England at Twilight is the title of this picture. Actually it is later. The darkness is descending on us.

This little essay owes its origin to Sean Gabb who has read the political writings of the left and even managed to understand them, foul as they are. You can find out more about him and what he has to say at www.seangabb.co.uk/

Battle Of Ideas  [ 1 July 2015 ]
QUOTE
Next week sees the tenth anniversary of the London tube and bus bombings [ 7/7 Massacre ] which killed 52 travellers and injured more than 700....... We are now preparing to mark that momentous event with the funerals of the estimated 30 Britons killed in the Tunisian resort of Sousse, the biggest subsequent loss of British life to terrorism. In both cases the killers were young Muslim men, native to the countries in which they carried out their acts....... It is indeed puzzling that young people from any......
UNQUOTE
The Times starts with an honest headline then carries on the lies, the Propaganda. What is puzzling about Islamics full of hate? Nothing but The Times pretends it does not know because it is helping incite the flood of Third World aliens being used for Ethnic Fouling In England and the rest of Western Civilization. It is not just Ethnic Fouling; it is Genocide. The Main Stream Media are in the business of causing Black Hate & Western Guilt.

 

Britons Believe Their Culture Is Threatened By Minorities  [ 26 May 2017 ]
Brits are right of course. See the comments and know that they know. The point they have not taken but should  is that THE dangerous minority is Jews, especially Zionist crazies. They are the Paranoid, the Psychopaths full of hate,  the Puppet Masters controlling immigration policy, causing Ethnic Fouling In England and throughout Western Civilization.

 

PayPal Suspends Dozens Of Nationalist Group Site Accounts  [ 8 October 2017 ]
QUOTE
PayPal is taking action against more than three dozen hate [ sic ] groups and other extremist [ sic ] organizations, sources close to the payments company told CBS MoneyWatch on Wednesday. The move follows this weekend's violence at a white nationalist rally in Charlottesville, Virginia.

Among the groups PayPal (PYPL) will no longer do business with is Unity and Security for America, according to civil rights group Color of Change. Unity and Security for America is operated by activist Jason Kessler [of dubious antecedents according to the Wikipedia ], an organizer of the "Unite the Right" rally in Charlottesville. PayPal is also cutting ties with Altright.com, a white nationalist group led by Richard Spencer.

"Regardless of the individual or organization in question, we work to ensure that our services are not used to accept payments or donations for activities that promote hate, violence or racial intolerance," PayPal said in a statement..............

The move comes a day after the Southern Poverty Law Center argued that PayPal played an "integral" role in raising funds for white-supremacist groups. The advocacy group has urged PayPal to drop racist sites for three years, said Keegan Hankes, an analyst with the organization............

Following the Charlottesville attack, Alphabet's (GOOG) Google and GoDaddy (DDDY) canceled the domain registration for the neo-Nazi website The Daily Stormer. Discord, a voice and text app aimed at video gamers, pulled the plug on a server tied to Altright.com "and a number of accounts associated with the events in Charlottesville," it said.
UNQUOTE
CBS does not explain who is not under attack. It eagerly claims that various Nationalist sites are Racist, that Patriotism is evil. But all of them are run by White Men. Others, who are in the business of inciting Black Hate get a pass. In fact they are complicit, co-conspirators. One such is the Southern Poverty Law Center run by deeply unpleasant Jews on the make.

 

Israeli Army Attacks Internet  [ 10 March 2018 ] 
QUOTE
Numerous well funded, organized projects by and for Israel work to flood social media with pro-Israel propaganda, while blocking facts Israel dislikes. The projects utilize Israeli soldiers, students, American teens and others, and range from infiltrating Wikipedia to influencing YouTube. Some operate out of Jewish Community Centers in the U.S.........

A few days before the termination of our channel, we received a form email from YouTube, telling us we had gotten “one strike” for a short video about a Palestinian man killed by Israeli soldiers. The video was part of our series of videos to make Palestinian victims, usually ignored by US media, visible to Americans.

