TIN SOLDIERS AND BIDEN'S COMING

      As we're writing this today, police forces loyal to the American Uniparty are emulating their counterparts in Canada, Australia, and across Europe and crushing protests violently under the pretenses of combating anti-Semitism. The Media Scum, quite predictably, discreetly have been ignoring the fact that anti-Zionist Jews are being rounded up along with the other protesters. In Germany, the SS violently suppressed a demonstration outside the Reichstag. The German Reich, under Chancellor Scholz has actually locked up more Jews than anytime since the 1940s, but Western journalists care about as much about that as they do the wholesale murder of their brother-newsmen at the hands of the Zionists. These things are, however, in keeping with the World Economic Forum's Agenda this year, which focused on the need of Deep States under their control to put down dissent. 

    Therefore, it was a major surprise yesterday to see an article actually appear in the Controlled Opposition Media outlining a traditionally Conservative approach to the Campus Protests. The article must have been downvoted into oblivion by our new Woke Conservatives, since it seems to have been archived. The author is man named Christopher Roach who writes for a number Neocon publications: it's astounding in today's atmosphere of Groupthink among the Right that anyone let it be published. 

       Roach correctly points out that "Our foreign policy towards Israel should be subject to debate and accepted as a target of protest as much as anything else. Suggestions that such views are beyond the pale and warrant expulsion simply because they are unpopular are impossible to square with the First Amendment and more general American principles of free speech. There have been many overwrought and dishonest criticisms of recent campus protests, but they do not appear more violent or more sinister than other protests of recent years." 

      Exactly. Ever since the Bush Administration, the American Right seems to have swallowed the idea that egregious violations of the 1st Amendment (and the Bill of Rights generally) are only bad when the Democrats do it. Such thinking has led to the absurdity of positions like we're seeing reflected in the standard Neocon approach to criticism of the Zionist Regime. Up until a few months ago, the paid pundits on the Right were howling about Cancel Culture and Speech Codes at American Universities (as if these things were something that only started yesterday); today that whole Official Counter-Narrative has gone and the Right stands shoulder-to-shoulder with the Academic Left deciding what is and isn't acceptable speech. That really has been the Neocon position all along, witness the fact that the Right has done nothing for decades (and are still doing nothing) to fight the diversity policies discriminating against Americans but are moving at breakneck speed to make certain that nobody speaks out against the Globalist Agenda.

   Roach also noted that minor detail, which has been overlooked completely by the so-called Opposition: "The current protests are a fraction of the size and scale surrounding the BLM protests of 2020. The class of those vilified has shrunk too. BLM attacked White people as a whole and called for violence against the police; the current protests are aimed at Zionists, that is, supporters of Jewish nationalism in the Jews’ historic homeland. In addition to violence, there was also a lot of nasty language associated with BLM. Many of the critics of the Gaza protests apparently didn’t notice the criminality, thuggery, and genocidal language of Leftist protests until their own group was in the crosshairs."

     Roach also points out the glaring hypocrisy of the Neocons: "For many years, Ben Shapiro and others on the neocon right professed pride in their hard-headedness, summarizing their worldview as 'Facts don’t care about your feelings.' So it is a little surprising to hear from him and his fellow travelers how terrible it is that Israel’s supporters have to endure listening to ideas they find offensive, disagreeable, and 'hateful.' If Israel and its policies are so great, they should be able to win the battle of public opinion with facts, logic, and protests of their own." 

     An accurate assessment of the Conservative approach contrasted with what passes for Conservativism in the 21st Century. Shapiro's maxim 'Facts don't care about your feelings' has become more or less the motto of the whole movement; although a more precise interpretation of the statement would be 'Your feelings are irrelevant to our definition of the facts.' Understood in that light, Shapiro's position is logically consistent despite being morally abhorrent. Acceptance of this creed has led less to hard-headedness as it has to hard-heartedness; thus so-called Conservatives, for example, have no problem accepting the fact of a few dozen Corporate Robber-Barons outsourcing entire communities' economic base as justifiable against the feelings of a few thousand people being reduced to poverty and displacement. In the case of Israel, the fact that the Zionists and their WEF Corporate Masters covet the resources under Palestinian control trumps the feelings of millions being slaughtered and enslaved systematically; and if we're all good Conservatives we simply should look the other way and give thanks in our Megachurches that it's all happening to somebody else for our benefit.

     Roach actually displays some unusual insight (that is, unusual by the standards of today's Conservatism) into the sociological factors among today's younger citizens: "We should try to understand what is happening in the world around us. People oriented towards practical matters like money, power, and personal advancement often do not understand those of a more romantic sensibility. While many people attend college to get credentials so that they can get ahead, others are motivated by a desire to live a life of meaning and sacrifice in service to a cause. We live in an age with fewer opportunities for heroism and adventure than prior generations. We are not in the middle of a grand struggle like World War II; no manifest destiny is afoot, and we do not even have much of a space program anymore. Most of our struggles are prosaic and personal: pursuing careers, establishing wealth, navigating indifferent bureaucracies, and amusing ourselves with travel and restaurants."

   This is a topic worthy of further discussion. What Roach vaguely, though correctly, grasps is that Postmodern Culture has sapped the vitality of our traditional culture and turned the national psyche away from the ideals of living for cause greater than oneself into an inward, introspective and narcissistic orientation of living for oneself above the good of the community as a whole. This shift is based on another Neoconservative myth, which they term rugged individualism: an idea that we debunked here already. Postmodern Conservatism celebrates the Narcissism of our culture as much as the Left does and that more than anything else is accelerating the downfall of our Republic. 

    During the Jacobin chaos of the French Revolution, Marquis de Sade authored a 'utopian' novel where he predicted that republicanism would lead eventually to a society of mutual exploitation. De Sade's fantasies sound eerily similar to many of the Manosphere's Red Pilled theories where this is reduced beyond economics into sexual matters where everyone becomes the sexual property of anyone strong (or 'Alpha') enough to take it. De Sade has been criticized as a misogynist, but more accurately, he hated all of humanity much like New World Order elites and their flying monkeys on the fake Right do. Unwittingly, de Sade gave us the blueprint of where immoral and godless republicanism leads to when drawn to its logical conclusions. One of our Founding Fathers, John Adams, understood the same fatal tendency and said that "Our system is designed for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the Government of any other." The Postmodern Right's philosophies of "Facts don't care about your feelings" and "Rugged Individualism" reflect de Sade's vision a lot more than they do Adams'. 

    As Conservatives, we must reject this fatal tendency to subvert our Constitutional Rights no matter whether the threat comes from the Left or the Right. The Bill of Rights was premised upon the ideal stated in our Declaration of Independence that Rights are inalienable, bestowed upon us by our Creator, and not subject to the whims of Governments---which are wholly human inventions. These Rights therefore are an absolute---not simply defined as whatever those in power permit us to have. These Rights don't cease to exist because a group comes into power and presumes to nullify them; hence the only Just Government is one that one that upholds and recognizes them. Since national policies are complex, such Rights can only be maintained in an atmosphere of free discussion and free access to information.