In the wake
of the sending of bomb-like devices of uncertain capability to prominent
critics of US President Donald Trump and of a mass shooting at a Pittsburgh
synagogue (both Trump’s fault, of
course) – plus a migrant invasion approaching the US through Mexico – there
have been widespread calls for toning down harsh and “divisive” political
rhetoric. Of course given the nature of the American media and other
establishment voices, these demands predictably have been aimed almost
entirely against Trump and his Deplorable
supporters, almost never against the same establishment that unceasingly
vilifies Trump and Middle American radicals as literally Hitler, all backed up by the evil
White-Nationalist-in-Chief, Russian President Vladimir Putin.
Those
appealing for more civility and a return to polite discourse can save their
breath. It’s much, much too late for that.
When Trump
calls the establishment media the enemies of the people, that’s because they –
together with their passive NPC drones and
active Antifa enforcers – are enemies, if by “the people” we mean the
historic American nation. Trump’s sin is that he calls them out for what they
are.
Trump didn’t
cause today’s polarization, he only exacerbates it because he punches back.
Good, may he continue to do so. Pining for a more well-mannered time in a
country that belongs to another, long-gone era is futile.
American
politics is no longer about a narrow range of governing styles or competing
economic interests. It is tribal. Today’s “tribes” are defined in terms of
affinity for or hostility to the founding American ethnos characterized
by European, overwhelming British origin (a/k/a, “white”); Christian, mainly
Protestant; and English-speaking, as augmented by members of other groups who
have totally or partially assimilated to that ethnos or who at
least identify with it (think of Mr. Hamadura in The Camp of
the Saints).
(Unfortunately
we don’t have a specific word for this core American ethnic identity to
distinguish it from general references to the United States in a civic or
geographic sense. (Russian, by contrast, makes a distinction between
ethnic русский (russkiy) and civic/geographical российский (rossiiskiy).)
Maybe we could adapt Frank Lloyd Wright’s “Usonian”? “Or Americaner,” comparable to
Afrikaner? “Or Anglo-American”?)
Since the
Left gave up on its original focus on industrial workers as the revolutionary
class, the old bourgeois/proletarian dichotomy is out. Tribes now line up
according to categories in a plural Cultural Marxist schematic of
oppressor and victim pairings, with the latter claiming unlimited
redress from the former. As the late Joe Sobran said, it takes a lot of clout to be a
victim in America these days. The following is a helpful guide
to who’s who under the new dispensation:
|
Category
|
Oppressor
|
Victim
|
|
Sex
|
Male
|
Female
|
|
Race
|
White
|
“Person of Color” (POC)
|
|
Language
|
English
|
Non-English
|
|
Religion
|
Christian
|
Non-Christian
|
|
Sexual Orientation
|
“Cis”/“Straight”
|
|
|
Sovereign allegiance
|
US citizen
|
Non-US citizen
|
|
Legal status
|
Citizen/legal resident
|
Illegal/“Undocumented”
|
|
Criminality
|
Law-abiding
|
Offender
|
|
Origin
|
Native
|
|
|
Physical condition
|
Able
|
|
|
Economic
|
Self-supporting
|
Dependent
|
In most of
the above categories there are variations that can increase the intensity of
oppressor or victim status. For example, certified victimhood in a recognized
category confers extra points, like Black Lives Matter for race (it is racist
to suggest that “all
lives matter”) or a defined religious group marginalized by “hate”
(mainly anti-Jewish oranti-Muslim, but not something like
anti-Buddhist, anti-Rastafarian, or even anti-atheist or anti-Satanist because
no one bothers about them; anti-Christian victimhood is an oxymoron because
“Christian” is inherently an oppressive category). In addition, meeting the
criteria for more than one category confers enhanced victimhood under a
principle called “intersectionality.”
In the same
way, there are aggravating factors in oppressor categories, such as being a
policeman (an enforcer of the structure of oppression regardless of the
officer’s personal victim attributes, but worse if straight, white, Christian,
etc.) or a member of a “hate” subculture (a Southerner who’s not vocally self-loathing is a
presumed Klan sympathizer; thus, a diabetic, unemployed,
opioid-addicted Georgia cracker is
an oppressor as the beneficiary of his “white privilege” and “toxic
masculinity,” notwithstanding his socio-economic and health status). Like being
Southern, living while genetically Russian is
also an aggravating factor.
Creatively
shuffling these descriptors suggests an entertaining game like Mad Libs, or perhaps an endless series of
jokes for which you could be fired if you told them at work:
Two people
walk into a bar.
One is a
Baptist, straight, male Virginia state trooper whose ancestors arrived at Jamestown.
The other
is a one-legged, genderqueer, Somali Dervish WIC recipient illegally in the US on an
expired student visa.
So the bartender says
… [insert
your own punch line here].
While Patrick Buchanan is right that the level
of domestic violence today is not up to what the US experienced in 1968, the
depth of the existential divide is much greater. This is why it’s perfectly acceptable for a
homosexual, black MSM news anchor to describe “white men” collectively as a
“terror threat,” but when a straight white, female counterpart makes
a clumsy but mild observation about
ethnic role-playing it’s a firing offense. (Note that while
“female” is an assigned victim category, white females can be “gender traitors” if they are seen
as putting their “racial privilege ahead of their second-class gender status”;
to remain victims in good standing and an “allies” of higher-caste victim
groups they need to learn to just “shut the f**k up” when POC sisters with
superior oppressed status are holding forth.)