It takes three minutes to view the video and see that it contains nothing objectionable, unless revealing cruelty and oppression is objectionable:
UNQUOTE
Jews, especially the Zionist crazies are the Puppet Masters, infiltrating Education Industry, the Main Stream Media, Big Business & all other sources of power in order to control and destroy. Is this news? Not really but it is the truth.

 

Student Suing Against Left Wing Indoctrination In Nevada  [ 29 December 2020 ]
QUOTE
A high school senior of mixed race is suing a taxpayer-funded charter school in Nevada over the “coercive, ideological indoctrination” that is central to its Critical Race Theory-based curriculum that forces students to associate aspects of their identity with oppression.

In the lawsuit, Clark v. State Public Charter School Authority, filed Dec. 22 in federal court in Nevada, the young plaintiff William Clark and his mother Gabrielle Clark claim their First and Fourteenth Amendment rights were being violated. Students were allegedly told that by refusing to identify with an oppressive group, they were exercising their privilege or underscoring their role as an oppressor.............

The student at Democracy Prep in Las Vegas whose mother is black and deceased father was white, claims there was a hostile classroom environment, and that he felt discriminated against in the mandatory, year-long “Sociology of Change” course required for graduation. There is another required class, “Change the World,” in which students carry out a political or social work project..............

The new curriculum “inserted consciousness raising and conditioning exercises under the banner of ‘Intersectionality’ and ‘Critical Race Theory.’............ William was directed “in class to ‘unlearn’ the basic Judeo-Christian principles [his mother] imparted to him, and then [the school] retaliated against [him].”

“Some racial, sexual, gender and religious identities, once revealed,” the complaint states, “are officially singled out in the programming as inherently problematic, and assigned pejorative moral attributes by Defendants.”

The school principal told Mrs. Clark “that the theoretical basis of the revamped ‘Sociology of Change’ course is known as ‘intersectionality,’ and is inspired by political activist, academic and ‘Critical Race Theory’ proponent Kimberlé Crenshaw,” the complaint states. Crenshaw is a law professor [ sic ] at UCLA and Columbia Law School who is regarded as a leading authority on black feminist legal theory and is said to have coined the term “intersectionality.”.........

The school repeatedly threatened William “with material harm including a failing grade and non-graduation if he failed to comply with their requirements,” the complaint states, and refused to accommodate his requests for reasonable accommodation.

Steven Hayward lauded the lawsuit at Power Line Blog, saying it heralds the beginning of an “active resistance” and a “counterrevolution” against the far-left takeover of American institutions.
UNQUOTE
This is very similar to the Brainwashing used by the Chinese on American prisoners of war in Korea. It is the Long March Through The Institutions in action. It set up by the Frankfurt School. Perverting  the Education Industry is a major part of it. It brought us the Protocols Of The Learned Elders of Cambridge.

 

Culture War Is Ugly - We Are Losing It  [ 15 June 2022 ]
QUOTE
There has been much wailing and gnashing of teeth at this chimpout on the NY subway whereby women were terrorised by a wildin’ jogger. Horrified commentators demanded to know why “real men” on the train didn’t come to her assistance. Even Douglas Murray took the opportunity to blast ‘demasculinised’ men for their inactivity. Now that’s a bit strange coming from Douglas, being as he is a poofter of some renown. But he was but one part of a horrified chorus asking broadly the same question.

Well as luck would have I think I can be of help here. For a start the number of real men has declined significantly, a fact supported by the collapse of male fertility in America by a staggering 30% since 1980. Whether or not Serena Williams took it all is irrelevant, the fact is that today’s male is on average a much-reduced specimen in terms of, well, toxic masculinity, compared to his counterpart of forty years ago. By the way I’ve written extensively on this phenomenon in the old blog and am certain that the decline was masterminded as a byproduct of Agenda 2030.

