The Unhappy Middle Class Is Becoming Radical

The Unhappy Middle Class Is Becoming Radical. By James Kirkpatrick, in the US.

I have come to conclude that politicians of the American Right not only do not care about political victory, I don’t even think they particularly care about staying in office. …

But the fact is that, to them, how you lose is far more important than actually staying in office. Many of the guys who have been driven out, say Eric Cantor, have landed on their feet with multimillion dollar jobs. Many conservatives who are driven out, or who lose an election even after a long career, are essentially thrown to the wolves. …

Don’t be distracted by structures and institutions:

Politics is about who — it’s not about what. The structure is less important than who is wielding power.

The State is a hammer. And while the American Right has got all sorts of wonderful theories about what the hammer looks like, what the hammer should look like, how we can make a better hammer, take the hammer away — no, none of this matters. What matters is who’s holding it. And that’s it. That’s the only thing we should be asking ourselves. …

The uselessness of the current political game:

The paradox of the Right is that so many of the issues that drive people to the polls are cultural and identity issues — immigration, a white backlash to black crime, what’s happening in education and curriculum — but then that energy is transformed into frankly stupid things like fighting over the debt ceiling or how we can make sure that George Soros gets an extra tax cut. That’s the only result of driving these people out to the polls.

Peter [Brimelow, Editor of] was talking yesterday about Donald Trump and the hold he has on the white working class and in particular how communities that have been destroyed, quite deliberately, have rallied to him as a kind of champion. Well, what was his major legislative accomplishment? A tax cut passed with Tim Scott. That’s what happened. That’s what 2016 led to.

What is this leading towards?

Well, what we have is a regime where the Political Class depends entirely on exploiting the working masses of this country and it has done this with an ideology that justifies this domination.

For what the end result is, I would say look at modern South Africa, where only about twelve percent of the population pays income taxes, 62% of the blacks get state grants and about half the population as a whole gets state grants; and both those trends are moving in opposite directions.

Now, is anything going to change about this? No, why? Because it would be “racist” if you did anything about this.

The genius of the “racism” accusation is that it is the ultimate justification for the system of elite dominance we have now.

(The Voice in Australia is ultimately about setting up the same racial divisions and conditions for the “racism” accusation.)

And there’s big money behind the kinds of things that are happening. When you have an illegal immigrant brought into Europe, for example, brought in by one of these NGOs that ships people in, every single one of those illegals is worth thousands of dollars to people who can then get jobs managing how racism can be suppressed among host communities or making sure “migrants” learn the language, or how they can get access to government services. You have an entire group of people, an entire class, that profits deliberately from the destruction of existing countries. So it’s not just ideology, there’s also a financial motive.

And it’s also a mistake to think of these things as different. They tend to go together. People tend to believe that what they’re doing is morally right. And they also tend to believe that they’re getting a paycheck, not just because they’re getting a paycheck, but because they’re somehow on the side of the angels. That’s what we’re facing.

Mitt Romney:

I think the most based take in modern American politics ironically came from Mitt Romney. When speaking to a group of donors, he admitted that basically half the population is not going to vote for him no matter what, because ultimately they pay no taxes and they’re always going to support infinite government.

But what did he do in response to that? He ran on a conventional Republican platform, lost, then moved to a whiter state where he could mouth conservative platitudes and get away with it for a bit longer. And now he spends his days lecturing Republicans, until Utah goes the way of California and then he won’t be able to win there either.

But what does he care? He’s got his car elevator, he’s got his. And that’s the story of American Conservatism.

How’s it working for you?

We have a system that not only enables unhappiness among the mass population — it’s just an objective fact that probably the most unhappy mass constituency in American politics are single liberal women, if you look at antidepressant usage, self-reported unhappiness, and dissatisfaction — but they’re also the best political soldiers the Left has. So it’s actually a mistake, from the point of view of political victory, we’re going to create a happier population. The Left has shown that the more miserable your activists are, the more effective they are. So why is that gonna be turned around?

A people under occupation:

Ultimately, I think we have to think of ourselves as a people under occupation. Peter talked about America versus Anti-America. The Coalition of the Fringes is united, not just by hatred of the existing Historic American Nation. but because they profit from its destruction.

That may be also the one thing we have going for us.

They need us, we don’t need them. The parasite needs the host. The host does not need the parasite.

Just so long as you keep working, cheaply producing stuff that people need, and don’t complain too loudly, the system will persist. It’s driving the middle class to sound like Karl Marx!