The first part of the track is steep, and one that my fresh horses at dawn can hardly climb. In mid-heaven it is highest, where to look down on earth and sea often alarms even me, and makes my heart tremble with awesome fear. The last part of the track is downwards and needs sure control. Then even Tethys herself, who receives me in her submissive waves, is accustomed to fear that I might dive headlong…You will not easily rule those proud horses, breathing out through mouth and nostrils the fires burning in their chests. They scarcely tolerate my control when their fierce spirits are hot, and their necks resist the reins. Beware my boy, that I am not the source of a gift fatal to you, while something can still be done to set right your request! –Ovid, Metamorphoses

The above excerpt is from Ovid’s wonderful classic about Greek mythology, perhaps one of my favorite sources for metaphors and parables of character outside the Scripture. One of the things I have noted the more trips around the sun I make is the inability of the English language to truly capture and quantify the range of emotions humans exhibit. Ovid tells the story of Phaethon, the son of Helios (the sun god) which represents one of the more well known parables about hubris. Contrary to the story of Icharus however, Phaethon was motivated by more than just a desire to excel or an overestimation of his own abilities. Insecure about his own position as a demigod and challenged by his friends, he sought assurances from his father Helios. Helios made the fatal error of granting Phaethon whatever wish he wanted, and one can imagine a Marlon Brando figure drinking campari or Disaronno grudgingly granting his son’s request. Without the ability and skill to do so, Phaethon took Helios’ chariot (the sun) and proceeded to just about kill life on earth by losing control of it. Zeus steps in to handle the disaster and strikes Phaethon with a lightning bold, killing him and bringing the whole goat rope to an end.

painting-phaethonThe story is interesting because despite the focus on Phaethon by Ovid, there are several more layers to the story that echo in life. The most obvious of lessons is intersection of hubris, incompetence and colossal insecurity to result in disaster. The more subtle lesson however is that of the enabler, Helios. Helios knew exactly how difficult it is to do his job, describing in agonizing detail to his son how perilous it is. Yet at the end of this he relents and proceeds to allow this disaster to run its course. The alleged results of this ill-fated experiment resulted in the Sahara desert and drying various rivers up. One can imagine the death toll from such catastrophic ‘global warming.’ The resolution of the matter happens when Zeus steps in and takes corrective action, which today would be seen as extreme, but the Greeks saw as fitting punishment for one who aspires to be that which he is not. We all know Phaethons, but disaster strikes when people become willing accomplices to idiocy and enablers like Helios.

The success of a community, organization and even a family unit is not the elimination of those too incompetent, arrogant or ignorant to even know they posses such character traits. Rather, it is those who are not those things to recognize the consequences of indulging such an individual. Whether because of senility, magnanimity or apathy, choosing to ignore such a thing, let alone promote it, is a dereliction of duty. I reserve the highest scorn not for those too stupid to know better, but those who do and passively allow such a person to wreak havoc. The immediate gratification of not being the ‘bad guy’ in a given situation ignores the long-term affects an incompetent egomaniac can have on your friends, allies, employees and family. In my professional life the Helios’ are what keep me up at night, those competent people who suffer a catastrophic lapse in judgment, often times leading to their own firing in addition to whatever Phaethon-esque character they allowed to drive the project. In my world, good intentions and $3.50 will get you a cup of coffee. You are judged  by your results and the part you played in getting those results.

DQTh8PXsOvid, or the unknown Greek who came up with the original tale, brilliantly described human nature’s tendency to mimic Newton’s 1st law of motion. Helios was nowhere to be found while Phaethon was busy torching the planet, and intervention arrived only after a crisis had happened and half a continent was on fire. Zeus steps in and deals out harsh punishment to the offender, resulting in Phaethon perhaps being the first human to ever reach terminal velocity. In our weak and effeminate society, often the Zeus of the situation instantly becomes the ‘bad guy,’ the ‘____-ist’ or ‘____-phobe’ because the rubric we use to judge actions is largely based on emotion. Even within the liberty movement has this attitude pervaded the discussion, far too many are content to sit back and criticize while declining to do much else except throw stones at their betters.

Ultimately, the real moral of Ovid’s story is not one of hubris by a fool. It is the enabling of fools by those who know better, resulting in disaster. Oft times resulting in harsh measures having to be meted out to correct the situation. The Phaethon’s of the world are not going to be reasoned out of their ignorance and pride. Perhaps if they survive a sufficiently jarring encounter with reality, but often not even then. What will derail the liberty community, and whatever other communities are important in your life, is either being or tolerating those who enable such bad actors and allow them to claw their way to the levers of power. Whatever the emotional satisfaction, you will regret it. Helios knew the perils, knew the sheer ineptitude and inadequacy of his son and ignored the logical result of such a decision. The Phaethons, Icarus’, Custers and Bernies don’t scare me, it is the myriad of enablers behind such people. The Phaethons will read this and not understand a word, it is simply who they are. I’m speaking to the Helios’ of the liberty movement that suffer fools far too willingly. A Zeus will come, and it’s going to hurt.




Who says organization, says oligarchy 


 The democratic currents of history resemble successive waves. They break ever on the same shoal…When democracies have gained a certain stage of development, they undergo a gradual transformation, adopting the aristocratic spirit, and in many cases also the aristocratic forms, against which at the outset they struggled so fiercely. Now new accusers arise to denounce the traitors; after an era of glorious combats and of inglorious power, they end by fusing with the old dominant class; whereupon once more they are in their turn attacked by fresh opponents who appeal to the name of democracy. It is probable that this cruel game will continue without end. – Robert Michels

The right for decades has been content to chase the idea of democracy, never questioning that sacred premise of universal suffrage. The original concept restricted suffrage to property owners, given the fact that the income tax had not been enacted and property taxes were the primary source of funding for the government. The voter base has expanded proportionally with the tax base, exceeding it now to the point where the net producers are only a fraction of eligible voters. The mentally handicapped, foreign nationals and deceased all enjoy suffrage in our country. Despite increasing it to the point of insanity, has universal suffrage really changed the nature of power in our country? The two parties still maintain a stranglehold on the government, both wield their respective voting blocs as clumsy weapons against the other and if results are any indication, neither have any interest in anything other than maintaining the status quo and defrauding the taxpayer. The historically literate will note the composition of the signers of the Constitution and the charge that we exchanged monarchy for an oligarchy has merit. Adams, Jefferson, Madison, Washington and Henry were all landed gentry and highly educated for the day, even if not of British aristocracy. Such men became central figures in the revolution and later the US government, forming the backbone of the new government and themselves picked those of similar social rank, such as William Marbury.

The concept of oligarchies is not a new one, class structure has existed throughout mankind’s recorded history. The rubric of the structure may be different, but the high, middle and lower classes have always been. Aristocracy places emphasis on birth, while oligarchy emphasizes wealth, political capital and other soft power. Plato defined oligarchies in his Republic as follows:

The accumulation of gold in the treasury of private individuals is the ruin of timocracy; they invent illegal modes of expenditure; for what do they or their wives care about the law? 

Yes, indeed.

And then one, seeing another grow rich, seeks to rival him, and thus the great mass of the citizens become lovers of money.

Likely enough.

And so they grow richer and richer, and the more they think of making a fortune the less they think of virtue; for when riches and virtue are placed together in the scales of the balance, the one always rises as the other falls.


And in proportion as riches and rich men are honoured in the State, virtue and the virtuous are dishonoured.




And what is honoured is cultivated, and that which has no honour is neglected.

Republic Book VIII pp.  408-409


wave-splashing-on-the-rocks-wallpaper-1.jpgPlato had a distinctly low view of oligarchy, from his atavistic perspective he held wealth and the pursuit of it second to the service of the state and the higher ideals of virtue. The German sociologist Robert Michels expanded this view of oligarchy in his book Political Parties: A Sociological Study of the Oligarchical Tendencies of Modern Democracy. Rather than positing oligarchy devolves into democracy, Michels observed that any organization which is large scale in nature will in fact become an oligarchy, if not in name, certainly in function. His observation quickly became known as the iron law of oligarchy, to which exist few exceptions. Michels lists several reasons for this, namely ability, efficiency and the nature of man. The most staunch egalitarians and ancaps must acknowledge the inherent inequality of men, whether intellectually, physically or emotionally. Men may be of equal worth to God, but they are certainly not to their respective societies or fellow man. We are all of different economic, emotional and social worth to different people and to our respective societies, as wages and relative influence provide concrete proof of. This natural inequality is borne out in the private sector and within organizations, despite the best efforts of the socialists to forcibly equalize humanity to the lowest common denominator. Any organization will have the core individuals it relies upon to accomplish its purpose. Those core members wield far more influence than their ‘peers’ in a given situation and that power, whether official or not, is generally recognized. When I need to source something from a supplier at work, there are people I call to get answers and people I call to get results. The difference in ability naturally pushes the more competent to the top by virtue of results, whether that be tangible or simply their ability to propagandize their efforts successfully.

Much has been written in the business world about streamlining the decision-making process and avoiding the loss of money that occurs when timely decisions cannot be made. Any successful long-term venture, whether it be in the business or political world relies on the ability of the organization to respond to events promptly. One of Michels better prongs of analysis was on this very fact. “Democracy is utterly incompatible with strategic promptness, and the forces of democracy do not lend themselves to the rapid opening of a campaign. This is why political parties, even when democratic, exhibit so much hostility to the referendum and to all other measures for the safeguard of real democracy; and this is why in their constitution these parties exhibit, if not unconditional caesarism, at least extremely strong centralizing and oligarchical tendencies.” Successful revolutions, protests, political parties and businesses all share the ability to adapt and react to changing circumstances before it’s too late. Particularly with smaller and newer ventures, the ability to be agile in the marketplace of ideas is what separates success and failure. It simply cannot occur in any type of real democratic process, so ultimately what is arrived at is the binary option of streamline or die. Those who choose the former face that Faustian bargain of success of the organization, yet death of the  democratic ideals they supposedly hold. The revolutionary syndicalist Humphrey Lagardelle admits to this anachronism in his work The Confederation of Labour and Socialism, “And for the use of the proletariat they have reproduced the capitalist tools of domination; they have built a workers’ government as harsh as the bourgeois government, a workers’ bureaucracy as clumsy as the bourgeois bureaucracy, a central power which tells the workers what they can and what they cannot do, which shatters all independence and initiative in the union members, and which sometimes must inspire in its victims a regret for capitalistic modes of authority.” Despite approaching the topic from a socialist revolutionary point of view, Lagardelle is intellectually honest enough to admit the platitudes of marxism are just that, platitudes. Michels classified the situation much the same way, “An extensive organization is per se a heavy piece of mechanism, and one difficult to put in operation…But the problems of the hour need a speedy decision, and this is why democracy can no longer function in its primitive and genuine form, unless the policy pursued is to be temporizing, involving the loss of the most favorable opportunities for action. Under such guidance, the party becomes incapable of acting in alliance with others, and loses its political elasticity. A fighting party needs a hierarchical structure. In the absence of such a structure, the party will be comparable to a savage and shapeless Negro army, which is unable to withstand a single well-disciplined and well-drilled battalion of European soldiers.

The last reason Michels gives for this phenomenon is the nature of men themselves. A vast majority feel an innate need to be led. Were we to step back and actually look at what every representative government in practice is, we will arrive to much the same conclusion as he did. “Even if we make the theoretical admission that in abstracto parliamentary government does indeed embody government by the masses, in practical life it is nothing but a continuous fraud on the part of the dominant class. Under representative government the difference between democracy and monarchy, which are both rooted in the representative system, is altogether insignificant — a difference not in substance but in form. The sovereign people elects, in place of a king, a number of kinglets. Not possessing sufficient freedom and independence to direct the life of the state, it tamely allows itself to be despoiled of its fundamental right. The one right which the people reserves is the “ridiculous privilege” of choosing from time to time a new set of masters.” You may protest, but look at the participation in the primaries for the respective political parties or better yet the local functions of government. Part of it lies with the fact that the majority of the public is ignorant both of economic, social and historical issues affecting them. The utter incompetence of the average person to soberly contemplate the affairs of state is perhaps an insurmountable obstacle to true democracy, whether one agrees with the ideal or not. With the breakdown of national and cultural homogeneity another layer has been added on to mere ignorance. The populace no longer has a common goal, a common heritage or common moral framework. What incentive exists for investment in an incomprehensible system that governs a populace that you share no bond with? Dumas famously stated that “Majorities are only the evidence of that which is.” The electoral privilege is one without a mandate. As such it relies on the citizenry or members of the organization to self-incentivize and exercise that right. It would appear that in every such case there exists sufficient apathy to prevent any real involvement with ‘that most sacred right’ until conditions get so poor a state of war exists between the organization and its general membership.

carol-martel1.jpgThe ideas presented in Michel’s book have enormous implications. The liberty movement acknowledges that men are inherently unequal, yet we struggle accepting and implementing the concept. Leadership and authority are as popular as typhus, yet there still seems to be a question as to the disparity of results between the alt-right and the liberty movement. We generate our own groupthink and mantras (BFYTW, Cloud/Dirt People ect.) and have the same tepid participation in the direction of the movement. I have no reason to suspect that any form of government we could implement would differ significantly in its machinations with the exception of some boilerplate about freedom and liberty with a pro forma ‘Constitution’ as toothless to the nature of man as our current one is. We bifurcate the spectrum of society in many different ways to describe exactly what Michels observed. Predator and prey, players and spectators, high and low class, and the list goes on. One could hypothesize that the construct of the government matters less than the character of the men inhabiting it. A noble monarch and aristocracy is preferable to a self-serving president and greedy Congress. A democracy made up of men of the highest character is preferable to a weak-willed monarch and corrupt aristocracy. Michels reached the same grudging conclusion, yet ends a spectacular tour de force with a half-hearted screed against aristocracy that would make Marx proud.

