Reactionary election link roundup


Deogolwulf and another one.

Moldbug agrees: “Dear conservatives! Eat the pain! There are two kinds of Americans celebrating tonight – true believers, and right-wing extremists.”

I must say, I didn’t celebrate. I discovered who won on my way to the office when I caught a glimpse of the front page of the newspaper. It doesn’t really matter that much anyway.

– Speaking of “The Machine,” if we take DC voters as a proxy for the The Machine, then it voted for Obama by a margin on 91-7.

– Nydwracu on the election results in Maryland.

A vignette of democracy

Another one.

– Mangan’s analysis is more Heartiste than Sailer. More along those lines here.

Here’s Heartiste’s to round it out.


17 Responses to Reactionary election link roundup

  1. Michael says:

    Good stuff, thanks Foseti. Time and again you prove to be the best anthologist of material from this strange and enlightening little corner of the Internet.

  2. Handle says:

    Food for thought: My reduction of this election is that this was Carter vs. Reagan in a new America in which Reagan couldn’t win.

    Too much has changed in 32 years, in ways that cannot be unchanged, and that was the grand strategic goal all along.

    • Piglet says:

      This is my take as well. Reagan bought us a couple of decades, but that is all. By that point the left was already too strong to be rolled back, it could only be delayed. And the full scope of the problem was not yet visible. The level of political indoctrination one sees in education today would have seemed like a delusional fantasy back when there was still time to do something about it. I see a lot of very bright young people coming out of college in my work, and they might as well be aliens when it comes to their political assumptions. Things that looked like laughable reductio ad absurdum when discussed in, say, 1990, are now mainstream. I don’t know whether to laugh or cry. I think laugh, what the hell. Sic transit gloria mundi.

    • Toddy cat says:

      “Too much has changed in 32 years, in ways that cannot be unchanged, and that was the grand strategic goal all along.”

      Probably true, although Romney wasn’t as good a politician as Reagan, and Obama does PR better than Carter. But I also remember when the USSR looked unbeatable, back in 1975. Never give up, history and Providence have many surprises up their sleeve.

    • Matt says:

      I’m not sure this is right. The Republican narrative definitely had this as Carter vs. Reagan part 2, but Carter was the last bastion of a liberal milieu that extended back to JFK and maybe even Brown v. BOE. By the 80s, it had overreached significantly and people were ready for a change. Compare this to now, where after 8 years of Republican failure Obama played the role of Reagan more than Carter. When Romney stepped up, forced to play another Carter by his party’s orthodoxy, he was only saved from an outright landslide by Obama not being much of a Reagan.

      The Republican party needs a new paradigm, just like the Democrats needed one after Carter and Mondale. Bill Clinton gave them one, but it took a few years.

      The other interpretation, that this is all demographics and unstoppable, is basically despair. If so, then we are talking secession now and the only argument left is how it will be done.

      • SOBL1 says:

        Secession is possible: need red state with net energy/food surplus and a net plus or close to 0 federal tax receipts/outlays fiscal position. That’s my position. There are states where this is the situation. Would need a more populist sounding GOP governor who is anti-establishment to get rolling.

  3. […] Reactionary election link roundup « Foseti […]

  4. Toddy Cat says:

    “The Republican party needs a new paradigm, just like the Democrats needed one after Carter and Mondale. ‘

    Certainly wouldn’t argue with this. Besides, despair is a sin.

  5. spandrell says:

    The only way left to the Republicans is naked white nationalism.
    But they won’t get funded if they do. So they’re screwed.

  6. Thomas Fink says:

    Auster perplexed. Still don´t gets it and don´t publishes my comments since I sassed him.

    Because it´s related here it is:

    “13 million fewer (white) people voted in 2012 than in 2008.” Auster

    My dear Auster shill,

    There are now so many conservatives, traditionalists, reactionaries or whatever you call them and some of them even read your blog who do not go for the lesser evil meme any more and are out of the reach of what you think are rational politics and will make you eat the pain with every election to come until you repent and when you have met your creator and all the childless single white woman who are so enthusiastic about Obama have gone that way too the Amish who do not vote anyway will take over.

    This is the riddle of victory:

    100*0.8 =80
    40*0.8 =32
    16*0.8 =12.8

    4*4 =16
    8*4 =32
    16*4 =64

    Today: 280 : 24
    Tomorrow: 112 : 48
    After tomorrow: 44,8: 96

    Do you get it? (little help: It is secular milieu versus nonsecular milieu. “I will make you the father of nations.” It works by the virtue of the loins not by the vice of elections)

    • Handle says:

      Auster is a man of the right – a ruthlessly uncompromising Absolute Monarch – in no more poignant way than the total dictatorial control he maintains on his blog – the content, authorship, and standards of written English of the comments especially. In other words, good luck getting an email to him published on his site unless you’ve already struck up a friendship.

      All of which is fine by me. I just wish he would implement the Ace of Spades “Continue Reading” Java trick whereby Auster’s “More…” would expand in the same window instead of opening a new one, leaving the other posts available. Then again, would he even read an email suggesting that to him?

      • Thomas Fink says:

        “Auster is a man of the right – a ruthlessly uncompromising Absolute Monarch”, who endorses Romney and for whom the GOP is “a party of decent, nice businessman types”? He is “ruthlessly uncompromising” with his commenters but not in the field of philosophy and politics. And when I started to become aware of the inherent contradictions in his views and told him I went from respected commenter to psychopath. He is a “a social conservative who just doesn’t get it” as Ferdinand once wrote. Also he is a tool of the divide and conquer race war and antimuslim strategy of the elites.

      • Handle says:

        Also he is a tool of the divide and conquer race war and antimuslim strategy of the elites.

        Please be to so kind as to explain.

  7. PA says:

    I’m not a fan of Moldbug’s gay/spazzy prose style. I much better lime his genial, clear voice of the blog’s early days. That way also lakes it easier to forward the post to non-blog reading friends.

  8. Once again, a great collection of links, tks.

  9. Allan says:

    The Obama machine did even better
    than in Washington
    in parts of Philadelphia and Cleveland
    where they voted for Obama
    by a margin of 110-0

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: