EXTREME POLITICS

On April 15, which in the United States is the day that yearly taxes must be filed, people of political persuasions closer to paleoconservatism held “Tea Parties” to protest rising tax rates levied against the upper half of the middle class. In Texas, some interesting results came out:

Texans are fed up with federal tax policies, and might get so fed up that they decide they want to secede from the union, Gov. Rick Perry told reporters today after he attended an anti-tax tea party rally in Austin.

“Texas is a unique place,” he said. “When we came into the union in 1845, one of the issues was that we would be able to leave if we decided to do that.

“My hope is that America and Washington in particular pays attention,” he said. “We’ve got a great union. There’s absolutely no reason to dissolve it. But if Washington continues to thumb their nose at the American people, you know, who knows what might come out of that. But Texas is a very unique place, and we’re a pretty independent lot to boot.”

At a tea party rally in Austin City Hall, chants of “Secede” could be heard during speeches.

Star-Telegram

This shows exactly how much libertarian economic ideas have infiltrated the moderate right (if nationalists are the far-right, and neoconservatives are the near right, then paleconservatives are most likely the moderate right, although illiterates will call them the far right).

Plato predicts this, of course:

And there is another class in democratic States, of respectable, thriving individuals, who can be squeezed when the drones have need of their possessions; there is moreover a third class, who are the labourers and the artisans, and they make up the mass of the people.

When the people meet, they are omnipotent, but they cannot be brought together unless they are attracted by a little honey; and the rich are made to supply the honey, of which the demagogues keep the greater part themselves, giving a taste only to the mob.

Their victims attempt to resist; they are driven mad by the stings of the drones, and so become downright oligarchs in self-defence.

Then follow informers and convictions for treason.

Plato, The Republic

Why does the right love libertarianism? Because it seems like it will defend them against this mob. The right is composed mostly of middle-class, suburban, Caucasian and East Asian voters. They want to be able to be responsible, earn money, and take most of it home.

The problem is that libertarianism, by enforcing de facto anarchy, will actually deplete their power by giving the masses the mandate toward “freedom” — which they will promptly use to organize themselves to crush the bourgeoisie/middle class. The masses want their freedom too, which takes the form of leaders who will continue to penalize the upper half of the middle class, as Barack Obama is, in order to appease its voters.

It happened in France, Russia, Greece and Rome, but in America it may take on a more civil form. After all, the masses have the numbers; they can simple vote themselves into power. As the moderate right complains about Barack Obama, I wonder how many of them have read history, and know what else is to come. Until they find some way of countering the power of this mass, they’re doomed.

Any philosophy like anarchy or libertarianism which tries to liberate us, as if by an invisible hand, from government, is oblivious to the consequences of lawlessness. With no goal except “freedom,” the tendency to form a crowd that beats up on the people with money or power is unchecked.

What I think will be interesting to observe here — and let me be honest: I’m an observer with my cash in offshore accounts — is how the Left responds as they watch this crowd take liberal ideals and turn them into lynch mob justice. As in France, the liberals who believe a revolution is deliverance are shocked to see the carnage, infighting, injustice and corruption that follows.

While the mob still thinks it cares about liberal ideals, leftist leaders can re-direct that mob toward more productive activities than retribution. I don’t think Dennis Kucinich and his ilk, who are starry-eyed dogmatists, can do that, but someone like Ralph Nader could.

Militia Report 2009 from Missouri

This report is really well done, in my opinion. It looks into the reasons why militias emerge in addition to describing them factually, giving a compassionate yet realistic look into their psychology.

Even more interesting, it describes their fears — RFID, marked ammunition, the NWO — and points toward others theorizing the USA will break up because of a permanent values schism between the liberal Left and the traditional Right.

All things have a beginning, a middle and an end, except perhaps existence itself.

At the middle point, they’re at the height of their powers, but also are halfway through the cycle, which means they can be outlasted.

That’s when the pundits start talking about breakup. They did it with Rome; they’re doing it with the USA.

“I think it’s ongoing right now,” Corsi says. “We’re already becoming a dual country.”

The author, pundit and political scientist says that Obama is using open borders, economic integration, and the crises surrounding the financial meltdown to “advance the agenda of worldwide integration, economically on the way to political integration.”

The goal is simple: “redistribution of income.”

“I think the idea for Democrats on the left is that open borders imports an underclass which will vote Democratic for generations to come,” Corsi says of the administration’s plan to nationalize illegal aliens. But Republicans, too, are responsible for the trend: their pro-business wing favors “cheap workers that can be used in the jobs that can’t be outsourced overseas,” Corsi says.

NewsMax

Corsi sometimes comes across as an extreme paleoconservative version of Alex Jones, but if we’re open-minded, we can see there is some historical truth to what he’s saying. This is a nation divided. It was once conservative; now it’s mostly liberal. Those who are conservative don’t want to live by the agenda of the liberal, and liberals find living under conservative rule unbearable.

Yet liberals have popularity and demographics on their side:

The electoral victory of Barack Obama symbolizes the culmination of the long march from the streets of Chicago to full institutionalization of the radical Left of a previous era. That Obama, the individual, is more of a centrist than a leftist and was only a child in 1968 is less significant than what he represents. The 68ers have now seized the establishment and those who insisted the establishment could never be trusted have become the establishment.

On virtually every issue, the radical Left of the 1960s has either won or is in the process of winning.

Though the Left has achieved complete or nearly complete victory on just about every issue, the Left will never admit as much. Sixties radicalism has become what any other movement becomes once it is institutionalized. The purpose of the Left today is to simply perpetuate its own existence and its own vested interests. For this reason, invisible armies of racists, sexists, homophobes and theocrats must constantly be said to be hiding behind every rock or tree. Heretics who dissent from left-wing orthodoxy on any number of matters must be constantly sought out for denunciation, repression or persecution.