An oligarchy already exists within this movement, within your community, within your family and within your workplace. If you haven’t noticed, then you’re probably not in it friendo. Rather than bemoan the fact that human nature creates and seeks hierarchy, seek to create a culture of excellence. The choice of whether you are a part of the oligarchy in your respective organization or not is up to you. Whether your children are is tangentially up to you. Call it the oligarchy or the movers and shakers if it makes you feel better, but make the choice every morning and live with the consequences. Go read Michels and Lagardelle, let them challenge your thinking and provide a different perspective. Disagree if you’d like, Michels certainly generated significant blowback with his assertion, though the best his detractors could come up with was a few exceptions that could fit on one hand. Those interested in further study should pursue elite theory and read more of Hobbes and Aristotle. Don’t be a pseudo-intellectual sitting in an echo chamber of endless kitschy acronyms. Think for yourself and use a rational argument. Who am I kidding, let the circular firing squad close ranks and extinguish aberrant opinions or challenges to your assumptions. A conservative candidate who should present himself to his electors by declaring to them that he did not regard them as capable of playing an active part in influencing the destinies of the country, and should tell them that for this reason they ought to be deprived of the suffrage, would be a man of incomparable sincerity, but politically insane.  Who says organization, says oligarchy. 


-Jesse James

The Resistance


We keep hearing [I’m part of] “The Resistance” spewing out of various public figures. These spews should be addressed.

Terms Used in Unconventional Warfare (UW)

[Current] Joint doctrine defines UW as activities conducted to enable a resistance movement or insurgency to coerce, disrupt, or overthrow a government or occupying power by operating through or with an underground, auxiliary, and guerrilla (sic) force in a denied area. (JP 3-05)

More recently, published Public Law defines UW as “activities conducted to enable a resistance movement or insurgency to coerce, disrupt, or overthrow a government or occupying power by operating through or with an underground, auxiliary, or guerrilla (sic) force in a denied area.” [Public Law 114-92 Sec. 1097, S.1356 — 114th Congress (2015-2016), National Defense Authorization Act for FY 2016]

zrcqe0v6jdmdalcm9liaResistance Movement: An organized effort by some portion of the civil population of a country to resist the legally established government or an occupying power and to disrupt civil order and stability. (JP 3-05)

Insurgency: The organized use of subversion and violence to seize, nullify, or challenge political control of a region. Insurgency can also refer to the group itself. (JP 3-24) (Emphasis ours.)

Now to the heart of the thing:

Seditious conspiracy (18 U.S.C. § 2384):

If two or more persons in any State or Territory, or in any place subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, or to oppose by force the authority thereof, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States contrary to the authority thereof, they shall each be fined or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both.

Now we see current and former politicians and the deep state (collectively, the Underground), the media (Auxiliary), and the various violent movements (BLM, Antifa, etc., loosely, Guerillas) engaged in seditious conspiracy. Ever wonder how all those spontaneous uprisings occurred in many places simultaneously?

All resistance movements are externally sponsored and supplied. To whom does this “resistance” answer?

Next is an appeal to the UN or World Court or somesuch (EU?) for “legitimacy.” We keep hearing how the current administration is illegitimate, so the “resistance” needs “legitimacy.” Things to watch for:

• Maintain Alignment of Resistance Campaign Activities with     Resistance Narratives and Legitimacy
• Synchronize Resistance Operations and Activities Across Boundaries
• Expand Resistance Controlled Territory
• Employ [PSYOP] Messaging to Delegitimize Adversary and   Legitimize Resistance
• Provide Civil-Military Support … and Expand and Prepare Resistance Capacity for Governance
If this comes to pass, then a shift from counter-revolutionary activities to counterinsurgency is in order.

If a legitimate international authority (IA) recognizes this “resistance” as a Resistance [movement], then it becomes more difficult to label it as terrorist/criminal. It has legal standing in war crimes, treaties, cease fires, etc. IA would want to mediate any agreements. IA would likely want any resistance member captured treated as a combatant rather than a criminal/terrorist. We don’t want any advantage regardless how minute shifting to them and it will, unless the Trump Administration steals a march and names them seditionists.

As John Boyd put it: ” For our success over the long haul and under the most difficult conditions, one needs some unifying vision that can be used to attract the uncommitted as well as pump up friendly resolve and drive and drain away or subvert adversary resolve and drive … a vision rooted in human nature so noble, so attractive that it not only attracts the uncommitted and magnifies the spirit and strength of its adherents, but also undermines the dedication and determination of any competitors or adversaries…. A grand ideal, overarching theme, or noble philosophy … within which individuals as well as societies can shape and adapt to unfolding circumstances – yet offers a way to expose flaws of competing or adversary systems.”

“The Resistance” lacks that, and will never have it. They are base. They are ignoble. They are without honor. They are wrong.

Check out the website here: www.warriorcapitalist.com and here: Distributed Security Inc.


You should be reading this material, it will be on the final exam. Sage advice by good people, so if you don’t have the resume to form an opinion on the subject material then it’s a good place to start with monkey-see monkey-do. Caveat emptor, you may be exposed to ideas that make you feel uncomfortable and intrude on your safe space.

– JJ


Guest Post: The Russians are Coming…Maybe?

Hillary ran all over Trump for saying he might question election results. Obama started the fake news/hacking smokescreen the day after the election. Those items as separate obfuscation led to the ‘Russians’ did it by hacking, even as WikiLeaks told the world that insiders gave them the damaging emails and just after ‘our’ leaders were telling how safe and secure our election process was/is. Everyone who doesn’t agree with the Empire’s story is accepting “fake news” and this is in a ‘democracy with free speech’. To be a member of the ruling Empire requires both telling and believing lies.

We’ve been seeing titles like “Kremlin brought Trump to power”, “Moscow interferes in the internal affairs of other states”. It seems that ‘our free press’ have a never-ending supply of these. It doesn’t matter that the recent anti-Russian accusations have been supported by no actual facts, since ‘our free press’ decided to ignore Western intelligence agencies all saying that Russia’s meddling is the ‘fake news’ Obama warned us about and CNN has had to fire people and retract stories.

The mainstream media’s reporting on the ‘Russian hacking’ has most of the world collapsing in laughter. It’s so amateurish by any standards. The rest of the world knows America would never let itself be ‘hacked’ by a foreign country because hacking foreign countries is what the Empire does best. The idea of Russian ‘collusion’ in the ‘election’ as a tool towards toppling Trump becomes further implanted in the minds of the most eager activists. Pointing out these glaring flaws in the latest anti-Russia frenzy is immediately interpreted by cynics as ‘defending Trump’ when it isn’t.

