Wednesday, July 31, 2013

Down with democracy

From Taki's.
What the 380 million Arabs need are property rights, not the right to cast a useless ballot every four or so years. If America and Europe insisted on only this, it would make millions of Arabs who hate us today love us overnight. Instead we have two medieval autocracies directing the agenda and competing with each other over who will pay terrorists more to overthrow Assad as long as they stay away from Saudi Arabia and Qatar, two of the greatest humanitarian, social, and cultural disasters to befall this Earth. These so-called monarchies are poison. They behead 14-year-olds for stealing—ditto for Filipino female servants who get raped—and are enabling hardcore Islamists to cause havoc all over the Middle East as long as they stay away from their sandy hellholes. In the meantime, Western leaders continue chanting democracy’s mantra with breathtaking naiveté. They are aided and abetted by the media, especially the grotesque New York Times, whose reporters at times seem to be on the terrorists’ side, openly rooting against the only man to safeguard Christians’ rights in the region, President Assad.

I'll take things a step further and say democracy isn't really what 'America' needs either. Democracy is the town council voting on which road to pave or how to finance a water reservoir. Democracy is not a polity of 300 million people spread across a whole continent, most of whom don't like and don't relate to each other, voting on hugely existential and defining questions.

Democracy in the US is just a charade, no different than the corrupt, debased Senate of late Rome.

Friday, July 26, 2013

Another addition to the blogroll

Anarcho-monarchism. A really well done layout. Good links. Good ideas.

If you want to get a literary representation of this sort of thing, read C.S. Lewis's 'Prince Caspian' and J.R.R. Tolkein's 'Farmer Giles of Ham.' And 'The Scouring of the Shire' in Tolkein's Lord of the Rings.

This logo is great.

If I am overlooking anybody who links to my blog, please let me know so I can add you to the Et Al. column.


My little corner of the Internet has seen recent internecine warfare between its Orthodox and Catholic factions. Inevitably with such matters, the debate gets heated and personal.

My informal rule for this blog had been generally to steer clear of Orthodox-Catholic debate. I spoke with people from both Rites and read and prayed then made my choice. The result has been numerous second chances for my life which I did not deserve. I claim an honest and Holy Spirit-guided basis for my choice, and I can say no less of anybody else, wherever they end up. My position has always been that we should concentrate on mending our own tattered tents.

With that in mind, I have deleted a recent post and may eliminate some others as well. May Christ and the Saints be with us all.

Friday, July 19, 2013

The Hispanic vote

If the Republicans are sincerely competing for Hispanic voters as they never cease telling us, it strikes me that they should be making hay out of the George Zimmerman case.

Why aren't the Republicans stomping on the Obama administration with both feet for its DOJ witch hunt and rabble rousing against Peruvian-descended George Zimmerman?

Why isn't Marco Rubio giving press conferences in Spanish declaring that the jury vindicated the rights of all Americans, including zero-generation and first-generation immigrant Americans like George Zimmerman, to carry firearms for their personal protection and defend their neighborhoods from thugs?

I originally asked this on iSteve. One offered hypothesis was that the Republican leadership is dominated by homosexual dilettantes who truly have zero curiosity about either blacks or Hispanics. This would explain the prominence of the effete, prissy Lindsey Graham, who is actually only in his second Senate term as opposed to being the venerable, barnacled pillar of the Party that the national press would have you believe.

Speaking of the Party of demented old men, why does anybody still take this reckless fool seriously?
Mr. McCain opened his talk with General Dempsey with a pointed question: “Do you believe the continued costs and risks of our inaction in Syria are now worse for our national security interests than the costs and risks associated with limited military action?”

General Dempsey said the administration had been active in supporting Syrian rebel forces, and described his role as advising the president on the risks and benefits of military options. But he emphasized that only the civilian leadership could order military action.

“I am in favor of building a moderate opposition and supporting it,” General Dempsey said. “The question whether to support it with direct kinetic strikes is a decision for our elected officials, not for the senior military leader of the nation.”

His response frustrated Mr. McCain, who said that the chairman of the Joint Chiefs is “the sole military adviser” to the president and is obliged to advocate for or against combat.

via New York Times
In a sane system of governance, any politician who got shellacked as soundly as John McCain did back in 2000 would never be allowed near the levers of power again. Rather, they would be viewed with deep suspicion, as their repellent personalities isolate them, driving them to seek validation from manipulative outgroups and Fifth columnists.

Monday, July 15, 2013

Tribal warfare

Obama restarts hate crime investigation of Zimmerman.

The government is anti-white.

More precisely, the government is anti non-elite white.

And if you're a nobody like George Zimmerman, being half-Peruvian is not going to help you.

Zimmerman is not African and he's not the right-kind-of-white, so the government is going to get him.

This is obvious to me. Can anybody tell me why I'm wrong?

At this point, it's just dress rehearsal for the civil war.

