← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · thoreaupoe
Thread ID: 12083 | Posts: 49 | Started: 2004-01-30
2004-01-30 19:35 | User Profile
I use this as my definition of 'paleo-conservatism', does anyone else agree? disagree? Bueller? [url]http://pages.prodigy.net/krtq73aa/gate.htm[/url] [quote="Dr. William Flax"]The ideological confrontation of our times pits the individual (responsible for his own material and spiritual well-being, comfortable with traditional sex roles, and able to identify with family, race, heritage and nation, while following a path illuminated by the light his Maker gave him) against an array of Collectivist movements. These movements may involve different personalities and use different terminology. But they are generally led by compulsive neurotics or amoral demagogues, determined to reduce mankind to an undifferentiated species: A human ant hill, managed by social engineers at war with history and reason; men and women, who endlessly prattle shibboleths extolling "Social Justice," "Equality," "Democracy" & "New World Orders!"
If you look to the Federal Government of the United States as your personal problem solver, this site is not for you.
If you see men and women as competing interest groups, or see all men as inherently equal--the apparent differences as unimportant--or if you feel threatened if anyone questions such assumptions; this site is not for you.
But if you celebrate the human differences, the uniqueness of every man and every woman, of every race and every culture; if you believe in the importance of instinctive sex roles and heritage;
If you believe in the glory of God's Creation, and that each of us is morally and economically responsible and accountable;
If you believe in private rights and private arms, in private sex and traditional values, you may enjoy going forward!
This site is about direction not progress --direction in Government, direction in the dynamics of Society. Progress without reference to direction is meaningless. A rat riding a piece of crating along the curb to a storm sewer makes rapid progress in a downpour, but very little in a drizzle. Indeed, he may have to get off and run on his own power, if the rain stops. He will definitely have to get off the crating if he would change direction.
Mankind, in one form or another, has frequently changed direction. And however denied, it is a given that all that Man has done for good or ill in the past, he can and probably will do again in the future.
The American Revolution had very clear direction. The Fathers set their faces against dependence upon Government, dependence upon a collective, in favor of individual responsibility. Progress, in the American context, was always in the direction of reducing the intrusiveness of Government. And in those first few decades, we became more--not less--individualistic; setting the individual free to solve his own problems; making the State and Union dependent for their very survival on an armed and productive citizenry; with a foreign policy based upon mutual respect, goodwill and non-interference in the internal and unique affairs of other nations.
180 years ago, having achieved our original goals and reached perhaps a sort of political and spiritual plateau, characterized by the near unanimous reelection of President Monroe--the principles of the Revolution no longer effectively challenged--we began to lose momentum. Since then, subtly, haltingly at first, latterly (since World War I accelerating into the 1930s) as though caught in a great ebb tide, we have lost all sense of that original direction. We have been swept back out to sea, as it were, where all the principles that made America work, have been called into question; where progress has been redefined in terms of a destruction--one after another--of the very principles that made America unique, that gave her strength and freedom.
This web site is dedicated as a beacon in the night of this induced folly: A light to help those about to drown in a sea of Collectivist madness to find direction, the American direction back to shore.
2004-01-30 20:51 | User Profile
Conservatism means conserving the White race.
2004-01-30 20:57 | User Profile
I remember Flax as 'ohioman' back in the day at FR. Always articulate, well-written and thoughtful, but I seem to recall him going soft on the Israel issue. I could be wrong.
As to paleo-con thought, just do a search on 'paleo.' You'll find a number of great threads where more than a few here went round and round.
2004-01-30 21:14 | User Profile
Oh ok, thanks dissident.
But what do you mean by "going soft on Israel"? I follow the view that while no country should get USA's money, including Israel, why is it wrong for the US to give Israel [B][I]moral[/I][/B] support?
2004-01-30 22:01 | User Profile
Just for a laugh, tp, try to give us a definition of "moral" which does not involve us in an illustration of ludicrous inconsistencies, prevarications, and errors in the premises and application thereof.