_jy0Go_5hFP3ESUF8TTI7n76U0CIoF76S4747PEpvsIMoral certainty is always a sign of cultural inferiority. The more uncivilized the man, the surer he is that he knows precisely what is right and what is wrong. All human progress, even in morals, has been the work of men who have doubted the current moral values, not of men who have whooped them up and tried to enforce them. The truly civilized man is always skeptical and tolerant, in this field as in all others. His culture is based on “I am not too sure.” – H.L. Mencken

Wars are discussed as if they’re good options because of the unique mix of ignorance and political cowardice of the entire American political class. Most American politicians apparently believe their own silly propaganda about America’s military being ‘the best’ in the world with no evidence needed. Even those smart enough to realize that this is something nobody outside the Empire takes seriously, they know that saying that publicly is political suicide, so they keep on spewing the patriotic mantra about we are ‘the best’ etc. Some figure that since the Empire spends more on aggression that the rest of the planet combined, that must mean that America’s military must be ‘better’.

Something crazy inevitably happens, like in Syria recently where the State Department had one policy, the Pentagon another and the CIA yet another one. The resulting cognitive dissonance is removed by engaging in doublethink: ‘yes, we screwed up over and over, but we are still the best’. That attitude is at the core of the American inability to learn from past mistakes. If the choice is between an honest evaluation of past operations and political expediency, the latter always prevails. American soldiers are often more capable of self-critical evaluation, especially in the enlisted ranks: the problem is that civilians and generals rarely listen to them.

American foreign policy is wholly dependent on America’s ability to threaten using military force. Every country which dared to defy the Empire did that only after coming to the conclusion that America didn’t have the means to crush it militarily forgetting the potential for ‘arranged coups’. Historically only the weakest, which are already de-facto American colonies, fear the Empire but that’s been changing.

‘Voters’ ignore what they dislike in favour of the tidbits tossed to them to attract their attention. This leads to votes for the Hildabeast by those who prefer peace and in that process ignore all of the things she’s on public record for doing that certainly aren’t peaceful. Same thing with any other politician.

‘Our free press’ camouflages the unsavory history of American interventions in foreign nations using such means as electoral fraud, economic blackmail, political assassinations and the violent overthrow of governments. The post-Soviet Russian state has been on the receiving end of electoral manipulation directed by America. An American-directed IMF “emergency infusion” of many billion dollars into the Russian economy re-routed a large amount of this to the Western-backed pawn Boris Yeltsin who had been failing with a single-digit approval rating just before the Russian presidential elections of 1996.

The Empire is politically schizophrenic. The still unproven allegations of Russian hacking during the American presidential elections as well as that related to Trump being compromised by a blackmail operation conducted by Russian intelligence only serve to confirm that America has charged into a self-inflicted uproar. What about all the politicians who take money from the Saudis and Gulf emirates, or Sheldon Adelson, the zealous advocate of Greater Israel?  What about political payoffs to the flat-earth politicians who are Israel’s amen chorus? There’s no reason for us to believe that the Empire under Trump will contribute to the development of peace. All it can do, much like its predecessors, is cultivate “allies” to wage wars so that weapon systems remain a profitable commodity in the global market and that the economy keeps running without interruption.
‘Our’ unilateral military bloc is intentionally sowing chaos across the entire planet for a very specific purpose. It’s the same purpose all hegemons throughout human history have sought to divide and destroy regions they can’t directly conquer. A destroyed competitor may not be as favorable as a conquered, controlled and exploited competitor, but is certainly preferable to a free and independent competitor contributing to a greater multipolar world order. The Empire, by embedding itself in the chaos it’s created, as it’s proven in Afghanistan and Iraq, only ensures further chaos.

Using this chaos, the Empire can make certain if its own members can’t benefit from the region, no one else will. Everywhere the Empire goes, chaos stays indefinitely. America is no longer the super power it was, but it retains its military dominance and there’s a greater temptation to use it. When the Empire fights for influence it’s to “promote peace and stability in the region” and when Russia does, it demonstrates its “malign influence”, we’re told.

And now, the Empire/America is mixing it up in Africa in ways ‘our free press’ never speaks about so we’ll have more fun on the way. This isn’t about assisting the American military’s African partners in their fight against terrorism. It’s the continuing American Deep State’s fight for resources, to which ‘our’ government, and the corporations it supports, has no right; to insure that the governments of Africa are Western-centric, even if they need to give those governments a coup. It’s about insuring that those resources are only sold in dollars, and it’s to keep Russia and China away from those resources as well. As Chalmers Johnson said “Blowback is another way of saying that a nation reaps what it sows.”

Unfortunately, “we the people” are the ones who keep reaping what the government sows. We’re the ones who suffer every time, directly and indirectly, from the blowback. We’re made to pay trillions of dollars in taxes to a military/industrial complex that kills without conscience. We’ve been saddled with a crumbling infrastructure, impoverished cities and a faltering economy while our tax dollars are squandered on unrestrained military installations and used to prop up foreign economies. We’ve been stripped of our freedoms. We’re treated like suspects and enemy combatants.

We’re spied on by government agents: our communications read, our movements tracked, our faces mapped, our biometrics entered into a government database. We’re terrorized by militarized police who roam our communities and SWAT teams that break into our homes. We’re subjected to invasive physical searches in airports, roadside strip searches and cavity probes, forced blood draws. America will never be safe or secure as long as our government continues to pillage, plunder, bomb, kill, create instability, fund insurgencies, stockpile weapons of mass destruction and police the globe.


– Craig Dudley




Happy Whatever Day

Freedom without virtue is not freedom. I’m not sure if it is morally superior to have had a semblance of freedom and fritter it away through negligence, or never have had it in the first place. Enjoy the barbecues and family time. Whatever you do don’t think about the reason for the holiday, or the current state of the birthright you’ve been gifted. For the love of God don’t do that or you might realize the abject failure of conservatism and become radicalized and (gasp) useful. Consider the following words and how crazy those guys who actually believed, and more importantly ACTED on them were. No compromise, no quarter, no enemies to the right. 

Jesse James


The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America

When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. — Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.

He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.

He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.

He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their Public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.

He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.

He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected, whereby the Legislative Powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.

He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.

He has obstructed the Administration of Justice by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary Powers.

He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people and eat out their substance.

He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.

He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil Power.

He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:

For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:

For protecting them, by a mock Trial from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:

For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:

For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:

For depriving us in many cases, of the benefit of Trial by Jury:

For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences:

For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies

For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:

For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.

He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.

He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.

He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation, and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & Perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.

He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.

He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our British brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these united Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States, that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. — And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.

Trump: The Way Forward

Turning and turning in the widening gyre
The falcon cannot hear the falconer;
Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.

– W. B. Yeats

With the recent developments in the current plot to depose Trump, the president must now take a different tack to see the end of his term. The incestuous relationship between Robert Mueller and James Comey precludes the possibility of the former having any untainted findings or decisions. The legacy media has now morphed itself into some demented Fifth Column super-PAC that produces assassination porn and is in no small part responsible for the recent attempt on GOP Congressmen. I find it difficult to believe that they would be any sort of bulwark against purely political findings by Mueller. The tattered remains of the political norm inside the Beltway were shredded when Comey admitted to leaking faux ‘memos’ to the press in order to push for a special counsel, and a Maddow acolyte took Loretta Lynch’s words to heart and tried to kill ‘conservatives.’ The majority of the public has finally been introduced to the true nature of Washington politics, the law is what you can get away with and the truth is only what you can prove. The naive moral equivalency argument and the laughable assertion that the office or process must be respected or in any way preserved under the current climate must be shelved by the Trump administration if it is to survive.