Saturday, July 13, 2013

ROCOR halts its Western Rite

Renegade vicar, via Ad Orientem. Reading between the lines, it sounds like another Western cleric who didn't want to be Catholic, only to discover that Orthodoxy is actually catholic.

When I left the Episcopal church, I walked into an Antiochian parish and, approximately one year later, received chrismation as an Orthodox. I did not know an Orthodox "Western Rite" existed, though my Archdiocese supports one. Consequently, I am open to correction about this entire topic. At this point though, I have the Eastern services and hymnody as my own, and so it shall be to my death.

I've never been clear on what all the source documents for the Western Rite are. There is apparently a surviving Liturgy of St. Gregory, which seems rather abbreviated, and everything else seems compiled from Anglican prayer books of the modern era, edited and supplemented with the Eastern rites for conformity with Orthodox praxis.

I assume the intent behind the Western Rite is 1) to recapture for Orthodoxy the Western forms previously lost to the schism with Rome and the Anglican catastrophe, and 2) to provide a familiar setting for cultural/ethnic Anglicans in the Orthodox faith.

My novice thoughts on the matter are that the orthodox Western forms are mostly lost to history. America has no nation, no creed, no aristocracy, no monarch and no emperor; it is terra nova for everybody. Converts to the True Faith can go to the back of the line and start with the Byzantine forms like everybody else. None of this is to suggest that the Western Rite is not in communion, but it's hard to avoid the sense that we are making it up as we go along. (Of course, going back far enough, everybody is making it up as they go along.)

Three centuries from now, it is possible that an organic Western rite will emerge from the current stew of missionary eparchies. There will not be a multi-national United States dominating the North American continent at that point, but several States organized loosely around their market-dominant ethnic majorities. Whether the Orthodox will still be around these parts remains to be seen.

And we can stop right there, because further particulars are impossible to predict.

Thursday, July 4, 2013

4th of July Special: in which I deconstruct a Mencius Moldbug post

I like to check Mencius's Unqualified Reservations from time to time. He is an excellent and imaginative writer, and it's striking how bloggers are doing for free and at a much higher level what the Establishment media pays professionals like Tom Friedman in the six-figures to do. (And which, incidentally, a machine could do for Tom Friedman. I'm not kidding.) Of course, the Establishment media pays very few people six figures at this point, and certainly is not paying them for any actually critical commentary.

The downside to Mencius is his essays are extremely dense, as well as subtle and sarcastic. I don't have a lot of time to unravel them, so I don't often chime in on his work. But it's a holiday and I think I've got a handle on this one.

A major story, some might say the story of the past month is that the US government spies always and everywhere on everyone: its citizens, its allies, its enemies and doubtless its own executives and legislators. Mencius is not concerned, as he relates here.

In the first place, whining about this breach of "civil liberties" is a useless exercise. After all, even the Soviet Union had scrupulous and well-catalogued civil liberties, as gushingly noted by Bolshevik sympathizer and founder of the ACLU, Roger Baldwin. Mencius's law of conservation of sovereignty--that first, somebody is always the actual sovereign and second, that sovereignty can be divided and still "add up"--applies to nominal democracies as to any other form of government. The U.S. is no less oligarchical simply because it allows voting.
In an oligarchical regime, public opinion is always an effect rather than a cause. It still matters, but only in the sense that some effects cannot be caused. But the power of the machine is always increasing. Few in the Reagan era could have imagined that in the lives of their grown children, most Americans would come to regard gay marriage as an essential civil right. Why did this happen? Because the ruling class is sovereign not just politically, but also intellectually. What it believes, everyone comes to believe - and is horrified that previous generations somehow failed to believe.
More on gay marriage in a bit. The good news from Mencius's perspective is that our oligarchy, being 'democratic' and hence far more concerned with such things as appeasing its permanently aggrieved minorities and sexual deviants, consumes itself with scrutinizing terabytes of data instead of doing what a competent oligarchy would do, which is round up and execute dissidents. An actual and integral nation, of course, has no need of such measures.
A prudently governed nation would not need to record everyone's phone calls and emails. A prudently governed nation would concern itself with its own affairs and no one else's. It would thus maintain either a culturally and politically homogeneous state in which terrorism was no more a concern than in the conflict between Vermont and New Hampshire, or a polycultural regime like the Ottoman one, in which every culture governs itself and knows it will suffer, not advance, if its members go crazy. But apparently the Orwellian panopticon creates more jobs in Virginia than the boring alternative of fencing the borders and enforcing consular law, so we can expect it to thrive. Americans prefer this ridiculous regime to any other. Yet they still object to being blown up indiscriminately in public places as if they were Israelis enduring the "peace process." So there is really no alternative, especially as our impending defeat in Afghanistan will swell the jihadi supply.
The only point which Mencius is really making in his manic, obsessive way is that self-rule, the purported democratic ideal, must be taken, and if you don't take it, somebody else will.
For a man or for a community of men, the right to rule is a function of the might to rule. If the sound competent Midwest can get itself euchred out of its democratic right to rule by a bunch of slick Harvard men, the sound competent Midwest cannot maintain its authority and will get euchred by someone someday. If it's not Harvard today it'll be Yale tomorrow.