However let us assume the presence of one ‘real man’ in the carriage. Let us further assume that this real man has his head screwed on. That being the case he’ll be well aware that rescuing the damsel in distress places him in a no-win situation. For a start, this being NY he will, as a law-abiding citizen, be unarmed. The same constraint does not apply to the guy chimping out. So by intervening he runs the serious risk of being knifed or shot. He also knows that were he to somehow disable the attacker he’d be in a heap of trouble. You see the attacker is black and the white knight will inevitably be White. You won’t get black passengers preventing a brutha’ havin’ his way with a White beetch. Can you just imagines what a black Affirmative Action DA, advised by slimy lawyers (whose names end in “stein” or “berg”) would do with that? The rescuer knows: The perp will walk while he finds himself up on a charge of “excessive force with racist overtones”. It will be classed as “White vigilantism” and nothing – nothing – scares the effete urban nation-wreckers more than that. Quite likely the perp would not alone walk but get compensation while the white knight gets fined or even jailed. And what of the victim’s gratitude? Don’t take that for granted. The unfathomable convolutions of the female mind are such that she’d likely turn on the rescuer and side with her attacker. Just ask any man who has intervened in a case of domestic violence if you doubt me.

Any would-be rescuer would also wonder why the new empowered woman would need help from a man. A White man at that. Remember the lady who claimed she needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle? We’re all equal now. You asked for equality sister and this is what it’s like. Chivalry is dead, sisters, and feminism killed it. Which in itself raises the question as to why the women in the carriage also stood by during the attack. Why didn’t the equal sisters do their sisterly duty in the face of such gross toxic masculinity? It’s a good question and the only conclusion we can draw is that strong empowered independent women want the benefits of equality but not the downsides. Which is why you see so few women working as miners or block-layers.

In the final analysis pervasive societal decay underlies this dismal spectacle. In 1950s America that jogger would have been taken down in the blink of an eye. But that was then, this is now. In the USA and indeed in most White countries what had hitherto been socially cohesive societies are no longer socially cohesive or even societies in any meaningful sense. There is no longer a ‘we’ – instead there’s a fractious, atomised mutually-hostile collection of races and cultures with the core population driven into imminent minority status, discriminated against in terms of employment, education, law enforcement and freedom of expression while their heritage gets endlessly trashed by the political, media and academic establishments. And of course berated for their ‘White privilege’ (once known as ‘working for a living’) which when you unpack it means being held responsible for the acts of your ancestors by blacks who accept no responsibility even for the acts of their own children!

Yet they are forced to sustain a vast and rapidly-growing parasitic welfare class which gets goaded by the nation-wreckers into believing that they are in fact the victims of their unwitting benefactors. Everything is now upside-down, subject to Satanic Inversion. Men become women, women are men, depravity is celebrated, art and music become travesties of their previous forms, maths and science are ‘racist’ because blacks can’t master them. How can Whites, White men in particular, invest themselves in such an abomination? But by withdrawing they are unwittingly hastening national suicide, or more accurately national murder, the murderers being a people who have themselves never fitted in anywhere and whose only real threat comes from a cohesive resistance of blood-and-soil-bound heritage Americans.

So sorry ladies. You asked – and voted – for this. No longer our struggle.
UNQUOTE
The Irish Savant puts the boot in. Is he right or is he wrong? Your answer tells whether you are a victim, deceived by the Mainstream Media, the Education Industry & Mob Psychology. Of course if you went to a university at great expense and really wanted one of their Micky Mouse degrees, their meal tickets you would have to pretend that you believed their waffle. Do you then grow up or carry on being a danger to Western Civilization? At all events our betters, the Quasi-Intellectuals, the Learned Elders Of Oxford & Learned Elders of Cambridge have not. They are just as much Enemies Of The People as our last few prime ministers.

 

Jews Whine About Second World War Re-Enactors, Jews Ignore Zionist Murders & Genocide In Israel  [ 22 June 2022 ]
QUOTE
A World War Two re-enactment group has been condemned as a 'sick joke' and 'grossly offensive' for dressing up as Nazi soldiers as a 'hobby'. 

Opponents said the group made light of the horrific crimes of Nazi Germany during the Second World War and the Holocaust®. The 304 Panzergrenadier Regiment, based in the South of England, takes part in reenactments and history events wearing Second World War German army uniforms with swastika insignias. 