Damigo-imageThe argument among constitutionalists and the perennial ‘never-Trump’ wing of the Grand Old Cuck party is that somehow by a unilateral show of force by the executive branch the office and delicate balance of the respective branches will be upset. The argument given relies on the condition that an out of control Trump would set in motion a series of events that would be significantly worse than our current situation. I fail to see how the threat of a derailed government is worth consideration if we are already there. The entire fetid organization is  a case study on dysfunction, the political violence, Congress in rebellion, a politicized judiciary and the state coffers empty in the majority of the populated regions of the US. The prisoner’s dilemma the cucks and communists are attempting to convince the public of doesn’t hold water. Why should anyone participate in this farce if the consequences for not doing so are no worse than continuing to support a fiction only slightly less believable than Bigfoot. Trump should act as things are, he is the de facto leader of a one faction in a cold civil war. Rather than continuing to participate in the theater of the Beltway, both he and the remnant of traditional Americans would be better served if he wielded every ounce of his power against ‘the resistance.’ If the Democratic Party seeks to be the Boxcar Party™ and truly be a government in exile, then the Trump administration should treat them as the seditious clear and present danger they are.

The communist revolutionaries and weepy-eyed RINOs can keep the ‘dignity of the office’ and the ‘balance of power,’ because the efficacy of both thus far has been negligible. The respect for a system or method of political selection and governance only functions when both sides are willing to participate and accept the outcome of the process as valid. The ‘conservatives’ should have long ago taken this tack when it became clear the government represented a marriage of corporate lobbying and professional grifters rather than anything written on a piece of paper 226 years ago. Were Trump to wildly exceed the limits Obama was able to push the Executive Branch, it would be just another hole in the Titanic. Fundamentally it would change nothing, except to more effectively deal with the government in exile currently sabotaging his presidency. The union of states is still involuntary, SCOTUS still legislates from the bench and Congress still steals from you. The Executive Branch will become tyrannical, and as Lincoln so aptly illustrated, the power of a president in a time of civil unrest can be immense.

belbaltlag_detailNeither the Boxcar Party™ nor the RINOs have acted in anything resembling good faith, but have insisted the political discourse move from the ballot box to the bullet box. The rate of change within the Trump administration and our own lives must approach the same rate at which it is happening in America if the Executive Branch is to remain a functioning organ of government. Rather than resist this new role of utterly partisan behavior, we should acknowledge that the Republic is dead and move on. If it is possible to use a temporary ally in the Executive Branch as a club to inflict damage on those who would kill me and mine, then I absolutely will take that calculated gamble. The alternative is a successful coup and premature return to the entire federal government viewing me as a tax slave at best, and sub-human the more likely possibility.

Far too few people are willing to acknowledge their own countrymen are quite eager and very open about their desire to kill and murder over political ideology. Despite the insistence that the magic dirt between our shores somehow insulates our baser political instincts, democide and regicide have been a staple of human existence throughout recorded history. We have been gifted a multitude of tweets and audio showing the intentions of the ‘resistance’ and their glee at one of their own trying his hand at starting the revolution. Both the Trump administration and you must pick a side. Beck and the GOP may sit on opposite sides of the proverbial field from those in the patriot movement uncomfortable with nationalism, populism, monarchy, ancaps or constitutionalists. However, both are irrelevant because both are spectators. Neither willing to admit that silence in the face of evil is evil itself. I refuse to passively wait for my turn in a shallow ditch. The way forward for Trump is to actively support anyone and anything that reduces the ability of the enemy to act, influence and finance their war, popularity and politics be damned. The way forward for our movement is much the same. Show up to rallies, get active with the younger people in the movement and if you’re too crippled to do that then fund those who can. Yeah you might get uncomfortable around some of the people, you might get hurt, you might even get shot by some psychotic Bernie supporter. What kind of men have we become if that is a sufficient reason to hoard a few more insipid days of mediocrity at the cost of your character and your country? Show up and influence things at a local and state level, there are no enemies to the right in this fight.


– Jesse James

Guest Post: An Empire with no Barbarians

The American print and TV media are servants of the police state. This makes the US media the principal threat that Americans face. The US media is the handmaiden of war, the police state, lies, and evil. The presstitutes have no shame over their lack of integrity and the risk of thermo-nuclear war to which they expose humanity.Paul Craig Roberts

‘Our free press’ consistently performs well below the already extremely low expectations most have for it. In the days since WikiLeaks released more than 8,000 documents detailing the CIA’s global covert hacking program, our ‘free press’ barely acknowledged it happened.  Considering how much America’s media loves to babble about spies and hacking, you would expect around-the-clock coverage and analysis of these leaks. Then again, why would the CIA want to report about its own crimes?

Fact-free, evidence-free accusations that just happen to align with CIA agendas are passed off as ‘news’ and anyone who questions the ‘authorities’ is slandered as ‘promoting fake news’ in the current state of doublespeak in the Empire. The first hint we had of ‘fake news’ was the day after the ‘election’ when Obama told us about its existence. Some ‘consumers’ believe a top-down “rescue” is coming, and if they can hold on, everything will be ok. The country is falling apart in so many ways it’s hard to list, but consider just a few like infrastructure, pensions, healthcare, and schools. So what do we do? Spend more cash on doing our best to rule the world using the military: ‘Guns and butter’ that never seems to benefit the populace at large.

Federal-Government-Corporation-Overlaps-Goldman-SachsThe sincerity of the Trump’s claim that he wants to “Make America Great Again,” could be demonstrated with the rebuilding of America’s infrastructure. That would actually return national economic value in form of increased jobs and increased economic efficiency and profitability. The wars with China, Iran, Syria and Russia that Trump’s team, or those in his government, are intent on pursuing is worse than a stupid waste of scarce national resources. It seems he forgot his campaign pomposity, or was made an offer he couldn’t refuse.

I hear the radio telling me I have to worry but they’re wrong and amusing. Look at all of the things I worried about that never happened. We can be sure the ‘deep state’ will continue to act as they have, so worry is the wrong word. There is little to no doubt their crimes will continue unchecked by ‘our’ law enforcement agencies…paging James Comey as the latest exhibit. I’ve been told it’s good to be witty when describing ‘our’ government’s actions, but I don’t have to do anything more than present their words and actions as that’s funny enough, in a sad way, if you have any historical perspective.

Russia has reduced its military budget by nearly 25%. This comes at a difficult time, as America has announced intentions to expand its tools for murder and theft by $ 54 billion yearly. That would be an increase greater than all that the Russians would be spending. Putin must be maneuvering into the victim’s role. Perhaps this is why the deep state under Trump directed the Empire’s hostility towards China and Iran who seem to be more grateful enemies: their armament expenditures are still increasing.