The victim
side accuses its opponents of a litany of sins such as racism, sexism,
homophobia, Islamophobia, etc., for which the solution is demographic and ideological
replacement – even while denying that the replacement is
going onor intended. This is no longer ordinary political
competition but (in an inversion of von Clausewitz attributed to Michel
Foucault) politics “as the continuation of war by other
means.” In its immediate application this war is a second American
civil war, but it can have immense consequences for war on the international
stage as well.
To attain
victory the forces of victimhood championed by the Democratic Party need to
reclaim part of the apparatus of power they lost in Trump’s unexpected 2016
win. (Actually, much of the apparatus in the Executive Branch remains in
Democratic hands but is only of limited utility as a “resistance” under the
superficial Trumpian occupation.) As this commentary appears it is expected
that on November 6 the GOP will retain control of the US Senate but the House
of Representatives will flip to the Democrats.
That’s what’s
“supposed” to happen, just as Hillary Clinton was “supposed” to win the White
House two years ago. How things will actually play out
though is anybody’s guess.
But for the
sake of discussion, if the expected scenario comes to pass the last chance Trump’s election
afforded to save what is left of the American nation is likely to come to an
end. We can anticipate three results:
- First, on the domestic
political front, while Democrats and their MSM echo chamber have cooled
down talk of impeaching Trump, it will return with a vengeance on November
7 (coincidentally, Great October Socialist Revolution Day)
if the House changes hands. In contrast to the GOP’s dithering in the area
of investigations and hearings relevant to the US-UK Deep State conspiracy to
overturn the 2016 election (which will be buried forever), the Democrats
will be utterly ruthless in using their power with the single-minded
purpose of getting Trump out of office before 2020. They won’t waste much
time on the phony Russian “collusion” story (Robert Mueller’s report will
be an obscenely expensive dud), they’ll focus like a laser on getting
Trump’s tax returns and dredging up anything they can from his long
involvement in the sharp-elbowed, dog-eat-dog world of New York property
development and construction, confident they can find something that
qualifies as a high crime or misdemeanor. (Some racist language couldn’t
hurt, either.) The model will be Richard Nixon’s Vice President Spiro Agnew,
who was forced out of office on charges relating to his time in Maryland
politics years earlier. Even the GOP’s retention of the Senate would be
far from a guarantee that Trump won’t be removed. It’s easily foreseeable
that a dozen-plus Republican Senators would be thrilled to get rid of
Trump and restore the party’s status quo ante with Mike Pence in
the Oval Office. As with Nixon, Republicans will panic at whatever dirt
the Democrats dig up and demand Trump resign for the “good of the country
and the party,” as opposed to the way Democrats formed a protective
phalanx around Bill Clinton. Unlike Nixon, Trump might choose to fight it
out in the Senate and might even prevail. In any case, a change in control
of just one chamber means an extended political crisis that will keep
Trump boxed in and perpetually on the defensive.
- Second, for Trump’s supporters and other dissenters
from the Regime of Certified Victims, the walls will continue to close in.
The digital ghettoization of alternative views to “protect
our democracy” from
supposed outside meddling conflated
with “hate
online” will accelerate, with social
media a particular target for censorship. The Deep
State’s intelligence and law enforcement organs will step up actions
to penalize
any resistance to Leftwing violence,
while perpetrators
of such violence will rampage with impunity.
Trump has done nothing to protect free speech online or in public places
while his enemies continue to contract the space for both – but things
can and likely will get much, much worse if
the Democrats feel the wind at their back after next week. Such vestigial
protections of religion, free speech, right to bears arms, and others that
we still possess – for now – aren’t
likely to survive much longer as the edifice of the old America continues
to crumble under the malfeasance of
the very Executive, Legislative, and Judicial officials who pretend to be
its custodians.
- Third and most ominously,
chances of a major war could increase exponentially. If Trump is fighting
for his life, chances of purging his terrible, horrible, no good,
very bad national security team will go from slim to none.
Any hope of a national interest-based policy
along the lines Trump promised in 2016 – and which still seems to be his
personal preference – will be gone. Thankfully, South Korea’s President
Moon Jae-in has run with the ball through last year’s opening and hopefully the momentum for
peace in Northeast Asia will be self-sustaining. With any
luck, the Khashoggi imbroglio between
Washington and Riyadh will lead to America’s “downplaying and eventually
abandoning the anti-Iranian obsession that has so far
overshadowed our regional policy” and to an end the carnage in Yemen, even
as the Syria war lurches toward
resolution. Still, the US remains addicted to ever-increasing
sanctions, and despite warnings from both Russia and China that
they are prepared for war – warnings virtually ignored by the US media and
political class – the US keeps pressing on all fronts: outer space, the
Arctic, Europe (withdrawal from the INF treaty), Ukraine, the South
China Sea, the Taiwan Strait, Xinjiang, and
elsewhere. Trump is expected to meet with Putin and Chinese President Xi
Jinping following the US election, but they may have to conclude that he
is not capable of restraining the war machine nominally under his command
and will plan accordingly.