The group's website says the regiment is committed to 'authenticity' and offers members 'great experiences and camaraderie you will struggle to find in any other hobby.'
UNQUOTE
The  Holocaust Memorial Day Trust is a bunch of subversive Jews & Zionist crazies to boot. They are part of the Culture Wars being waged against us. They market the Holocaust® Story, claiming that 6 million of them were murdered by naughty little Adolf and his followers. Ask them about the evidence for their stories if you want; They will get evasive or abusive. That is if they simply don't lie about it. Then ask them why it is illegal to say that their Story is a pack of lies in various countries. You will hear more abuse, lies or threats. A lot of Germans knew the truth. A lot of them did things. But their government doesn't allow them to talk. Ask the very same Jews how much they made out of the Holocaust® Industry to hear more lies. Der Spiegel will tell you that Jews With Light Fingers Took German Mugs For €63.2 Billion. That was back in 2007. It has risen since.

The Panzergrenadier Regiment 304 Living History Group is a bunch of re-enactors interested in history, in the Second World War, not politics. These Jews, by contrast are alien intruders with an agenda. They stole Palestine by fraud and Bribery. Now they hold it by terror, just the way that Adolf did.

 

Dancing School Run By Anti-White Racists Objects To Ballet  [ 1 August 2022 ]
QUOTE
A top British dance school has dropped ballet from its auditions after branding it an 'elitist art form', built around 'white European ideas and body shapes'. 

The Northern School of Contemporary Dance (NSCD) reviewed the dance as part of a wider plan to 'decolonise the curriculum', and consider the impact of race and gender on dance.

The Leeds-based school will no longer require ballet as part of its auditions, due to the cost of learning the dance style, its idealisation of particular body shapes and gender-divided roles, staff have said. 

Head of undergraduate studies at the conservatoire, Francesca McCarthy, called ballet an 'elitist art form'. Ballet's traditional terminology uses 'ballerina' for women and 'danseur' for men, with female dancers focusing on pointe work and lifts and leaps for men. Ms McCarthy said the ballet's terminology has 'strongly gendered roots' and was, 'problematic in relation to inclusion of non-binary and trans dancers.'

Ballet will still be taught at the school, which charges £9,250 per year for British students, and £17,500 per year for international dancers.........

The head of undergraduate studies, who credits her 'wonderful wife' [ She of Lesbos one assumes - Editor ] and two adopted sons for becoming more aware of 'challenges experienced by young people today', added that the NSCD is encouraging staff to use gender-neutral words, such as 'dancers/people/folk/everyone/everybody'.

Staff are also encouraged to use 'they' instead of he and she, to 'not make assumptions' about students' identities.
UNQUOTE
It is another case of Mob Psychology in action. The Puppet Masters are pulling the strings, controlling the Long March Through The Institutions. This little matter is part of the Culture Wars being waged against us. The Mail's readers are very impressed - unfavourably.

 

Jew Wages Culture War Against America After Screwing Eskimos  [ 5 August 2022 ]
QUOTE
Billionaire David Rubenstein's philanthropic efforts trash the Founding Fathers, even though his own business has made a fortune from deals that have profited off the less fortunate.

Since 2013, Rubenstein, 72, who co-founded the private equity giant the Carlyle Group, has given millions to entities that repair and upgrade historical monuments and landmarks like the Lincoln Memorial and the Washington Monument as well as Monticello and Montpelier, the homes of US presidents Thomas Jefferson and James Madison. But some say the restoration at the presidential homes has recast the presidents as sinister racists while downplaying their accomplishments.

Recent visitors to Monticello and Montpelier have flooded Trip Advisor with complaints about how the former presidents have been virtually reduced to villainous slaveholders in lectures by the tour guides while books on anti-racism and critical race theory by Ibram X. Kendi and Ta-Nehisi Coates dominate the gift shops.