Or, in the paleo-conservative alternative, simply dismiss the question as beneath yourself, considering the source, of course.
2004-01-30 23:03 | User Profile
[QUOTE=thoreaupoe] ...why is it wrong for the US to give Israel [B][I]moral[/I][/B] support?[/QUOTE]
You mean because any kind of morals they get from anywhere would be an improvement over what they have now? :jester:
2004-01-30 23:10 | User Profile
Isn't it suprising that there are so many willing to give "moral support" to Isreal among the libertarians? You would think they'd hate that welfare ethnocentric state populated by statists and collectivists?
2004-01-30 23:25 | User Profile
[QUOTE=NeoNietzsche]Just for a laugh, tp, try to give us a definition of "moral" which does not involve us in an illustration of ludicrous inconsistencies, prevarications, and errors in the premises and application thereof.[/QUOTE]
NN! Great to see you.
Am I to reason correctly that you have terminated your self-imposed exile from the board in order to weigh-in here with your position that there is no such established code or accepted notion of right and wrong?
2004-01-30 23:27 | User Profile
That gun thread must have smoked him out.
2004-01-30 23:30 | User Profile
[QUOTE=thoreaupoe]But what do you mean by "going soft on Israel"? I follow the view that while no country should get USA's money, including Israel, why is it wrong for the US to give Israel [B][I]moral[/I][/B] support?[/QUOTE]
Tell me, why should we should lend "moral" support to a nation that extorts billions from us each each year, spies on our military, attacks our ships, and does everything in its power to turn the Islamic world against us?
2004-01-30 23:39 | User Profile
[QUOTE=madrussian]That gun thread must have smoked him out.[/QUOTE]
And like most "Libertarians," he has elected to cut and run rather than defend his fantasies about how consevatism is based on "the individual."
2004-01-30 23:51 | User Profile
I meant NN.
2004-01-30 23:56 | User Profile
Fair enough; I still think my comment is applicable to our latest libertarian member, though. I'll be surprised if he sticks around to engage in open debate.
2004-01-31 00:09 | User Profile
The definition of true 'conservatism' is: you take your culture, see, and you.....conserve it! You don't allow it to change -- much at least. You don't allow immigrants to come in and screw it up. You don't allow Jews to mold it and shape it. You don't let globalism and global corporations influence it or alter it. You don't let your women go off to have 'careers' thereby ignoring your children.
In that sense, the Nazis WERE true conservatives.
Any questions? Now, go back to eating your donuts...
2004-01-31 00:27 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Texas Dissident]NN! Great to see you.
Am I to reason correctly that you have terminated your self-imposed exile from the board in order to weigh-in here with your position that there is no such established code or accepted notion of right and wrong?[/QUOTE]
Thanks, TD.
You reason correctly.
2004-01-31 00:39 | User Profile
[QUOTE=madrussian]That gun thread must have smoked him out.[/QUOTE]
'Cause him hates to see a great opportunity wasted to get ahold of an example of the realization, in the metal, of the following:
"So, we have our ideal military general-purpose assault rifle and MG cartridge - the '6.5x45 GP' - and we could have had it many decades ago. What are the chances of such a cartridge being adopted now? Until very recently, it would have been reasonable to assess these as zero; too many resources have been invested in the current [5.56x45] weapon systems to throw all of those out of the window and start again. However, recent reports indicate that the US SOCOM is testing a more powerful cartridge designed to fit in the M16 action. This is the 6.8x43 Remington SPC (Special Purpose Cartridge) which fires a 115 grain bullet at 2,650 fps from a 16.5 inch barrel (7.45g at 808 m/s = 2,430j); very similar to the 'ideal' 6.85mm listed above. The cartridge case is based on the old .30 Remington commercial round, with a larger diameter than the 5.56x45 to increase the case capacity. This round develops 55% more muzzle energy than the 62 grain SS109/M855 loading at the muzzle, rising to 84% better at 550m due to its superior ballistic coefficient. Even standard 5.56mm magazines can be used, with some modifications to the lips and follower and with capacity reduced from 30 to 25 rounds. If this is adopted for US Special Forces and proves successful, then it stands a chance of being used more widely. *This is the most promising development in military rifle ammunition for about half a century,*** and clearly has the potential to replace both the 5.56x45 and 7.62x51 rounds. Time will tell if this is yet another false dawn." [Quintuple emphasis by NN]
[url]http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk/Assault.htm[/url]
2004-01-31 00:47 | User Profile
Oh, yeah - and all true conservatives know and love firearms. Go Franco!
