Monday, April 3, 2017

A concept in it’s infancy : Nationalist Distributism.


After my dissatisfaction with libertarianism and libertarians in general became a little too much to handle. I drifted over to reactionary politics where I can say that I am very satisfied with my new home. Over the past few months the beginnings of a new ideal began running around in my head. I’ve dropped hints with articles like Mutual aid and the right  and Communal self sufficiency policy . But those were just seeds being planted in the soil. Entertaining autarky and mutual aid were just the start of something. 

Distributism represents the circulation of the blood (value). Nationalism represents the flesh that protects what is underneath. Monarchy represents what mankind naturally desires. The need for a paternal authority. A family that operates like a monarchy is ordered and healthy. A family that works like a democracy is chaotic and produces spoiled offspring. 

A collective caesarism is beneficial for the populace. Viewing our people as great and wanting to remain so is logical. Populist slogans like “MAGA” are thought up by people that understand this basic truth. A united front motivated by the desire to be great is superior to the alternative. The modern aversion to collectivism is not rational . 

Distributism points out that capitalist corporations are harmful to communities. Due to the fact that they have no real tie to the community. Small business will be easily run out of the market. Taking money out of the community and into the hands of international giants. Another issue with the current system is it’s ability to subvert cultural norms . Here’s a link to a decent book on distributism . 

The state should intervene in order to ensure that employment is stable and people are being fed. I suggested one way to do this in “communal self sufficiency policy”. By having a partially state owned agriculture organization. You could reduce unemployment while feeding people that cannot afford food. Homeless veterans for example. 

Outsourcing and Mass immigration’s negative impact on labor. Lowering wages and losing jobs to immigrants and people in other nations. Can have a negative affect on the native population. Eventually extreme solutions will be search for once the scenario deems it necessary. 

Nationalism , distributism , and monarchism were made for each other. Nationalism wants to preserve the nation. Distributism wants to bring morality into the marketplace. Monarchism wants to guide the populace. They all intersect because of their belief in putting your group first and making sure that your group stays in a positive state. 

Socialists and classical liberals see mankind for what they think it can be. But they never acknowledge it for what it truly is. A hierarchal group oriented species that is not inherently good. The socialist thinker assumes that because all human beings are good. That means that they will share the wealth and work to stomp out inequality. But as long as beauty and intelligence exist. You will never get rid of it completely. The classical liberal thinker assumes that humans are inherently good as well. But he believes it in the hopes that man can handle it. Except not every human can handle running their own lives let alone true freedom. You’ll find people that prioritize sex and partying all over. They lack meaning in their life , So they seek pleasure.  Reactionary ideologies acknowledge the true state of man. 

Something that just as important to society as any thing else is the  environment . It’s important for a society to preserve it’s land while taking full advantage of the resources. Humanity should absolutely reach for the stars and achieve technological heights that were previously impossible. But we should exercise caution so that the world doesn’t end up a useless husk. 

It was suggested that I post the quote from this link. “Although the corporate idea was intimated in the congregationalism of colonial Puritan New England and in mercantilism, its earliest theoretical expression did not appear until after the French Revolution (1789) and was strongest in eastern Germany and Austria. The chief spokesman for this corporatism—or “distributism,” as it was later called in Germany—was Adam Müller, the court philosopher for Prince Klemens Metternich. Müller’s attacks on French egalitarianism and on the laissez-faire economics of the Scottish political economist Adam Smith were vigorous attempts to find a modern justification for traditional institutions and led him to conceive of a modernized Ständestaat (“class state”), which might claim sovereignty and divine right because it would be organized to regulate production and coordinate class interests. Although roughly equivalent to the feudal classes, its Stände (“estates”) were to operate as guilds, or corporations, each controlling a specific function of social life. Müller’s theories were buried with Metternich, but after the end of the 19th century they gained in popularity.”

The environmentalism of the right wing


Environmentalism is typically associated with the left by most people. The “green on the outside but red on the inside” comment comes from that. But environmentalism is also important to the fringe right while mainstream rightists usually libertarians and neo conservatives tend to promote the mentality mentioned above. Environmentalism is something I should have brought up in amoral market but since I did not. I’ll dedicate some time to it here. 

Humans are stewards of the earth and it is our duty to take care of the planet. Other than age, The difference between an adult and a child is a sense of duty. Adulthood is wholly dependent on whether or not you try to fulfill your duties. Ignoring your duties to your family and community completely is a juvenile behavior . 