Remarked Dan A. after his visit to Thomas Jefferson’s Monticello: “Do your history homework before going, so you can appreciate this great American… the woke tour guide will leave you feeling like he started the Ku Klux Klan.” “They have demonized the founding fathers now,” wrote another recent visitor to Monticello. “Same thing with Madison’s home. I would stay away from places like this. It’s not worth the propaganda.”
UNQUOTE
The New York Post is a deal more honest than most of the Mainstream Media, albeit there is no mention of Rubenstein being a Jew. His sort incite Black Hate and White Guilt; it is their Culture War against us. It was Jews like him that imported black Slaves from Africa as cheap labour. All is explained by Louis Farrakhan in The Secret Relationship Between Blacks and Jews. Now they use blacks as weapons to destroy Western Civilization.

 

 

 

Understanding the Culture War
by
Steven Yates

A good man writes:-

From www.lewrockwell.com

We start the new century and the new millennium with a problem of major proportions: the seemingly unstoppable march of political correctness through American institutions and life. A recent article in the journal Policy Review, published by the Heritage Foundation, is worth reading for its insights into how we have ended up in this predicament – and also for why we seem unable to figure a way out of it. The article is by John Fonte, of the Hudson Institute, and is entitled "Why There Is A Culture War." If this article is any indication, Fonte’s forthcoming book Building a Healthy Culture, of which the article is an excerpt, is likely also worth reading as a barometer of where we stand.

Fonte contrasts "two competing worldviews" that are currently struggling for dominance in America. It would be fair to say that the two really are at war: Fonte somewhat euphemistically calls the contest an "intense ideological struggle." One he calls "Gramscian"; the other, "Tocquevillian," after the intellectuals he credits with having authored the respective warring ideologies: the Italian neo-Marxist philosopher Antonio Gramsci, author of Prison Notebooks and other works, and the French political philosopher Alexis de Tocqueville, author of the influential Democracy in America.

It becomes clear that one cannot understand either the meteoric rise or apparent immunity of political correctness to attack without understanding Gramsci. Rarely would I recommend actually studying a Marxist social philosopher, but this guy merits our attention. Gramsci (1891-1937) agreed with Karl Marx that every society could be divided into "oppressor" and "oppressed" classes (e.g., Marx’s own "bourgeois" and "proletariat"), but for the first time, expanded the latter into an ensemble of subordinate, marginalized groups instead of a single, homogeneous group. Whereas Marx had spoken only of the proletariat, Gramsci spoke not just of propertyless workers but also of "woman, racial minorities and many ‘criminals.’" Fonte documents how Gramsci distinguished two ways the dominant group exercises control, whereas Marx had only written of one. First, there is direct domination through coercion or force – political might in service of the economic interests of the bourgeoisie. Second, there is what Gramsci calls hegemony, which means the pervasive and mostly tacit use of a system of values that supports and reinforces the interests of the dominant groups. The repressed groups may not even know they are repressed, in Gramsci’s view, because they have internalized the system of values that justifies their repression. They have internalized a "false consciousness" and become unwitting participants in their own domination.

Is this sounding familiar yet? Think of the radical feminist philosophy professors and law professors who speak of romantic candlelight dinners – a staple of ordinary American life – as a form of prostitution. They justify this seemingly outrageous claim on the grounds that American women exist in "false consciousness," the hegemonic product of male-dominated (and capitalistic) values. The sense of abhorrence felt by "ordinary" women at radical feminist claims is nothing more than this "false consciousness" asserting itself. Gramsci went on to argue that before there could be any "revolution" in Marx’s sense it would be necessary to build up a "counter-hegemony," or system of values favouring the repressed groups that would undermine or delegitimize the hegemony-created consciousness. And because hegemonic values permeate the whole of society and are embodied in the warp and woof of daily life, daily life becomes part of the ideological battleground. All the institutions we take for granted – schools, churches, the media, businesses, as well as art, literature, philosophy, and so on – become places where the "counter-hegemonic" values can be seeded and allowed to take root. They become domains to be infiltrated, and brought into the service of the movement. As the radical feminists put it, "the personal is the political." It is interesting how the latter have lifted this idea from a white male European philosopher mostly without credit. The point, however, is to create a new kind of "consciousness" free of the values that allow the dominant group(s) to repress the subordinate groups. Only this will throw off the shackles of "hegemony" and lead to true revolution.