2004-01-31 00:49 | User Profile
[QUOTE=NeoNietzsche]You reason correctly.[/QUOTE]
Great. I assumed you had thrown in the Tao.
2004-01-31 01:03 | User Profile
[QUOTE=NeoNietzsche]This is the 6.8x43 Remington SPC (Special Purpose Cartridge) which fires a 115 grain bullet at 2,650 fps from a 16.5 inch barrel [/QUOTE] (7.62x39 + 5.56x45) / 2 = 6.59x42. Looks like splitting the difference is the best choice.
2004-01-31 01:31 | User Profile
QUOTE=madrussian / 2 = 6.59x42. Looks like splitting the difference is the best choice.[/QUOTE]
Definitely. It's also the case that stopping-power complaints with FMJ rounds stop when you get up toward 7mm. The 7x57 Mausers got it done in the Boer and Span-Am wars, but the Italians and Japanese started trading-in their 6.5's for 7+ calibers during the subsequent Judeo-German confrontation.
2004-01-31 01:50 | User Profile
NN,
Happy 30 January to you!
2004-01-31 01:51 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Texas Dissident]Great. I assumed you had thrown in the Tao.[/QUOTE]
Nah - was the victim of a demoralizing gas attack - when Walter got back from Spain and immediately flopped into the ring with a gut-load of badly-digested evolutionary theory and wearing no Depends.
2004-01-31 02:01 | User Profile
Walter's popularity has dropped, somewhat :whstl:
2004-01-31 02:25 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Sertorius]NN,
Happy 30 January to you![/QUOTE]
Thanks, Sertorius.
As it just so happens, my monitor wallpaper is an image of the magnificent entrance to the Reichskanzlerei, flanked by SS guards in dress black.
2004-01-31 02:36 | User Profile
[QUOTE=madrussian]Walter's popularity has dropped, somewhat :whstl:[/QUOTE]
No shit?
I mean - yes, shit.
But I haven't been keeping up. Anyone else been victimized by Walter's shit?
2004-01-31 02:57 | User Profile
He no longer believes that those who aren't Christians are worth collaborating with and wants Tex to declare this a Nationalist Christian Forum.
2004-01-31 03:35 | User Profile
[QUOTE=madrussian]He no longer believes that those who aren't Christians are worth collaborating with and wants Tex to declare this a Nationalist Christian Forum.[/QUOTE]
What's a "Christian"?
2004-01-31 07:35 | User Profile
[QUOTE=NeoNietzsche]What's a "Christian"?[/QUOTE] You mean after all this time of jawing about it, you never really knew yerself? :lol: Or you've forgotten.
I guess I'm gonna just have to convert ya, so you know fer good.
Tell me where the nearest river is, and I'll bring my Bible and my towel :lol:
2004-01-31 12:45 | User Profile
N.N.,
You're welcome. I know the photo. Those are sharp looking uniforms.
2004-01-31 14:17 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Okiereddust]Tell me where the nearest river is, and I'll bring my Bible and my towel :lol:[/QUOTE]
Be more fun if you'll bring your rack, stake, and strappado tackle.
Do you have any supernumerary nipples, Okie? Any enlarged moles?
2004-01-31 14:31 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Sertorius]N.N.,
You're welcome. I know the photo. Those are sharp looking uniforms.[/QUOTE]
Those Nazis had style, didn't they? Even knew how to create good-looking weapons. We'll never see the like of them again.