Attack the System

While some will claim this is a transition into tyranny as predicted by Plato in The Republic, others point out that it’s part of an evolving process of self-definition for the most powerful nation without a native culture:

But as Juan Enriquez notes in his amazing PopTech talk, based on his book “The Untied States of America: Polarization, Fracturing, and Our Future”, no US president has ever died under the same flag that he was born under. That is, the borders of the United States has constantly shifted even in modern times. The last state was added in 1959 (after I was born!) and more could be added still. Americans are comfortable ADDING states, but it might not take much to subtract one. The outcome of the US Civil War has biased Americans to disbelieving in subtraction, but that might change.

In past decades bold American thinkers have imagined how the US might break up, but these were more thought experiments indicating the cultural differences within this large country.

Kevin Kelly

Many others understand Plato’s logic.

A civilization needs to have some core that binds it together. In America, we have always thought that was a belief in freedom, but now as we seem to have different definitions of freedom, that gets difficult. What if we’re using the same word to mean radically different things?

We worry that we cannot reconcile these claims. After all, America was born as a nation-state when the nation-state was still new; previously, nations, or ethnic groups incorporated into political entities, prevailed. The nation-state grouped people together by a political belief, like belief in the ideals of the French Revolution, and made nationality secondary.

Since then, liberal politicians have used demographics as a means of controlling their presence in nation-states, which conservatives have danced around the fact that their ideology only functions well in a nation. Some simply point to the values divide: if you have a Christian-values right, and a relativist/Marxist-values left, how on earth will the two ever get along?

If either one gets control, it’s oppression to the other.

Patrick Buchanan, in his book, Day of Reckoning, writes, “To hold together a multiethnic or multilingual state, either an authoritarian regime or a dominant ethnocultural core is essential.”

In the past, immigrants and natural-born citizens alike worked together to get through difficult times, and though there were still distinct differences in ethnicity, culture and race, they were bound together by their common Christian-Judeo roots. But many of the immigrants that come to America today do not come here with the intent to assimilate themselves as Americans, nor do they come here with the same kind of faith that core Americans hold.

This drive toward socialism, if not a thinly veiled dictatorship, has been determined to be the answer to this not-so-silent breakup of our country.

Tulsa Beacon

Setting aside the “thinly veiled dictatorship” for another blog post, let’s think about the silent breakup. If two groups exist in the same community, but do not interact, and basically hate each others’ ideologies, how are they going to collaborate? If a war comes, the party that started it will be left to fight it; the others may even work against them. If a long-term plan is needed, it will be voted out of existence the instant the other party gets into office. And so on.

The American experiment is only 220 years old. It will be interesting to see how it mutates to fit this new stage, or whether it dissolves into two or more nations of contradictory beliefs.

“Texas will again lift its head and stand among the nations. It ought to do so, for no country upon the globe can compare with it in natural advantages.” – Sam Houston

The man who led Texas to victory in its war of independence from Mexico knew that Texas was special. He knew that Texas was a land of promise, hope and opportunity. He also knew that Texas was a place where freedom could be maintained and preserved for future generations.

Today we find ourselves at a crossroads. Down one path we find the erosion of our freedom, our economy and the very fabric of our society. Down this path we are still tethered to the United States. Down the other path we find the legacy of our forebears. It’s a legacy of freedom, justice, security and hope. It’s a legacy of independence.

We ask you to visit our site and join with us as Sam Houston’s prophetic words are coming to pass. Texas will stand as a nation among nations again. And it’s happening now. Come be a witness to history.

Come witness the rebirth of Texas independence.

http://www.texasnationalist.com

Very interesting statement, based on an old post-French Revolution theme: there’s more freedom this way.

As a skeptical observer of politics, I think that terms like “freedom” and “independence” need careful defining, and that the Texas Nationalists should be very careful about offering another version of what people already claim they have.

As things spiral out of control for downward-moving nations, which the USA has been — independent of the current economic crisis — as its population gets more and more divided from consensus, it’s not wise to offer another divisive philosophy.

Freedom, after all, means independence from collectivity, but in bad times, people want functional collectivity instead. It will be interesting to see how the Texas Nationalists target this issue.

There’s been a lot of interest in secession since this election. After 2004, liberal places like Vermont and New Hampshire wanted to pull away. After 2008, conservative places are wanting to secede. It’s as if the recognition that liberal and conservative are incompatible has come home to roost, and the result is a desire for states to have autonomy under a confederacy that provides for their defense.

Texas was placed into dormancy not lawfully annexed. The Nation has always been there and has ?never ceded to any foreign Nation. Therefore since it never ceded itself it cannot un-secede. It does not need to because anything after 1845 was fraud anyway. “Texan” is a
Corporate State Citizen without any rights they only have privileges. “Texians,” however, are citizens with full rights and are citizens of a Nation. See attached article explaining the difference. For example a Canadian is a citizen of Canada a foreign Nation. When you add the “i” in the word it is signifying an international individual of a certain Nation.

We need to get the word out to as many Texians as possible. The republic of Texas Congress has already served our Charter to the Texas Secretary of State in Austin and are in the process of serving other documents, effectively taking control of our Nation of Texas again. As the article explains, we do not have to go through the process of secession because we were never legally annexed.

Our next Congressional Meeting will be held on December 13th. We always announce the date, time and place on our website. All Texian citizens are welcome to attend our meetings.

Texas Republic

The following documents were included:

What is a Texian?

Annexation of Texas

Self-Responsibility