoil them in their references to Islam. The implication is that he did not know what he was saying, that his comments need context in order to instill full comprehension. In fact, this speech wasn’t about Islam alone, but about how the West must first reconcile Religion and Reason (already done). Only by each Faith’s resolution to these essential issues can we save both.

Continue reading

September 16, 2006 Posted by | Leaders of the West, Philosophy - General, Politics, Religion | 11 Comments

The Left and the State

Ace is getting pissed

The left has decided that talk of murdering politicians they don’t like is now acceptable. Cute, even. I have long been against such talk — including on this site, directed at people I personally loathe — but I have to say I’m getting to the point where I’m less willing to avoid it if the other side refuses to abide by similar common-sense restraints.

I can’t say I’m in complete disagreement. What is particularly dangerous is the notion that they can hide behind the Net’s anonymity, the “humor” gambit, or their collectivism to say that they didn’t mean it. It is precisely that identification with a group or with a philosophy that would give them license to pull a nut-brained stunt like this.

I can tell you one thing about the Left’s conspiracy theories – they all point the finger of blame at Bush and his administration. When and if they gain political power, given their philosophical roots, they will seek to assuage that blame by having the State proclaim him or his administration or his supporters as its enemy. Does anyone recall when Clinton sought to blame right-wing talk radio for the Oklahoma City Bombing?

I’m goddamned tired of the murder-talk and the left’s wink-wink-nudge-nudge response to it. I am sick of these vile fuckers subtly and not-so-subtly encouraging the assassination of duly elected or appointed members of the Bush Administration.

Here’s the problem: our political opponents are autoritarians all, believing in some mix of fascism, socialism, and communism. The ends justify the means, and only they are privy to what the appropriate ends must be. In that way, they are philosphical duplicates of jihadist assassins, for whom a loss of life is the means of advancing the argument.

Their delusion of grandeur is based on the flawed notion that they are both omniscient and representative of the State appratus. Just as there are already calls for an Impeachment hearing should the Republicans lose the House, there will be pressure put on elected Democratic representatives shoud they gain any power whatsoever. Because the ends justify the means. And if the elected officials don’t take action, don’t you think some jack ass would take a Democratic win as a mandate for sanction to act on the behalf of the State?

This is precisely why we cannot start talking like that as a party or as a group. Classical liberalism and rugged individualism cannot tolerate an “ends justify the means” motivational component, because they don’t. The means are the ends that we seek. The way that you do things is important. And the State is not the god of the Republicans – we don’t serve it; it serves us.
Communism and socialism are known as the governments of thugs, becuase they are the first groups to benefit from the ability to hide vicious criminality behind the veneer of righteousness. The Democratic nutroots are devouring that political methodology, and this is why they are a danger to the US. They would allow anything as long as it promoted the State agenda.

We are living in dangerous times when a group of people would act on the behalf of the State to advance an un-democratically supported political agenda.

September 7, 2006 Posted by | Philosophy - General, Philosophy of the Commons, Politics, Sweet Crazy | 7 Comments

Rob Reiner is a Jack Ass


Mel Gibson’s apology for making drunken anti-Semitic remarks isn’t enough to redeem him, actor-producer Rob Reiner said. The actor also must acknowledge that “his work reflects anti-Semitism,” particularly the 2004 hit movie “The Passion of the Christ,” Reiner told Associated Press Radio.

Of course it does. Of course it does.

How much of this is jealousy? The Hollywood establishment had a veritable cow when Passion did well, precisely because it was made outside of the usual production path that most movies take. What’s more, it was a huge success even though it is overtly religious. Certainly the teeming masses couldn’t appreciate such … mythology. Now Reiner is criminalizing the work based on the crime of the producer.

Continue reading

August 28, 2006 Posted by | Art and Aesthetic, Philosophy - General | 2 Comments