Conservatives Must Build Their Own Culture or Be Exiles Inside Their Own Society

Townhall.com ^ | June 4, 2018 | Kurt Schlichter

[Delta 21]

The author doesnt even know the difference between a democracy and OUR REPUBLIC. People like him get ignored and dont succeed or even get to participate outside of liberal pussy zones.

[central_va]

Yo are probably not a libertarian. You just don't realize it. You are paleo conservative.

Part of a series on Libertarianism Origins[show] Concepts[show] Schools[show] People[show] Aspects[show] Organizations[show] Related topics[show] Outline of libertarianism Libertarianism portal v t e The libertarian perspective on immigration is often regarded as one of the core concepts of libertarian theory and philosophy.[1][2] Some libertarians assert that "[e]fforts by the government to manage the labor market are as apt to fail as similar efforts to protect domestic industries or orchestrate industrial policy. [...] If an immigrant seeks to engage in peaceful, voluntary transactions that do not threaten the freedom or security of the native-born, the government should not interfere".[3]

Is that what you think?

[AndyJackson]

Nope

[familyop]

Agreed on the confusion issued with propaganda, but we need to retain some of our language and terms for the purpose of teaching the next generation.

Conservatism is not so hard to understand despite the confusing obfuscations and subversive claims of impostors. To be conservative is to agree with the relevant tenets behind the founding of our nation.

To be conservative is to agree with the most important fundamentals taught and agreed upon by George Washington, Thomas Jefferson and others who stood with them on those principles.

More young folks should engage in learning more about civics and American history in order to be less affected by Internet propaganda disseminated mostly from drug-addled minds in blue states. We’ve failed for more than a generation to make sure that such education is delivered to them.

When those who oppose our freedoms begin to lose or get impatient, they tend to try to make messes of our tools of communication in hopes that more of their own kind will become confused enough to rise from the mess to their side and against our freedoms.

And one way to try to have our freedoms outlawed is to promote unreasonable extents of freedom for some people (”more equal animals”) that allow the way to violations of freedoms, property rights or lives of others. As I said before, the objective of anarchists in Europe was to clear the way for communists, as we recently saw on display from the cruddy likes of Antifa.

[Qiviut]

The other side isn’t having children.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

“Our” side also needs to make sure ‘their’ side, which tends to run the education system, doesn’t indoctrinate our kids into their view of society and the world. For those that can home school, I believe that is the ultimate way to keep kids out of the clutches of the Left. If you can’t home school, then be vigilant as to what the kids are being taught and be active on school boards, etc. The Left may not be having kids, but they’ll appropriate yours for their purposes and the public education system currently in place allows them the opportunity to do it.

In your original comment, you said the Left does not reciprocate tolerance - so true, a very important point and lesson still to be learned. The Normal Americans, expect reciprocity and have been finding out the hard way that you don’t get it with the Left. Give an inch, they take a mile rather than giving you a reciprocal inch back. Trump has learned from this and fights back ... he doesn’t turn the other cheek, acquiesce, back off, or act polite when the Left spits in his face, he goes on offense ..... we should also learn this lesson and quit being polite and shocked when the Left doesn’t reciprocate our decency .... Normal Americans, as a people (not just a few here and there) need to realize that we must stand in the breach and fight for our ‘culture’ and thus, our country.

[a fool in paradise]

I want back my country. The entertainment, arts, and sports culture are the flotsam. What they promote are false history and false culture. Don't confuse commerce with culture.

Crush COMMUNISM and things may return to normal.

Denounce the extreme Left at every turn. The blood of a hundred million people are on their hands and they support it and mock it.

If you don't eradicate the evil of Communism, one day it will eradicate all else.

[a fool in paradise]

As we saw under Lord Obama, it isn’t simply about homosexuals serving in the military, their service is highlighted, special parties, job promotions, etc. Equality isn’t a factor, homofascists want supremacy and dominance and power.

[a fool in paradise]

Can the ranks look up to a commanding officer who cross-dresses in uniform?

[a fool in paradise]

>>You have a right to reject unwanted advances and its the reason we have laws in place against sexual harrassment and sexual assault.

The reporting of same sex rape in the military has been climbing.

#MeToo

[DuncanWaring]

Homosexuality is a mental illness.

Are there any mental illnesses you consider to be incompatible with military service?

[pfony1]

I think the labels “Normal” and “Stooge” are more accurate than “Conservative” and “Liberal” as in:

Normal Americans respect America’s Constitution.

and

Chris Matthews smiles whenever he parrots stooge-news.

[semantic]

Liz, always love your perspective and comments. I also like Kurt, but I believe he's thinking small in this arena. To use a flawed analogy, his proposed solution(s) are like the military plans that were prepared for the invasion of Japan. Unbeknownst to lower level strategists, a weapon had been developed that would render those entire efforts null.

Likewise, why fight hand-to-hand combat on individual beaches and towns, when a MOAB can be dropped on the entire proglib edifice? I know a lot of people think Trump has been damaged by the attempted coup, but in actuality it's the greatest gift that can be given any leader. Consider if Trump had experience a normal transition of power - who would be suggesting calling out the Marines and/or circumventing established criminal justice procedures?