BTW, have you read Reactionary Modernism? I suspect that AY has and would join me in endorsing it.
2004-01-31 15:00 | User Profile
N.N.,
No, I haven't. Could you give me the author's name and a thumbnail sketch of it?
2004-01-31 18:02 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Sertorius]N.N.,
No, I haven't. Could you give me the author's name and a thumbnail sketch of it?[/QUOTE]
[url]http://www.worldhistoryhub.com/Reactionary_Modernism__Technology_Culture_and_Politics_in_Weimar_and_the_Third_Reich_0521338336.html[/url]
2004-01-31 18:10 | User Profile
[quote="madrussian"]Isn't it suprising that there are so many willing to give "moral support" to Isreal among the libertarians? You would think they'd hate that welfare ethnocentric state populated by statists and collectivists?
? You were the one that made fun of me in the welcome thread by my use of the term "collectivist"...so, right..
Well, I came to this site expecting actual conservatives that wish to deny aide to Israel through their wish of non-interventionism, NOT this uber-paranoia of Jews. I mean, I don't expect anyone to "adore" a culture/ethnic group/race that is not of their own, but to simply look at all the civilizations/nations that tried to kill them off has faced its own destruction. You guys know, the difference between "tolerance" and "acceptance", right?
But OK, I misspoke about my question of Israel. I mean just "orally" supporting them. Do you guys really think that Islamo-fascists are not a big threat? And don't give me this "our support of Israel has created this culture clash" stuff, I don't remember UBL saying anything about our support for Israel as a casus belli against 'the West' or USA.
Also you accuse (OK, this was just "madrussian", but I'm assuming most board members agree with him.) Israel of being ethnocentric? Aren't you guys pushing for the same thing with your own race/ethnicity of "White Nationalism"? Why is the onus on the Jews so much? OK, they now have their own country, and are no longer "sullying your race lines" in your countries; so why this canard that they cannot even have their own country?
I don't mean for this to come off as confrontational, but I am seriously curious in your reasoning for your positions.
2004-01-31 18:35 | User Profile
AntiYuppie, thank you for the informative reply!
But how does a govt. not become intrusive/oppressive when its main goal is keeping "racial" lines pure? I consider myself a paleo-con because I think the US has a culture to preserve, but any immigrant (despite their own country's possible savage culture) to assimilate into the Anglo-Saxon/Celtic culture that helped America become the great nation it is.
But with that "requirement" you can easily accept anyone who is willing to adopt a new culture and is eager to work for their own fortune. With the requirement of racial purity in a country, I honestly don't know how you could keep that in a globalized economy like ours is, without the govt. becoming too tyrranical.
2004-01-31 18:35 | User Profile
[QUOTE=thoreaupoe]But OK, I misspoke about my question of Israel. I mean just "orally" supporting them?[/QUOTE]
I have already confronted on you over this issue, and you failed to respond (unsurprisingly, IMO).
Surely you're familiar with the USS Liberty incident and Jonathan Pollard.
Why should White Americans (or any American) "orally" support a nation of parasites that takes billions of dollars from us each year, and then spits in our collective faces by attacking our ships and spying on our military?
Of course, a group of Israeli Jews were also seen celebrating the destruction of the towers on 911 -- I guess that's something we should "orally" support too, right?
2004-01-31 18:42 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Valley Forge]I have already confronted on you over this issue, and you failed to respond (unsurprisingly, IMO).
Surely you're familiar with the USS Liberty incident and Jonathan Pollard.
Why should White Americans (or any American) "orally" a nation of parasites that takes our billions of dollars from us each year, and then spits in our collective faces by attacking our ships and spying on our military?
Of course, a group of Israeli Jews were also seen celebrating the destruction of the towers on 911 -- I guess that's something we should "orally" support too, right?[/QUOTE]
Like I've said before, the onus is always on the Jews in your concerns to the attack on the USS Liberty. The US military killed about 8 (?) Canadian soldiers in Afghanistan about a year ago, and there were no claims of hatred between the two nations. Friendly fire will always be around, it just seems some people have preconceived bias' set in that they need to feed.