Gramsci saw an important role in the transformation of society for those he called "organic" intellectuals (as opposed to "traditional" intellectuals). "Organic" intellectuals were to be intellectuals belonging to the repressed groups and making an effort to undermine the "hegemony" with the assistance of any "traditional" intellectuals they could persuade to defect from the dominant point of view. They will flourish as the roots of counter-hegemony grow. In other words, Gramsci was recommending recruiting radicalized women, members of minority groups, and others into the fold – affirmative action before that term was coined. Changing the minds of "traditional" intellectuals was particularly valuable, as they were already well positioned within the dominant educational institutions. The "long march through the institutions" – a phrase we also owe to Gramsci – began.

Antonio Gramsci's name is not exactly a household word. Many people concerned about political correctness have no doubt never heard of him. To describe him as important, however, is probably the understatement of the new year. He sketched, in works such as Prison Notebooks, the basic outline of the agenda that would begin to be implemented in American colleges and universities, and then carried to the rest of society, in the final quarter of the 20^th century. The efforts accelerating in the 1990s, no doubt helped along by having one of their own (perhaps it was two of their own) in the White House. Clearly, we find echoes of Gramsci’s notion of an "organic" intellectual in today’s calls for more and more "diversity" in all areas of society: universities, the workplace, etc. The mass conversion of "traditional" intellectuals to the Gramscian struggle helps explain why this diversity is a diversity of faces and not ideas. "Traditional" intellectuals have power, especially in education. The gatekeepers control who is admitted to the academic club, and the "traditional" intellectuals control the gatekeepers. Today, an outspoken conservative might as well not even apply for an academic appointment in a public university. But feminists of all stripes and colours (and sexual preferences and fetishes) are more than welcome!

Gramsci, we ought also to note, described himself as an "absolute historicist," whose views derive from the philosopher Hegel. All systems of value, all Moral codes, etc., are entirely the products of the historical epoch and culture which gave rise to them. There is no such thing as an "absolute" or an "objective" morality. There are only systems of value that represent either the (mainly economic) interests of those in power or of those not in power; and one of the jobs of "organic" intellectuals is to develop systems of value that will undermine the former. Capturing control over language, especially the language of morality, has a major role to play in this because of the doors it opens to psychological control over the masses. Most people will reject ideas and institutions if they become convinced of their basic immorality; most people, too, lack the kind of training that will equip them to untangle the thicket of logical fallacies that might be involved. This all helps pave the way for the Gramscian transformation of society.

Clearly, political correctness in all its manifestations, from academic schools of radical feminism, "critical race theory," gay and lesbian "queer theory," etc., to the preoccupation with "diversity" as an end in itself, is the direct descendent of Gramsci, and the chief arm of enforcement of the ongoing Gramscian transformation of American society. Consider efforts to transform our understanding of the law. Fonte observes: "Critical legal studies posits that the law grows out of unequal relations of power and therefore serves the interests of and legitimizes the rule of dominant groups." The academic movement known as "deconstruction," however one defines it, is a systematic effort to destroy the legitimacy of the values of "dominant groups": straight white Christian males of (non-Marxist) European descent [ e.g. WASPs ]. The values to be destroyed: truth as the goal of inquiry, transcendent morality as the guide to human conduct, freedom and independence as political ideals, hiring and contracting based on merit. All are rationalizing myths of the dominant consciousness, in the Gramscian scheme of things.

The transformation is now very much underway, as Gramscian foot soldiers have captured not just the major institutions in the English-speaking world (Ivy League universities) but also huge tax-exempt foundations (Ford, Rockefeller, Carnegie, and so on) that have been bankrolling Gramscian projects for decades. Fonte cites author after author to document the millions that have flowed to academic feminist endeavours, diversity-engineering projects in universities and sensitivity-training re-education programs in corporations. The plain truth is, we can no longer trust large corporations. Fortune 500 companies have become as reliable foot soldiers in the creation of a politically correct America as universities. Even Bill Gates [ Race Traitor 2014 ] of Microsoft has gotten on the official bandwagon, with his creation of minority-only scholarships last year. With the money now behind it, small wonder political correctness has become so difficult to oppose!