While private property is an important factor to a healthy society. There are spillover effects that happen when someone misuses and don’t properly maintain a resource. Farmer Joe and farmer Bob both rely on the same river for their crops and their cattle. Farmer Joe is only concerned with his bottom line. So he does not do his duty to make that the river remains clean. His actions lead to the river being contaminated. Farmer Bob now has the right to take legal action against Joe. 

As a person on the right side of politics,Conserving the world that we share while still making good use of the resources. This should be an issue for the entire right wing and not just the more traditional and nationalistic types. Environmentalism for a conservative should be more than the conserving the great outdoors. It should be about conserving communities and leaving something behind for your children as well. Sure, We might be colonizing planets one day and that would give us a way out. But you should always treat your birthplace with the utmost respect. 

The final thing I want to talk about is the idea that nationalism is bad , exclusionary,and poisonous to the freedom of workers. I’m addressing the left with this part. It actually isn’t anti worker. The reason you are against it is that it goes against the whole “workers of the world unite” attitude on the left. Outsourcing and mass immigration is harmful to the worker. A larger labor supply does affect a worker’s wage. It’s not just the fact that you are losing jobs to immigrants and people in foreign nations. You are actively making workers poorer with your internationalist ideals. Mass immigration is beneficial to the employer but it is harmful for the worker. Here is an essay by a Harvard professor that points out exactly what I am saying. At the end He also states that immigration is harmful for workers and beneficial for corporations. So all of you anti capitalists are actually corporate shills. Good job! You’ve been played. There is legitimate anti capitalism and then there is “anti capitalism”.  

What they have in common with reaction

I’ve noticed something fairly interesting about one section of the left in recent times. There is an ideological tendency on that side of the spectrum that is essentially reactionaries in denial. Left leaning localism or communalism is effectively an attempt to reconcile left wing views with a traditional form of society. 

Anarchist thinker Keith Preston takes issue with the left wing variant of localism because of the fact that they believe that altruism requires loyalty to those in immediate proximity.  Which is a correct statement on their part even if other members of left cringe at it. He views  terms like “organic community” as an attempt to blend communitarian obligations with authoritarian attitudes. 

I’m currently reading a book on communalism and one of the first issues raised is getting atomized individuals to recognize that communities exist. It would seem that there is a bit of reactionary underpinning within this faction on the left. Whether that was intended or not would be a question for a person that knew the founder of that ideology well. 

This gives me the impression that there is potential for converting these folks to a traditionalist and distributist way of thinking. Though attempting this sort of thing comes with the risk of subversion. It also could be a complete waste of someone’s time. But they have this innate desire to put the community first and that hints at something deeper. 

If you feel like going down this bumpy road. They might be swayed by arguments about the amorality of capitalism and how that affects communities. Talking about how the negatives of free love culture might be useful as well. But I imagine that will be a bumpier ride than all the others. Feminist tendencies on the left and what not.

Explaining human nature to those that deny that it’s relevance

I'm on a new browser. So I'm copying and pasting from my wordpress .

After a recent comment on a post from January. I felt it was time to do a follow up to that post. The commenter accuses me of making a circular argument but I don’t believe that is a legitimate argument against my claim. “Because people are bad , We need people to rule them” is an old anarchist meme. Anarchists will use this meme to respond to their conservative uncle. Who might not be too interested in politics outside of a few core ideas. But I think I will take the time to articulate the point in a more detailed way. Because your conservative uncle isn’t wrong. 

Humans are different from one another in a variety of ways. From IQ to birthrate and physical strength. Which is just fine because we adapted to different climates. Humans like other primates developed organizational structures in order to make things work smoothly. 

I personally believe that belief in a deity is something that comes natural to a human being. But the attachment of morality to belief is definitely a social construct. The more intelligent members of early human societies understood that some people need to be given incentives to behave. The less intelligent or more morally fluid among the group needed a reason outside of punishment by his fellow tribesmen to behave. So naturally the concept of sin and eternal damnation was born. That’s why religion and traditional norms exist. While I’m on the topic of religion, I’d like to bring up an anti religion meme. “if you were born here, you’re a x”. Congrats you figured out that religion has folkish roots, how long did it take to figure that out ? 

