Category Archives: Neoconservatism

Iranian Mad-Hatter: Please, Take Her

Feminism, Intelligence, Iran, Journalism, Neoconservatism, Propaganda

WARNING: ADULT HUMOR

When Iranian dissidents approach me on LinkedIn, I confess to ignoring them. They are invariably interventionist agitators, and I’m an avid, longtime non-interventionist, as you know.

Loud, banal, with a mad-woman’s tumbleweed hair; mouthing the kind of cliched ideas of which we have an abundance and get a load of incessantly in America from the most tiresome, troublesome #MeToo women—Masih Alinejad, Iranian-American “journalist,” is alleged to have been the object of a kidnapping plot by the Iranian mullahs.

However, I don’t believe the Iranians want her back. (Would you? She’s hardly a keeper.)  I don’t buy the whole hype around the alleged kidnapping plot hatched by Iranians. The FBI says so. Yes: Where have we heard that before without a shred of evidence!? (We go to wars based on the intelligence community’s habitual lies.)

AND:

She said she had been working with the Federal Bureau of Investigation since the agency approached her eight months ago with photographs taken by the plotters.

What do you know? This has been going on for a while. Well, it takes time (and funds) for the FBI to lay a trap.

This sounds like vintage FBI entrapment. Some low IQ Abduls are enticed by out-of-control FBI agents into committing a crime they had no intention of committing until approached.

The woman, Alinejad, is irksome, but she’s irrelevant in the American and Iranian grander scheme.

Just like they need to pick-up the scent and chase after Cuba, the neoconservative press and political establishment likes to push the idea that America—near bankrupt, financially and morally—needs to bestow freedom on Iran. Ludicrous.

Lift embargoes on both Iran and Cuba. Both are impoverished. And with respect to Iran, let the International Atomic Energy Agency do its job. (The IAEA is pretty good, and was spot on about Iraq!) The Europeans don’t want a nuclear Iran in their neighborhood. That’s the best we can do without destroying another country with hubris.

*Image credit

NEW COLUMN: Losers: Markle And A Meritless McCain. Winner: The Queen

Britain, Conservatism, John McCain, Neoconservatism, Political Philosophy, THE ELITES

NEW COLUMN is “Losers: Markle And A Meritless McCain. Winner: The Queen.” It is now on WND.COM, The Unz Review and CNSNews.com.

And excerpt:

Fancy that! A member of a meritless political dynasty, The McCains, has panned the duty-bound British monarchy.

There is a revolving door between Big Media, be it the neoliberal CNN or neocon Fox News, and members of the political duopoly. Whether practiced by the Left or the Right; this is indisputably immoral, and a conflict of interest.

To spout received opinion, Fox News has hired Ben Domenech, the unremarkable husband of the irredeemably awful Meghan McCain.

At the conclusion of a wishy-washy Fox segment about the wanton Meghan Markle, the man who had married into the McCain dynasty declared:

“There is nothing more American than hating the British Crown.”

That’s a shallow stance at best. For, if forced to choose between the mob (democracy) and the monarchy, the latter is far preferable and benevolent. This thesis is anatomized in Democracy: The God that Failed: The Economics and Politics of Monarchy, Democracy, and Natural Order, by libertarian political philosopher Hans-Hermann Hoppe.

In his seminal work, Hoppe provides ample support—historical and analytical—for democracy’s inferiority as compared to monarchy:

‘… democracy has succeeded where monarchy only made a modest beginning: in the ultimate destruction of the natural elites. The fortunes of great families have dissipated, and their tradition of a culture of economic independence, intellectual farsightedness, and moral and spiritual leadership has been lost and forgotten. Rich men still exist today, but more frequently than not they owe their fortune now directly or indirectly to the state.’

“[I]n light of elementary economic theory, the conduct of government and the effects of government policy on civil society can be expected to be systematically different, depending on whether the government apparatus is owned privately or publicly,” explains Hoppe.

“From the viewpoint of those who prefer less exploitation over more and who value farsightedness and individual responsibility above shortsightedness and irresponsibility, the historic transition from monarchy to democracy represents not progress but civilizational decline.”

The raw, ripe, rule of the demos has diminished the queen, but has yet to destroy her. Queen Elizabeth might be a member of a landed aristocracy, much-maligned in radical America—but she has acquitted herself as would a natural aristocrat. …

… READ THE REST. NEW COLUMN is “Losers: Markle And A Meritless McCain. Winner: The Queen.” It is now on WND.COM, The Unz Review and CNSNews.com.

NEW COLUMN: Still Addicted To That Rush: Revisiting The ‘09 CPAC Speech

Barack Obama, Conservatism, Donald Trump, Economy, Neoconservatism, Republicans, The Establishment, War, Welfare

NEW COLUMN, “Still Addicted To That Rush: Revisiting The ‘09 CPAC Speech,” is now WND.COM and The Unz Review.

Excerpt:

Rush Limbaugh died on February the 17th. In the encomiums to conservatism’s radio king, mention was made of his 2009 address at the Conservative Political Action Conference in Washington, D.C.