Many of our allies spy on us, including Germany and Britain, and so do we. Jonathon Pollard is an American Jew that took it upon himself to spy on the US, Israel/Mossad (to the best of my own knowledge) did not ask him to do so.
? I could have sworn I saw PALESTINIANS dancing in the streets after 9/11 not Israeli Jews. lol
2004-01-31 18:52 | User Profile
You really are quite ignorant if you believe the USS Liberty massacre was a friendly fire incident. The fact is, and this may make you uncomfortable, Jews attacked and murdered those sailors intentionally -- their intent was to sink the ship and blame the sinking on Egypt. And both the Mossad and the Isreali government has done everything in its power to help Pollard, and so have dozens of Israeli/ Jewish special interest groups. In fact, the former leader of the Mossad has refused to turn over the information that that Jew B*stard Pollard stole in the first place. If you really are a palecon, as you claim, you should be supporting the interests of America first, not parroting the Zionist propaganda line that the Liberty attack was an "accident" and that "allies" spy on each other all the time.
2004-01-31 18:58 | User Profile
[QUOTE=thoreaupoe]Jonathon Pollard is an American Jew that took it upon himself to spy on the US, Israel/Mossad (to the best of my own knowledge) did not ask him to do so. [/QUOTE]
Jews regard Pollard as a hero. They even made him an Israeli citizen.
[url]http://www.jewishsf.com/content/2-0-/module/displaystory/story_id/2465/format/html/displaystory.html[/url]
2004-01-31 19:14 | User Profile
[QUOTE=thoreaupoe] I mean, I don't expect anyone to "adore" a culture/ethnic group/race that is not of their own, but to simply look at all the civilizations/nations that tried to kill them off has faced its own destruction.[/QUOTE]
[?] A little proofreading would help with the attempt at a sentence, above - but I take it, neverthless, that we are, after the manner expected of all pseudo-sophisticates au courant, to admire the Jews for their courage in facing the consequences of behavior of which we are to be correctly ignorant or dismissive. Sorry - but pseudo-sophisticates au courant get their heads handed to themselves in fairly short order at OD and are consequently in short supply hereabouts for purposes of applauding such endorsements.
[QUOTE=thoreaupoe] But OK, I misspoke about my question of Israel. I mean just "orally" supporting them. Do you guys really think that Islamo-fascists are not a big threat? And don't give me this "our support of Israel has created this culture clash" stuff, I don't remember UBL saying anything about our support for Israel as a casus belli against 'the West' or USA.[/QUOTE]
How wonderful, then, that you have come to OD for your continuing adult education - because we do remember that UBL made precisely that point in public proclamation about our support for Israel, among other activities, as a casus belli. Also, please take the point that "Islamo-fascism" is just Hitchens' toadying smear phrase in abuse of the terminology, the employment of which identifies one as yet to transcend pseudo-sophisticate status in one's grasp of the conceptual foundations of these matters.
[QUOTE=thoreaupoe] Also you accuse (OK, this was just "madrussian", but I'm assuming most board members agree with him.) Israel of being ethnocentric? Aren't you guys pushing for the same thing with your own race/ethnicity of "White Nationalism"? Why is the onus on the Jews so much? OK, they now have their own country, and are no longer "sullying your race lines" in your countries; so why this canard that they cannot even have their own country?[/QUOTE]
"Their own country" causes big problems for our own country - otherwise they are welcome to go their own way, hail and farewell.
[QUOTE=thoreaupoe] I don't mean for this to come off as confrontational, but I am seriously curious in your reasoning for your positions.[/QUOTE]
Please come off as confrontational - makes this so much more fun.
2004-01-31 19:34 | User Profile
shrugs Oh well, I don't think we're going to get any farther with this, you guys obviously have pre-conceived notions to feed. Not to mention, I don't have much free time to waste on yet another political forum besides Protest Warrior.