NATO is now wondering if Russia can still maintain the ‘Russian threat’ to Finland, Sweden, the Baltic States, Montenegro, and Ukraine. The insurrection against Kiev could collapse in the absence of a commitment by Russia. This could be a bad example because we need military spending to prop up a flagging national economy. NATO’s eastward expansion has been wasted, unless the Russians are bluffing. While American bases and ships increasingly surround China and Russia, the surrounded become the aggressors and aggressive American imperialists whine about their victim-hood. America is the worlds’ largest arms exporter, surpassing the collective production and sale of the next five leading merchants of death. We couldn’t sell so many weapons if there was no ‘threat’ that needed to be answered. America’s military/industrial complex are the winners of confrontation with Russia, closely followed by the hierarchy of NATO who has been chasing justification for their existence for years. As long as the military/industrial complex owns ‘our’ government, there will be international friction, but American spy satellites will continue to be carried on rockets powered by Russian engines.

America is a one-party state but, with typical American overindulgence, we have two of them. Candidates represent Goldman Sachs, Wall Street and several corporations. Americans respect government less each day. Many of us are obsessed with the idea of ‘absolute invulnerability’ for ourselves, and my extension our country, which implies absolute vulnerability for everybody else. ‘Our government’ hopes that by encircling the world with military bases, and aggressively inserting itself where ‘necessary’, it can prevent the emergence of any challenge that will weaken the Empire as global superpower.  America’s future rests on its ability to derail economic integration of its targets and succeed in the Great Game where others have failed.

Empires have no integrity, morality, compassion, self-awareness, or truth. We’re told everyone knows that Russia is an opponent, an adversary, but what does that mean? It is classic empire talk. Whenever the Empire encounters a country that isn’t sufficiently subservient and compliant, those are some of the labels that are pasted on it. Imperial adjectives like assertive and independent oftentimes are introduced. If Russian “meddling” in American elections is considered to be a bad thing, then why does ‘our government’ meddle in elections and other domestic politics in other countries?

Kiev before and after US ‘assistance’
‘Our free press’ and political animals never mention Langley’s interventions in other countries when they suspect that Russia meddled in ‘our’ election. Why not? If it’s bad for government to meddle in foreign elections, then why have the Pentagon, CIA, USAID, State Department, and other elements of ‘our’ national-security establishment been doing it in other countries for decades. When we talk about American meddling in the political affairs of other countries, we aren’t talking about scheming. We’re talking about bribery, kidnapping, assassination, embargoes, coups, invasions, and occupations with lots of death, destruction, suffering, and corruption. Ask people from Cuba, Vietnam, Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, Panama, Grenada, Chile, Guatemala, Congo, Yemen, Libya, Syria, and lots of other countries around the world that have been at the receiving end of American ‘assistance’.

Don’t forget the recent American regime change operation in Ukraine. You know the one that just coincidentally led to a big crisis with Russia, which then provided increased budgets for the Pentagon. The Trump/Russia ‘burning issue’ won’t lead media ‘consumers’ to do any soul-searching over the interfering which ’our government’ has been doing in the whole world so let’s enjoy the amusing and hypocritical spectacle.

Apparently most ‘consumers’ assume that global sea-change events just happen randomly, and that the elites are stupid, uninvolved or oblivious, and that all outcomes are a matter of random chance.  These people are idiots, who have a bias, nurtured by decades of indoctrination by ‘education’ and media propaganda, causing them to deny the potential for ‘conspiracy’, no matter the evidence. It’s not crazy to suspect that there are groups in power, perhaps for many generations, which aggressively seek to predict or even force particular outcomes in geopolitics for their own profit. History is rife with examples of just that. By profit, I don’t necessarily mean material wealth. In many cases, the power of influence and psychological sway over the masses might be considered a far greater prize than money or property.

Managed chaos is Washington’s foreign policy. That’s why there’s no strong, stable, secular governments that can provide security for their people in any of the countries the Empire has destroyed, because this long string of failed states that now stretches from North Africa, through the Middle East and into Central Asia create a permanent justification for ‘our’ military intervention as well as strategic access to vital resources. Why waste money and time on nation building which runs counter to America’s strategic objectives? The Empire unilaterally attacks because it’s the investigator, the prosecutor, the judge, and the jury. This is called global leadership by those who have no conscience: Air strikes are the easy way to look tough without fixing anything. It’s most amazing that ‘consumers’ continually believe humanitarianism is the goal of American wars. No one is asking why America ought to believe itself to be authorized to interfere anywhere as it does.
Terrorist attacks serve some of three political purposes: create a reason to increase centralized power, increase state surveillance and/or decreased freedom for ‘consumers’. Create an excuse for a military intervention, or all-out war on foreign soil, as 9/11 was so used. Undermine the security of a target government, forcing them to commit resources to a war, or else turn the government’s response into a reason to attack them like the Empire did in Syria, and Libya. Throughout history, terrorist attacks, from the Reichstag fire, to Chechnya, and 9/11, have served the interests of established power structures. This correlation is not coincidental.

It is reasonable to conclude that terrorism occurs to scare people into accepting the expansion and largess of ‘our’ American military industrial complex. At the end of the Cold War, America has suddenly found itself an Empire without Barbarians.

 Craig Dudley


IMG_3066Like badthink? Support it and make a statement with some cool designs from 144:1. He’s got some new decals for your beer fridge or car window and of course the classic resistor patch and VFS patch. Father’s Day is coming up, if you need an excuse. I plug because I care, no shekels were exchanged for this advertisement. 


Friends and Allies

It is essential to keep in mind that in a teleological theory the good is defined independently from the right. This means two things. First, the theory accounts for our considered judgments as to which things are good (our judgments of value) as a separate class of judgments intuitively distinguishable by common sense, and then proposes the hypothesis that the right is maximizing the good as already specified. Second, the theory enables one to judge the goodness of things without referring to what is right. – John Rawls (A Theory of Justice)

The striking feature of the utilitarian view of justice is that it does not matter, except indirectly, how this sum of satisfactions is distributed among individuals any more than it matters, except indirectly, how one man distributes his satisfactions over time. – John Rawls (A Theory of Justice)

If you missed the PATCON this past weekend, I highly recommend you attend the next one. No crowd is without their idiots, but if you can look past the incessant stream of insipid one-liners of a couple, the vast majority are there to learn and make contacts. One of the things discussed was improving attendance and specifically among those not eligible for AARP memberships. Doing so requires us to collectively reach out to the Millennials and Gen Xers in a way that they are receptive to and understand. Conflicts often make strange bedfellows, consider the relationships between the Greek city-states in the Greco-Persian War as one example. The Greeks learned the difference between friends and allies the hard way. The way forward, if you want to be relevant at all, is to learn this lesson and accept it. Alexander Kerensky is famous for his line of ‘no enemies to the left.’ Others on the right have said much the same thing, there are no enemies to the right. What we have done has gotten us the results we have now, if you want something other than that, then we need to change what is giving us these results. We are all aware what the definition of insanity is.