But there is an opposition force. Fonte describes the opposition to the avalanche of money and resources flowing into the creation of a Gramscian world as the "Tocquevillian counterattack." The key idea here is American exceptionalism – the idea that there are normative values to be embraced that are not mere historical products, that these values have been embodied in America, and are what makes America a special place. Fonte articulates a "trinity of American exceptionalism" that defined our unique development: (1) dynamism (support for entrepreneurship and economic progress, including the changes economic progress yields, and support for equality of opportunity for all individuals to participate in this process); (2) religiosity (the idea that freedom is only possible to a moral citizenry, that moral values have their origins with God, that character development should be an important component of education, and that social problems should be addressed at the local level through the voluntary associations of men and women of good will and character); (3) patriotism (love of country, and support for Constitutionally limited self-government and the rule of law). It is easy to see the roots of these ideas in the works of the political and economic philosophers of the English-speaking world the Gramscians abhor. These include Adam Smith, John Locke, and especially Edmund Burke, among others leading up to and including the Framers.

Fonte also discusses a "third" set of views which oppose the creation of a Gramscian world but are not, in his view, Tocquevillians because they do not accept all three components of the above. They might emphasize one at the expense of the others. For example, libertarian author Virginia Postrel emphasizes the first in her book The Future and Its Enemies which distinguishes "dynamists" from "stasists." Most Libertarians seem to want to have nothing to do with the second, believing with the philosopher-novelist Ayn Rand that morality originates from the necessities of sustaining human existence (the exercise of reason in responding to knowable circumstances in an objective world) rather than from God. There are, finally, members of the pro-South movement afoot today who mistrust the first, and who believe the third can be carried forth only through a new secession effort – which would end America as we know it.

Those Fonte identifies include "libertarians, paleoconservatives, secular patriots, Catholic social democrats, [and] disaffected religious-right intellectuals"; he doubts that they "will mount an effective resistance to the continuing Gramscian assault. Only the Tocquevillians appear to have the strength – in terms of intellectual firepower, infrastructure, funding, media attention and a comprehensive philosophy that taps into core American principles – to challenge the Gramscians with any chance of success."

In some cases, this seems clear. Many Libertarians will not succeed – if by success we mean actually gaining political office or sufficient influence to make a difference – the primary reason being their bull-headed atheism. A people, over 90 percent of whom believe in a personal God, simply will not support a political movement that tries to marry individual liberties and natural rights with the idea that there is no God. For intellectuals there are, or should be, too many problems with the idea that a moral view of the universe can be built up on the materialistic foundation that represents, for many of us, the dark side of the Enlightenment. Materialism, after all, also gave rise to Marxism and the Gramscian movement, and is far more compatible with the idea that in the physical universe, superior might is what gets the last word.

It is unclear, however, what Fonte finds lacking in paleoconservatives. The only person he mentions by name is Samuel Francis, a Buchananite writer who rejects the entire Enlightenment as misguided. But there are different strains of paleoconservatism just like there are different strains of everything else. Some tend towards Buchananism; others don’t. Fonte does not discuss these differing strains, so we are left in the dark whether paleoconservatives are, for example, lacking in (1) above because some are Buchananites or simply agrarians, or in (3) because some favour secession. There can be no doubt that agrarian life has its healthy side – as opposed to our present urban nightmares of traffic, crime, stress and, of course, bureaucracy. And if one believes in the Declaration of Independence than one believes that secession is sometimes legitimate – period – even if it takes wars for independence to make it stick.

It is clear, however, who Fonte’s favourite Tocquevillians are. He lists them. They include William Bennett, Michael Novak, Gertrude Himmelfarb, Marvin Olasky, Norman Podhoretz – also scholars such as Williams Galston, Wilfred McClay, Harvey Mansfield and Walter McDougall. Writers such as Irving Kristol and Charles Kesler also get favourable mention. There are, to say the least, more than a few Neocons represented in this group, and all are closely associated with what could be called the Republican Establishment’s intellectual wing, associated with the Republican Party – Heritage Foundation – National Review axis.