Signing off, thoreaupoe
2004-01-31 20:03 | User Profile
[QUOTE=thoreaupoe]shrugs Oh well, I don't think we're going to get any farther with this, you guys obviously have pre-conceived notions to feed. Not to mention, I don't have much free time to waste on yet another political forum besides Protest Warrior.
Signing off, thoreaupoe[/QUOTE]
["pseudo-sophisticates au courant get their heads handed to themselves in fairly short order at OD and are consequently in short supply hereabouts"]
Next applicant, please!
2004-01-31 20:12 | User Profile
[QUOTE=thoreaupoe]Oh well, I don't think we're going to get any farther with this, you guys obviously have pre-conceived notions to feed. Not to mention, I don't have much free time to waste on yet another political forum besides Protest Warrior.
Signing off, thoreaupoe[/QUOTE]
I'm sorry, but that's pitiful, tp. Word of advice: if you come on this board throwing out terms like 'collectivists' and such to describe paleocon/white nationalism, you best bring your 'A' game.
I've taken a cursory glance at protest warrior. Looks like a neo-con, Israel-first indoctrination center to me.
Please come back when you're ready to discuss the real issues. In the meantime, pick up a copy of Kevin MacDonald's [u]Culture of Critique[/u] and read it. Then study the articles pinned in the Neo-Con Watch forum on this board.
Best of luck.
2004-01-31 20:31 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Texas Dissident]I'm sorry, but that's pitiful, tp. Word of advice: if you come on this board throwing out terms like 'collectivists' and such to describe paleocon/white nationalism, you best bring your 'A' game.
I've taken a cursory glance at protest warrior. Looks like a neo-con, Israel-first indoctrination center to me.
Please come back when you're ready to discuss the real issues. In the meantime, pick up a copy of Kevin MacDonald's [u]Culture of Critique[/u] and read it. Then study the articles pinned in the Neo-Con Watch forum on this board.
Best of luck.[/QUOTE]
Having likewise taken a look at "Protest Warrior" and come to the same evaluation as did TD, above, I conclude that tp was a mere propagandist, likely Jewish, as suggested also by the kosher-con correctness of his vocabulary and facile misconstructions in measure uncharacteristic even of pro-Israel libertarians. Spare yourself the nausea. Caution: Jews at work.
2004-01-31 20:39 | User Profile
The only places that I have ever heard the term "Islamo-fascist" [used by Thoreaupoe] is on pro-Israel websites......why does he use that term?
2004-01-31 20:41 | User Profile
[QUOTE=NeoNietzsche]Spare yourself the nausea. Caution: Jews at work.[/QUOTE]
Ha! That's good, NN. Perhaps instead of my usual practice of just banning the obvious disruptors and goofs, I should create a special user group with that phrase: Caution [img]http://forums.originaldissent.com/images/icons/icon4.gif[/img] : Jews at Work
:dung: :oh:
2004-01-31 20:42 | User Profile
Have I fallen asleep at the wheel and forgot my official duty at OD to troll spots...er.. I mean to spot trolls?
If it walks and talk like a duck... it's a zhid.
2004-01-31 20:47 | User Profile
The problem is that it's hard to know for sure whether a poster like TP is a Jewish troll, or a simply another misled Gentile who just doesn't know any better, having spent a lifetime submerged in Judaic propaganda.
2004-01-31 21:00 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Valley Forge]The problem is that it's hard to know for sure whether a poster like TP is a Jewish troll, or a simply another misled Gentile who just doesn't know any better, having spent a lifetime submerged in Judaic propaganda.[/QUOTE]
That is a crucial question, VF, and I spent some time yesterday going back and forth on the matter in my mind. One doesn't want to be too hard on a brother who is sincerely trying to understand the truth. That's what we're here for.
Nevertheless, the question was just decided. I have no patience or tolerance for those who cut and run and the first sight or sound of something that 'offends' them. The hour is too late for that. If folks want to come in here and disagree and defend their position, that's great. But don't come here with certain assumptions, making claims based on same and then take off when challenged. That's not the way of principled and honorable men.