Screen-Shot-2017-02-02-at-8.55.13-PMSoccer moms, the neoJacobins and the blue-haired genderfluid college students are all united under the religion of the state. While they may all have varying tactics and platforms, the goal is the same. The destruction of Western culture and the subsumption of every aspect of humanity under the government. Any step in that direction, by whatever means, no matter how small is acceptable. An essential aspect of statism, and communism in particular is the amoral component to it. The only virtue of communism is increasing state control. If accomplishing that requires you to shoot people kneeling in a shallow ditch or starve an entire nation of men, women and children, then it is a moral act. If history is any indication there is no act of depravity that someone, somewhere will not do to usher in this ‘utopia’ of theirs. Much of this goes back to Bentham, Hegel and the utilitarian school of thought. The ‘greater good’ fractures any moral compass of the believer, replacing it with permission to do any act which ‘benefits’ the ‘whole.’ What the greater good is, what benefit means, and what the whole is cannot be defined except on an individual level. As Satanist Aleister Crowley put, ‘do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law.’ Utilitarianism is exactly that. You define the greater good, you define what benefits the whole. Whatever you do within that context is moral, whether it is pedophilia, genocide or torture. Those concepts matter, because you are living in that world right now and the consequences of those philosophies. Philosophies may not be the sword that cuts your head off, but it directs the hand that holds the sword. At times we need to be reminded of exactly the nature of the evil we face, and what the consequences of failure are. You will get no quarter.

The concept of an ally is in one the words that we derive it from, ligare. You may recognize it as the root word of ligament and possibly religion, though there is debate on that. Simply put, it means to bind together. It implies the two things are not homogenous in nature, nor would they be naturally together absent an external force. The right is far more heterogeneous than the left is, both philosophically and socially. The structure is one of the free market of ideas, with intense competition and conflict. The left is far less interested in internal feuds, and their internal hierarchy is much more of a Soviet nature. Conservatives are far more interested in fighting Trump than the neoJacobins itching to turn Kathy Griffin’s photo op into reality. Rather than focus on the defeat of the existential enemy, we fight those who would be our allies. It has translated into one defeat after another, ‘conservatives’ have not conserved gun rights, traditional marriage, sane fiscal policy, borders, education, or a semblance of the free market. The venom and backstabbing has been reserved for the electorate and the few who were willing to attempt to conserve anything. We are more focused on the pro-Con/pro-King/pro-anarchy debate than preventing or winning a Yugo-style war or the North American genocide. We pretend this is not the case, or have a degree of cognitive dissonance that would make Hillary blush.

P1040178.jpgThe patriot/liberty movement is purported to be made up of adults and people who ‘get it.’ If that is indeed the case then perhaps acting like the modern equivalent of the Scottish nobles at Irvine is not the way to approach things. Put your big boy pants on and realize that anyone who despises and wants to eliminate the people who seek the death of your culture is a potential ally. Some of the opinions given by people in this movement are the height of naiveté or woefully ignorant of the philosophical and historical precedent surrounding them. I could spend hours being a boor and fighting with people, many of whom would be far better served reading the source material referenced by the authors. I don’t because I hate those seeking to destroy me and my country enough to put aside personal slights. I don’t care what you want to have in your little AO, whether it is a king or an ancap wet dream. The preceding condition we can all agree on is that the statists have to be gone before any of this can occur. Nothing else matters if that condition is not met. I fear if this internecine fighting continues we will be still arguing about how much better anarchy is than the Constitution as a statist blows your brains out. Congratulations, your ego killed your family, your culture and your country.

A friend is someone that is significantly higher on the relationship scale and it would seem many in the liberty movement conflate the two. I’m not asking us to agree on everything; I’m not asking you to kiss them and buy them dinner. However, if you cannot work with someone based on the simple statement that communism and it’s child socialism needs to be removed from the continent as a requirement of our continued existence then you are irrelevant at best. What kind of person would put their ego over their family? Those who survived Holdomore, or the Bolshevik Revolution, the killing fields of Khmer Rouge or the Armenian genocide would assure you that I am not speaking hyperbolically. Smart people who see the wheels coming off our society are looking for answers and allies. Don’t further reinforce the ignorant old white man that hates everyone meme. We will need every single person who isn’t on board with putting you in the ground, so stop requiring them to fit to your impossibly narrow definition of bosom buddies.

The alt-right are our natural allies and have the youth that the liberty movement desperately needs. Traditional conservatives are aging out, the average age of someone who reads National Review is 66 and the majority of the liberty movement is easily 55-60. In a decade the term irrelevant will be optimistic if the younger generation is not incorporated into it. Age will kill us all as surely as a communist will and your ideology dies with you if it is not transmitted to the younger generation. Contrast that with the alt-right being 25-30 and far more adept at driving the political and social conversation in the US than any of us have been. It was not the liberty movement that started the ‘sick Hillary’ story, nor did they influence the election like the alt-right has. You may not agree with the neo-reactionary, reactionary or identitarians of the movement. Again I drag you back to the idea that the political disagreements be put on hold until the existential conflict is over. A sea change has occurred and 2017 is not 2015, a new player has arrived on the block and new methods of communication and propaganda exist. The younger alt-right can benefit from the experience, expertise and knowledge that many of you have, if you can simply put aside your ego and distain. Familiarize yourself with /pol, Voat, Gab and who the players are on Twitter. Go to a few Proud Boys meetings. You may be surprised and learn something, and be able to share something with them. I don’t need friends, I need allies and so do you. Be willing to do what is necessary to stop the threat, and working with someone you don’t like is only the beginning of how far I’m willing to go. Love enough to do what is necessary, with who is necessary…or make your peace with the consequences of ideological purity and embrace the darkness enveloping this country.

Jesse James

So you want a counter-culture?

Traditions, rituals and ceremonies take centuries to build, and can be lost in an instant. Be careful of your inheritance. – Unknown

The nuclear family must be destroyed…whatever its ultimate meaning, the break-up of families now is an objectively revolutionary process. – Linda Gordon

Since marriage constitutes slavery for women, it is clear that the women’s movement must concentrate on attacking this institution. Freedom for women cannot be won without the abolition of marriage. – Sheila Cronin

“Tribe.” How can there be tribe without clans? How can there be clans without extended families? How can there be extended families without patriarchy? How can clans become tribes without a chief? Indeed, how can there be families at all with divorce, contraception and infanticide and a ‘working ‘mother’? And as far as community goes, can you think of a people less prone to coalesce into community than Americans? – SFC Steven M Barry USA RET


Inevitably when I or others will write an article pointing out the latest example of degeneracy or graft within our culture, someone will demand a solution. While I understand the sentiment, it is neither my responsibility to do your thinking for you, nor do I have the time to do so. My time and effort are directed at starting the conversation and highlighting the problem, so that you may consider it and develop an educated opinion and response to it. The solutions that many are looking for lie close to home, and necessarily include relevant factors in your life that are unique to yourself and your family. Given that fact, the following is indeed just that…a solution. I don’t have all the answers and this isn’t the end of the discussion, but it’s certainly a start. You may not approve, you may not like it, and it certainly is not politically correct. Consider this your trigger warning.