On the contrary, we find ourselves actively engaged in CWII; albeit low level legal fighting at this point. However, the point stands that when Trump prevails, he is going to be able to wield 'scary' power. After all, that's what happens when you fail to kill the king - the chopping block literally comes out to 'process' thousands of traitors.

All Trump has to do is win in November - it really is that simple. That sets up stacking the SC and passing certain legislation like the wall, voter ID, etc. Once that's in place, it's fairly trivial to destroy proglib institutional control in media and education. So, win in November, using the attempted coup as the red flag to wave in front of the voting populace.

Easy breezy, amiright? And what is Trump doing? Exactly.

[pfony1]

I think the labels “Normal” and “Stooge” are more accurate than “Conservative” and “Liberal” as in:

Normal Americans respect America’s Constitution.

and

Chris Matthews smiles whenever he parrots stooge-news.

[Liz]

Nice game plan.......I like it.

[EdnaMode]

A conservative streaming platform would be excellent. Get James Woods, Gary Sinise and Patricia Heaton on board too.

[EdnaMode]

Her entire popular vote margin came in California. Trump won the rest of the country by a small margin.Also, I think a large percentage of her voters (blacks, hispanics and Muslims) are actually socially conservative.

[mjp]

we must also build our own cultural institutions, ones that they can’t control.

They will control. They will find a way

[bert]

You are making excuses that are invalid. The fact is the margin exists and can’t be swept under the Free Republic dogma carpet

You by denying the problem are the problem

[AndyJackson]

I will address this at greater length. You write, "Some libertarians assert" which attempts to tarnish the whole with views of some who claim to speak for the whole.

A good discussion is The von Mises Instutute article "The Origin of Libertarianism". In this article they take credit and blame for resurecting the term "libertarian" to describe classic liberalism, the term "Liberal" having been stolen by and perverted by the left.

The article summarises the issue by concluding " libertarian is the opposite of an authoritarian. Strictly speaking, a libertarian is one who rejects the idea of using violence or the threat of violence — legal or illegal — to impose his will or viewpoint upon any peaceful person. Generally speaking, a libertarian is one who wants to be governed far less than he is today."

Now as to your point "If an immigrant seeks to engage in peaceful, voluntary transactions that do not threaten the freedom or security of the native-born, the government should not interfere". Well let us examine this closely because I think the premise is unsustainable. In the first place, the author restricts the inquiry narrowly just to a presumed singular immigrant and inquires whether such acts by such and individual affects, narrowly, a native born's "freedom or security." Of course, one by one the impact of an individual illegal but otherwise law-abiding immigrant has little collective impact, though you might ask whether any singular individual native born citizens were adversely affect.

But the issue is really whether a mass influx of such immigrants negatively impacts the broader interests of the native born. And there the issue is actually inarguable, which is why the hew and cry especially over H1B visa abuse, which is a good place to examine the question.

You see individual rights in a society are much broader than just freedom [e.g. to protest Tommy Robinson outside the British embassy] or security [e.g. said immigrant did not invade my home at gunpoint or blow up a train].

In the first place a native born has a vested interest in the language and culture [and accompanying institutions] that he was born into, which are fundamental building blocks of a society. Of course the Marxists know this which is why they have sought so single-mindedly to undermine western culture attacking it by co-opting the words we use and undermining their meaning.

In the second place, rights include property rights and includes freedom to contract. Now, we protect some property rights at gunpoint. Included in property rights is intellectual property which includes professional education and licenses. Try practicing law without a license and the state will show up with guns drawn in the middle of the night, shoot your dog and haul you off to prison.

But how about other professions, the most obvious being software engineers and computer scientists, the targets of the H1B visa scam. There is a sort of social contract between citizens and the market. You get an education, you develop requisite professional skills and you can reap the benefits by competing in the market for remunerative employment. But that contract has been broken and no you can't compete because the market has been flooded by the dumping on the market of the products of heavily subsidized foreign education systems that don't come here with enormous debts.

Once you have severed the remuneration for a job from the consequent benefit to society [pay taxes, support your favorite local institutions, raise a family, etc.] from the fact of employment you have undermined the society the culture that provides freedom and security.

Libertarians have allowed themselves to be undone by the socialists and their running dog crony capitalists and globalists into confusing the freedom to trade (exchange) goods and services across boarders through a market with the right of one country to undermine the economic security of another country for long term global strategic purposes.

The problem that constitutional conservatives (classic liberals) have is the submission to glib labels as a way of arguing a point, and the left have become very good at hypercharging the meaning of the labels pinned on conservatives with their own connivance.

So arguing what "libertarianism" "is" is to fall into the trap of Clintonian dialectics.

[who_would_fardels_bear]

There are two main problems with conservatives creating their own "safe space" version of Google:

1) It won't turn a profit. Corporations will blackball it and not put their ads on it. Yes you'll get the same type of creepy ads that Rush Limbaugh gets like gold investment schemes and dodgy vitamins, but you won't get ads from the beer companies, the automobile manufacturers, the food companies, etc.

2) It won't change minds. Even if you can get some billionaire to fund the money-losing effort, it'll basically be an echo chamber where conservatives go to video one another rather than text one another as on FR.

All of this has been discussed ad nauseum by YouTubers who are trying everything they can to branch away from YouTube but finding that YouTube must still be an important part of where they present their messages.