CPAC for short, or CPUKE before Trump.

At the time, I had surveyed the perennial, Republican Party dynamics surrounding the event. “Addicted to that Rush,” the March 6, 2009 column’s title, came not from Rush’s brief addiction to painkillers, following surgery, but from an eponymous hit by the band Mr. Big. (It, in turn, came from an earlier time when the American music scene produced not pornographers like Cardi B, but musicians like Paul Gilbert and Billy Sheehan.)

Nevertheless, that title alluded to one of Rush’s missed opportunities: Speaking against a war into which he was involuntarily drafted and by which he was almost destroyed: The War on Drugs.

Still, how petty does that war, in all its depredations, seem now?! How unimaginably remote do the issues Rush spoke to, in 2009, seem in light of a country that has come a cropper in the course of one year, due to an unprecedented consolidation of state power around COVID, compounded by an amped up, institutionalized campaign against white America. And, in particular, against white Trump voters.

Other than champion tax cuts and globalization, the Rovian cadre of the GOP had been doing what it has always done: Calling for a more upbeat, inclusive and diverse party. Michael Steele, then chairman of the Republican National Committee, today an “analyst” for MSNBC, had derided Rush as a mere entertainer, describing “The Rush Limbaugh Show” as incendiary and ugly.

Then as now, Steele’s main concerns were not those of main-street Americans. Rather, Steele’s cares were “conciliatory.” The Rovians, like the Never Trumpers and the Lincoln-Project perverts, believed in the urgent need to broaden the Republican Party’s base and “appeal” to traditionally hostile minorities, when in fact the GOP had been courting traditional Democratic constituents with every trick possible, with little success, all the while sticking it to the base.

The Steele-Limbaugh spat fell into Barack Obama’s lap. The former president was losing it—throwing everything and the kitchen sink at the thing he called “the economy,” but which is really no more than the trillions upon trillions of voluntary, capitalistic acts individuals perform in order to make a living.

Introduce government force and coercion into this synchronized spontaneous order, and it starts to splutter. The economy responds poorly to economic planning and planners. BHO had imagined that he could walk on water. America facilitated his fantasy. The former president was realizing that he was not the magic man he imagined he was. Desperate times called for desperate distractions.

In short succession, Democratic henchmen—Paul Begala, Stanley Greenberg, James Carville, and Robert Gibbs—began picking on Limbaugh. Strong-armed too by the Obama administration was CNBC reporter Rick Santelli, who led a revolt from the floor of the Chicago Mercantile Exchange against the bailout billions for mortgage delinquents. Little wonder, then, that the contents of Limbaugh’s speech at CPAC garnered less attention than the characters involved.

Rush spoke stirringly. He railed against the enormous expansion of government in the first few, frightening weeks of the Obama presidency.

But, as I noted at the time, not a word did one hear against the man who began what Barack was just completing. George Bush set the scene for Barack. Stimulus, bailouts, a house for every Hispanic—these were Bush’s babies. The Constitution and the Bill of Rights had been abandoned well before the fist-bumping Obamas moved into the White House. …

…  As rousing as his speech was, not a word did Limbaugh devote to the Warfare State, every bit as corrupt, corrupting, and bankrupting as the Welfare State. As I observed, at the time, over $1 trillion was being spent yearly on imperial expeditions that were awash in American blood, but offered few benefits to the sacrificed, stateside and abroad.

Besides, I asked, “what kind of a nation neglects its own borders while defending to the death borders not its own?” …

… READ ON. NEW COLUMN, “Still Addicted To That Rush: Revisiting The ‘09 CPAC Speech,” is now WND.COM and The Unz Review.

 

UPDATED (5/7/021): Prager University’s Propositional-Nation Creed

America, Conservatism, Culture, Europe, Multiculturalism, Nationhood, Neoconservatism, Political Philosophy, Republicans

“Race and ethnicity have defined every nation on earth, except one: The United States of America. It is defined by values.”—PragerU

Prager U, here, articulates the propositional-nation perspective, propounded by the neoconservatives and neoliberals. It is a false creed.

So how is the US doing as a nation united by “values” upon which nobody can agree? As well as a Walmart with missiles can do. We shop and we war, with others and among ourselves.

Notice the Schadenfreude tinged with a sense of American superiority with respect to the Europeans.

To her credit, France has no institutionalized multiculturalism. Integrating individuals, not communities, is how the French have approached their émigré population. They say their republican values proscribe affirmative action. But since America’s republican values haven’t hindered racist quotas here, says our neoconservative troika, the French should get with The Program.

MORE.

Oh, by the way, which “nation” has held onto its historic monuments, America or the “cheese-eating surrender monkeys”?

President Emmanuel Macron evinced the resolve the Anglo-American surrender monkeys are too feeble to feel, much less display:
Said Macron, “The [French] republic will not erase any trace, or any name, from its history … it will not take down any statue.”
Bravo, Monsieur Macron.

MORE.

UPDATES (5/7/021):

Charlie Kirk swear allegiance to propositionalism.