main-qimg-16ad56230d254d7e2ed6cedf206c93e8-cThe current culture in the US is one of a carrion bird, feeding on the remains of that created by better men. Those who rail against implicit whiteness and conjure specters of klansmen at the mere mention of dairy products enjoy the fruits of those they hate whenever they adjust the thermostat and enjoy the luxury of vehicular or air travel. What is lacking from this lifestyle and worldview is sustainability. In the business world the difference between profit and loss is often wafer thin, and asinine things such as which of the dozens of new genders you are or whether someone is ‘man-spreading’ at a desk is the last thing people who value a paycheck consider. I’ve lost count of how many interviews I have done with people emotionally and psychologically unfit to deal with the authority and structure of a business. Their parents utterly failed to equip them to succeed even in the most nominal way in the world. Added to this is the drastic decrease in the workforce of jobs that produce tangible goods and colleges becoming little more than a conduit for service industry workers. It is worth noting that the vast majority of service industry and retail jobs simply cannot generate the kind of revenue required to sustain a family, even on both incomes. Some is directly attributable to the tax burden associated with every employee a business hires and the rest is the low skill required to perform such tasks.  The economic opportunity for large or even medium sized families is simply not there for many in larger cities who refuse to consider a trade or see it as beneath their station in life. Modern American culture has significantly degraded the economic viability of the family.

While part of the consideration for the declining birth rate, the economics of the family are not the only means by which it is being destroyed. Inculcated from birth to treat men as disposable at best and a dangerous threat at worst, rather than a potential mate, an entire generation of women has been stripped of their maternal instinct. If results are any indication, the goal of third-wave feminism has been to turn women into angrier and more neurotic versions of men. Equal parts unbearable to be around and unemployable, they drift from one meaningless relationship to another, celebrating their ‘liberation’ while collecting cats to fill the void. It is tragic to watch these deeply conflicted human beings emotionally and psychologically contort themselves in an effort to deny the attributes encoded within them at a genetic level. Men on the other hand have either rejected the traditional male archetypes present within their lives, or as the children of dysfunctional families have elected to parrot that behavior in their own life. A significant portion of the alt-right has been the worthy, though utterly preventable, search of millennials to rediscover what it means to be a man. We are told that traditional male characteristics are to be avoided at all costs and as feminists try to become the new men, men have taken to becoming the new women. In a self-flaggelating homage to the god of ‘progress’ both sexes have turned themselves into an androgynous mass of humanity, neither fit to fulfill the role needed of them in a functional marriage. Modern American culture has nearly destroyed the emotional and psychological viability of the family.

david-face-760x985The family is the most basic unit of interpersonal relationships, and thus my focus on modern culture’s destruction of it. A counter-culture porting over 80% of the existing culture is not countering anything. The conservative movement did this with no success for the last several decades. Rather than conserving anything, they were happy to play the political resistance movement to the statists while the cultural of traditional America disappeared. A counter-culture is NOT a political disagreement, but a repudiation of the prevailing political, economic and social norms of the day and the concomitant value system. If you are unwilling to reject the anti-Christian and anti-Western influence on a personal level, then why would I ever believe that you would on a corporate level. Those unwilling to take the mantle of leadership on and implement traditional values in their own lives are simply play acting. The most obvious one and the most infrequently applied within the liberty movement and the gamut of conservatives is the structure of the household. A lot of men say a lot of things about ‘conservative’ values, yet it flies out the door at home. It must be truly difficult to implement a worldview when your personal and corporate ones are diametrically opposed in practice, if not in theory.

Patriarchy is now a dirty word, yet let us consider the alternatives. Patriarchy has created stable populations for over 5,000 years and is a direct contributor to the modern age we enjoy. Matriarchy or some confusing mishmash of household anarchy has given rise to what civilization exactly? This article conveniently lists six ‘modern’ societies that are matriarchal, and like Camille Paglia so eloquently stated they are living in the equivalent of grass huts. I certainly haven’t seen the Mosuo flag on the moon, and if they managed to erect the Notre-Dame de Paris there tomorrow it would only be 628 years too late. Patriarchy admits there is a moral component to the rearing of children and the roles each gender has. The organization of the family according to the Biblical hierarchy sees procreation as morally good and virtuous. Modern culture cannot even maintain a positive birth rate and will result in the extinction of its adherents. Contrary to the modern thirst for independence from everything and everyone, patriarchy is the recognition that dependence is a necessity and reality of life. We are dependent as children to our parents and as spouses on the roles of the other. As head of the family, the man recognizes his dependence on God for direction and guidance. Patriarchy represents a symbolic relationship at the family level, while modern society seeks to set all at war with all. Men and women are at war with their own nature, at war with each other and thanks to Margaret Sanger at war with their children and the natural reproductive cycle. The sheer destructiveness of this lifestyle is demonstrated by the fact that within two generations the West is no longer culturally, economically and biologically sustainable at it’s current course. Sadly, the results of a system in rebellion to natural law speak for themselves.

The counter culture I speak of is not a return but a rebirth of the West. It may never happen at a national level, but it can happen at a personal and local level. The rejection of the modern value system is a prerequisite of that. The differences I have with modern culture are that of first principles. I suspect my views are an anathema to many and offensive to even more. However, that is what is necessary to develop an actual counter-culture. The creation of culture is manifest in the home and is transmitted outside of that home by the father. The reason the institution of patriarchy is an anathema to statists (who seek to replace it) and feminists (who seek to eliminate it) is the very nature of that role. The defense of the family and by extension those proximate to such demand not an introverted view of the world, that of the maternal nurturer, but an extroverted view of the world, that of a watchman, a shepherd. Destroy that, and you create a culture unable to defend its weakest and most vulnerable from outside harm. I would argue you have created a culture unable to defend itself at all. Contrary to those blaming the women with bullhorns and signs for Roe v. Wade, it was a failure of us, western men, to lead and defend our families at a corporate level. We allowed the usurpation of our role in society and in the family. Destroy the nexus of moral and objective authority, and you destroy what relies on that, culture and ultimately civilization. The counter-culture starts at home and cannot rise to a corporate level if it is based on the same first principles that have taken us to the amoral, hedonistic society we currently have.

Some may find this topic unpalatable and those who do not subscribe to a Biblical worldview may not accept the Bible as a valid source of first principles. Without a detailed and lengthy discussion of theology and philosophy, I think a reasonable man can find a significant amount of empirical evidence supporting these assertions. Call it natural law or whatever terminology du jour you would like, but the structure looks much the same. To the women who read me, know that this is not a call to mistreatment of you. Rather it is a call to the roles we are genetically, emotionally and psychologically designed to fill and a return to sanity. It is abuse to use a screwdriver like a hammer, and I refuse to force the person I love most in this world to suffer that abuse because I am unwilling to be the hammer she needs and God calls me to be. Those curious about how oppressive and horrifying a life such as this is are more than welcome to contact me and you can ask the redhead yourself.

Jesse James