As for your right to "privacy," as if having your emails grepped affected you in any way, it is by accident. Forget about the opponents of the government being persecuted. If they are persecuted, which is not their decision of course, (a) it will not be by means of grep, and (b) they'll have to learn to deal with it, like men, rather than whining like little girls.
This gets back to a point made on this blog earlier, that the genesis of any monarchy is an individual who seizes the properties and privileges that go with being a monarch, and bequeathes them to his posterity. The rights of a people are no different. Every form of popular rule in existence today had to be, once upon a time, seized from a monarch and retained by the people to bequeath to their posterity. This is why 'rights' have zero (I repeat, ZERO) meaning in the universalist sense understood by our Masonic, naive Founders. They are the actual property of a particular people at a particular time and place, and passed in turn to the people's descendants, as in the "rights of Englishmen," or the Frenchmen's "liberty, equality and fraternity." Like all property, they must be defended against encroachment because like all property, they are defined not in the having, but in the excluding. Otherwise you don't really have them.

To wrap up, the American people who imagine themselves sovereign need to recognize that the government's "democratic" structures do not enable, empower or defend self-rule. As Mencius notes, "The right to rule is a function of the might to rule." And a very good example of this is the duo of "gay marriage" cases recently decided by the U.S. Supreme Court.

In the first case, the Court struck down the federal Congress's Defense Of Marriage Act on equal protection grounds: the U.S. government cannot deny the privileges it extends to heterosexual couples to homosexual couples. To get to that conclusion, the Court had to recognize a classification meriting equal protection--homosexuality--never contemplated in the history of America or the world. Marriage, in fact, pre-dates the State. This was purely a policy choice by a majority of the Court's justices. For all the fancy language the decision comes down to this: the Justices recognized a protected status of homosexuality because 1) they could (being "sovereign" after all), and 2) therefore they think they ought.

Now, there is a very good argument that DOMA exceeds the scope of the U.S. government's enumerated powers and regulation of marriage is reserved to the several States. But the Court, having decided that gay marriage shall be, was not done. In the second case, the people of California expressed their policy choice and passed a statute reserving marriage for monogamous heterosexuals. But the people of California are not actually "sovereign," so a homosexual district court judge struck down the statute. The actual California sovereigns, the executive branch, declined to defend their legislature's statute and a citizen's group tried to carry the ball on appeal. They got tackled by the Supremes: no standing to appeal, citizens. The district court's judgment therefore remained intact, and California's actual, elected-at-large sovereigns gleefully grabbed their ankles to take one for the gay marriage team.

Happy 4th of July.

Wednesday, July 3, 2013

From Robert Higgs: "Why fight for King and Country?"

Curt Doolittle tells him, and I don't think it's what Robert Higgs expected to hear:
I think the answer to this problem for both sides is to pull the US military, state and intelligence organizations from Europe entirely so that European defense, international relations, and the stabilization of commodity prices is left to the management of Europeans. It’s not really necessary for Americans to stabilize the price of oil, or any other commodity, now that we’re close to being energy independent. And our dollar will remain the currency of last resort even more durably if we drop our international intrigues.

That would stop the American cultural necessity for jingoism in order to preserve the cultural will to pay for the necessity that we police the world for largely European convenience. And it would allow us to save three quarters of our military expenditures, and focus our efforts on domestic reality rather than ideological propagation as a means of further discounting the cost of our policing. [It would] be nice to have a domestic government rather than an internationally focused one actually.

Conversely, it would force holier-than-thou Europeans to do all the nonsense that Americans now do and also to pay for it. Which would require the re-nationalization of european propagandism in order to motivate the already heavily taxed population to pay for.

I’m sorry that you don’t like being a client state of Rome dear Athens-after-the-overreach, but without us you’ll be a client state of ether German political and economic power and cultural discipline, or Russian resource and military power.

It probably doesn’t occur to silly people on the other side of the pond that it’s because Britain was so bad at containing its self interest, rent seeking, politics and policies that Americans ended up with the entire Empire in our lap, and had to militarize our entire country quite against our naturally isolationist inclination and will.

We look like you 100 years ago. Maybe even better than you did.

As someone who has to deal with UK bureaucracy, laziness and pervasive incompetence on a regular basis I have to say that the sentiment is reciprocated. A nation of fat, ugly, crooked-toothed, self aggrandizing, talkative alcoholics, dressed in gap-wear, pontificating morality because they have the convenience of not being responsible for their actions – having outsourced the dirty work across the pond.

It is profoundly naive to think that nations have the degree of nationalism that they want to rather than the level of nationalism that they need to. People are too practical to waste their energy.

Glass houses and all.

Mr. Doolittle is going on the blogroll.