There is "intellectual firepower" in this group; no doubt about it. But only one observation need be made: thus far, this group – for whatever reason – has not stemmed the Gramscian tide. It has not even come close. Perhaps it is unable to. It has its foundations, too – Bradley, Olin, Scaife, and select others. However, none of these even begins to match the bottomless pit of resources available to leftists from the Rockefeller and Ford Foundations. Perhaps there are other reasons, unstated, why this group has not seized the moral high ground despite all its "intellectual firepower." (For whatever it is worth, the home page of the Hudson Institute’s website openly embraces "A Global Perspective." The Gramscians are also global maniacs, but they want to extend political correctness and welfarism worldwide instead of liberty and technology.)

Whatever the reason, the Republican Establishment has not stopped the advance of political correctness – the war against the political and economic philosophy, and the moral and religious values that built this country. Here is one theory: Fonte’s favourite intellectuals are simply too close to the forces of centralization on which the Gramscian advance is riding to resist its advance effectively. Both groups, that is, are benefiting massively from the increased centralization of society (and the Western world generally) that is taking us into the New World Order. How far, for example, is loyalty to (3) supposed to go? Does "patriotism" mean loyalty to a set of ideals on which a country was founded, or merely blind obedience to those currently running it? Do we impose our brand of "patriotism" on other nations, and then, if they resist, use force? One reason many of us do not trust Neocons is that they have been all too willing to favour military interventionism around the globe in the name of "democracy" – as if having forgotten that free institutions require a longstanding philosophical tradition that developed mainly in the English-speaking world and nowhere else. In major respects, the Neocons claim to support Constitutionally limited government, but many accept the centralized mega-state that began to grow with Lincoln, took quantum steps with the Wilson and Roosevelt administrations – and then took its biggest quantum leap during the Johnson-Nixon era. Many Neocons, let us also remember, are former socialists who came to reject socialism itself but not one of its first premises, which is the efficacy of centralization in getting things done. You cannot mount an effective strategy against an opponent if you share that opponent’s key premises; those premises will be turned and used against you.

Assuming that sincere efforts among those with influence are underway to stop the Gramscian march to the centre of power in American society, one thing is clear: they need all the help they can get! That would include infusions of new ideas from paleoconservatives, pro-South types and others routinely dismissed as "out on the fringes." Republicans, it is easy to show just by looking at Bush Jr.’s cabinet nominees so far (with a few exceptions such as John Ashcroft), have been largely co-opted; the rest just do not have the backbone to stand up to the Gramscian assault. Moreover, the Gramscian element that long ago co-opted the Democratic Party expresses its agenda using moral language. Result: left-liberal Democrats who have the courage of their convictions are acceptable, because their agenda advances "social justice"; conservative Republicans who have the courage of their convictions are not acceptable because their agenda is "unjust" or "immoral." Republicans at the centre of influence have failed to respond to such insinuations effectively.

If any Neocons are perchance reading this, I would implore them to stop being so elitist. Pay attention to all those "red states" on the now-infamous map, and realize there is activity going on out in the Midwestern hinterlands, in the Far West, and, of course, down here in the South. Not just in the Washington – New York City – Boston corridor which (along with the West Coast) has also been the major hotbed of Gramscian activism. Those at the centre of influence ought to seek out some new blood, both because they need all the allies they can get and because we are all running out of time.

January 6, 2001
Steven Yates has a Ph.D. in Philosophy and is the author of Civil Wrongs: What Went Wrong With Affirmative Action (ICS Press, 1994). He is at work on two manuscripts tentatively entitled View From the Gallery and The Paradox of Liberty, and also lectures occasionally. He lives, freelance writes, and is available for occasional lectures in Columbia, South Carolina.

Steven Yates Archives

Errors & omissions, broken links, cock ups, over-emphasis, malice [ real or imaginary ] or whatever; if you find any I am open to comment.
 
Email me at Mike Emery. All financial contributions are cheerfully accepted. If you want to keep it private, use my PGP Key.  Home Page

Updated on 25/09/2022 17:57