Tuesday, June 27, 2017

Mailvox: the importance of posterity in the Preamble to the U.S. Constitution

Tublecane explores the implications of the historically correct interpretation of "posterity" in the Preamble to the U.S. Constitution:

I don't want to put words in Vox's mouth, but the upshot is the Proposition Nation doesn't exist. There is an American nation, but it has no power, and probably can't be restored. The U.S. government, which associates itself with the idea of a nation, doesn't have any such foundation.

The sine qua non of Voxism on the contemporary National Question, if I may be so bold as to assert it, is that we're headed for social and political disaster. The Frankenstein's Monster "nation" of the U.S.A. will fail and be eaten up by the bad sort of identity politics. The destructive tribalism is promoted and officially sanctioned by multiculturalism, and permitted, whether with or against its knowledge or will, by civic nationalism, Proposition Nationalism, Nation of Immigrantism, etc.

The practical solution is to, above all else, abandon the dead end of civic nationalism, which is a false creed. The posterity issue doesn't prove that fact, but it is rhetorically useful in helping to swat it down. Then, I think, the idea is to reform in smaller groups and start nation-building for reelz.

That is a reasonable summary, although I would say that the correct definition of posterity is useful in demolishing the false rhetoric of the civic nationalists used to justify their civic nationalism rather than say that it swats down civic nationalism per se. What will actually destroy civic nationalism is the societally destructive results of immigration, multiculturalism, and globalism proving the concept false.

I would also be remiss if I failed to point out that one error the civic nationalists insist on making over and over and over again is to conflate the genetic nation with the legal state, and to confuse posterity with the possession of state paperwork. One obvious sign that a civic nationalist is doing this is that they will refer to laws and court decisions in a categorically erroneous attempt to rebut historical and scientific facts.