Humans much like other primates developed in groups and had a leader. Animals have in/out group tendencies that developed for survival purposes. Just like leadership developed for survival purposes. Wikipedia has a short piece about it if you’d rather read that. Here’s the link . This is why more authoritative systems are chosen over direct democracy. Division of labor is more than an economic concept. It is a fact of life. Some people are suited for one role and some are not.  Another thing that backs up the claim that government is necessary for humans to survive. Is a psychological theory called terror management or TMT for short. As a means of managing terror, People embrace cultural norms and symbols. They also look to an authority figure. A stateless society would come to an abrupt end. Once a scenario triggers this response in the brain. 
Ideologies on both sides of the spectrum like to claim that humans are inherently good and are forced to become bad. Which I believe leads to a lot of disappointment especially by young hopeful communists that realize rather quickly that humans are nothing of the sort. I believe that the red terror in nations like Spain, Russia, and Cambodia. Happened partly because of the fact that people could not live up to the gospels of Marx and partly because the ideology attracted really vicious people. It is not up to the “humans are bad” guy to prove his case. His point of view is rather easy to see. But is instead up to the “humans are good” guy to prove his. For every good deed there is a bad one. For the optimist , The human being is naturally good but is made into a bad person. But for the realist, Humans are naturally bad but can be taught to be good through the correct incentives. 
I had fun using my limited knowledge on psychology tonight. One last thing before I go. It’s about immigration and assimilation. European and Asian immigrants are viewed more positively. This isn’t that shocking. Europeans assimilate into other European cultures rather easily. Asian immigrants tend to do well in European environments and vice versa.  Asian immigrants are usually self employed or in high skill careers. So they’re not going to get a lot of heat from middle America. Here’s a study on mass immigration’s affects on worker’s wages. Here are two links about the study about multiculturalism and how people respond to it. You can see that here and here .

Monday, March 13, 2017

Observations #1 Libertarians

This irregular series of posts will be used for thoughts that I think should be shared . Even if I don’t feel like dedicating a normal length post to them. If you want to see some of my other posts. I’d recommend “Dear Conservatives” and”How an effective left wing state is run“.

I’ve had conversations with these people dating back to when I was one of them. They genuinely have this idea that outside reinforcement like a state telling you not to do something forces you to do the bad thing. When it’s really something to do with impulse control and consequences. A child doesn’t behave on it’s own and most adults don’t either. Truth is that most people have shitty impulse control. Which is why certain things were frowned upon for the longest time.

It also seems like people that are committed libertarians also have an ahistorical issue. Because they don’t really have anything in the past to really show that this is possible and they don’t seem to care. They’ll point to classical liberal society but there is a difference between what they want and what libertarians want. They try to use ancient Ireland as an example but that system was more of tribal communalism than a libertarian society.

Sunday, March 12, 2017

How an effective left wing state is run

Go to my wordpress to get the article right away. Instead of waiting until I post it here. 

 I was in a discord chat earlier today with some friends of mine. We were talking about philosophy as usual. The topic of the day of was communism. One of them asked “Will that inspire a revolution of the working class or the perpetual rule of high finance?”. My response was “Rule by high finance while pandering to the revolutionary consciousness within the urban working class.” In many ways the United States is a better template to build off of than the USSR was. Yet many leftists still cling to that bygone era.

Here’s the thing, It’s already being done and it’s very effective. How do you run an effective left wing state? It’s very simple really. Other than taking over a nation’s media and academia. You must create a fake enemy and pander to the revolutionary spirit of the urban worker. The bottom of the article linked covers what I am referring to when it comes to enemies. When you want to pander to the rebellious spirit of urban workers and students. You send a guy like Bernie Sanders out to rile up the kids. A democratic socialist that has multiple houses yet talks as if he’s a working class guy that’s fed up. My generation really fell for that hook, line, and sinker.

The next step in this plan to create an effective left wing state is to destroy the traditional culture and replace it with a shopping mall. Where any corporation will sell you a culture for just 19.99. Once the nation is a culture of subculture. You can divide and rule. The academia and media must also produce anti family content for the buyer to enjoy. Keep them focused on work and fun without having a family. If the livestock suddenly stops replacing itself there is no need to worry. Just loosen immigration laws and keep the socially leftist money train rolling. In the end, We’re all dead am I right?

The lesson of the 20th century is that explicit fast release leftism is unworkable while implicit slow release leftism works just fine. So what does this mean for concerned right wingers that wish to undo the rot of the 20th century? It means that it may be time to embrace an older form of rightism. I have an open letter that you should consider reading.

The superior leftist model of the United States just hit it’s first road bump. Whether or not it’s enough to take it off the road is uncertain. But what is certain is that if i was a leftist billionaire this would be the model for me to go with. It’s silly to even bother with the USSR approach. The party eats well and so does it’s subjects. Why risk revolts over famines? When I could just sit near the window and laugh as they fight for 15?