Tag Archives: American Civil War

Don’t Fool Yourself – The Left is Still Winning

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/03/Bonnie_Blue_flag_of_the_Confederate_States_of_America.svg/1200px-Bonnie_Blue_flag_of_the_Confederate_States_of_America.svg.png

(Tom Kawczynski) Within the next month, I will be releasing my second book:  The Coming Civil War.  Over 384 pages, I lay out the contradictions at the heart of our republic that are driving the culture war as it burns from cold to hot, identify the major players, and assign which groups will gather to each side.  Six different scenarios are profiled therein, but to explain why such an event gains in likelihood each day, I write today to share with you the crisis.  In writing this book, I’ve come to realize just how dominant the Left has become, and my hope is after reading the below, you will also and will act with the urgency such understanding requires.

Since gaining control of the American education system, the forces of the Marxist Left have been following a recurring pattern of introducing reforms, weathering a period of conservative response, and then building upon the new cultural framework.  This generational approach to victory has been devastatingly effective and the bedrock upon how they have built their radically transformed country which we now inhabit today.

Consider the efforts by FDR to establish social welfare as an expectation for all Americans.  The very idea of socialism itself came under both national and international assault in the 40’s and seemed to fade away in the happy 50’s, but had become irrevocably part of our national expectation by the 60’s.

Consider the efforts by LBJ to realize the cultural revolution ideas of minority power, feminism, and war without sanction.  Resistance floated through the 70’s where a counter-revolution seemed to happen in the 80’s proved illusory by the 90’s.  All the social ethics of the 60’s were essentially adopted and accepted, leading today’s politically correct culture to rise.

Consider the efforts by Obama, which built upon the strong foundation left by LBJ as a multi-generational project, to remake the country by changing our demographics.  What the 1965 Hart-Celler Act began by opening America up to Third World immigration, chain migration, and a lottery system for who would be admitted, has been amplified through successive amnesties from Republicans and Democrats alike.  Obama’s open borders and refugee policies only made more blatant what the American government, in service to the Marxist Left, has been doing for a very long time which is seeding new people in the deliberate intent to outvote people who believe in traditional limited government, liberty, and national sovereignty.

Trump’s election was driven, in no small part, to reverse both these cultural trends and to stop the flow of immigration into America.  But as history shows, even a successful presidency has only served to slow the implementation of what the Left intends, leading to the acceptance of their basic action following the countervailing administration and a steady march leftward for the United States.  While embracing social welfare and the cultural revolution were bad enough, those could be undone with policy and determination.  The transformation of America, as we see happening already in Europe, through shifting demographics is end game for the Left.

Voting habits are indisputable.  White voters in America are the only group who vote Republican, with 58% having voted for Trump in the most recent election.  Compare this number to 65% of Asians, 66% of Latinos, and 89% of Blacks who voted for Hillary.  There is no election in American history since the 1960’s when the Democrats embraced racial politics full force where minorities have ever voted for Republicans at the national level, and these trends, correcting for a candidate like Obama who for obvious reasons of identity was able to get historically high support, are only accelerating.

At the same time minorities are more likely to vote Democrat, their numbers are growing.  According to current US Census estimates, America is now only 61% white.  Whites also have a declining birth rate as opposed to every other group who are becoming a larger share of the electorate.  Growth is most pronounced in Hispanics who have surged to become over 18% of the population, joining blacks at 13% and Asians at 6%.  Such figures only contemplate growth due to children being born, not accounting for the many legal and illegal immigrants, as well as refugees, who as added accelerate these trends.  Absent immigration, people who study these statistics estimate the tipping point is just one generation away in the 2040’s.

Given that more non-white children are being born today than white children, the radicalization of leftist ideology to legally enfranchise doctrines like white privilege which advocate for whites having fewer rights, it’s not hard to imagine what this future will look like absent some radical change.  Twenty to thirty years from now, a majority minority America will lean left, support socialism, and be closing in on nearly one hundred years of doctrine where successive generations will have been taught by schools at every level that the sole impediment to social justice in America has been white civilization, and the various ideas upon which it built America.  One need only look at the Marxist ideas coming from colleges and universities today as proof.

As the immigration and social policy of the Left realize the establishment of a permanent majority habituated to living off redistribution from the now white minority, the shrinking remnant will be targeted more deeply for economic sanction, political disenfranchisement, and social shaming.

We know this because there have been no other countries in history, besides the white countries of the West, who have ever voluntarily given away control over lands they possess.  In every other instance, which remains the case today in Africa, Asia, and Latin America, those of the dominant nationality conduct a logical foreign policy to ensure ethnic homogeneity for stability and mutual benefit.  In those instances where formerly white run colonial enterprises where any substantial number of settlers stayed behind, we see how the whites have been subject to exploitation, expropriation, and even genocide.

Zimbabwe is one example.  The country formerly known as Rhodesia, destroyed through international blockades, was delivered to tribal leadership who proceeded through several different organized murder schemes against farmers.  In fact, the situation became so bad that these once fertile lands were no longer able to feed the existing African population, but as there were few whites left to help, the country slid into decay after rounds where this sad happenstance recurred.

South Africa, once a First World nation, has gone down the same pathway as a prosperous country was handed over to the Africa majority who had been motivated by many decades of communist ideology, beginning with Mandela whose legacy is whitewashed to appear a friendly leader, but whose party and policies were hard-line communist.  Now, we see a nation which has gone from food exportation to food importation, where cities run short on water, and brutal murders are increasingly common.  Recently, laws were passed in parliament whereby whites can have their lands taken without any recompense, adding to restrictions already in place whereby whites cannot get licensed for business, and are being restricted from emigration.

The violence committed against these people is pure savagery and barbarism.  Imagine children being drowned in bathtubs after being raped before their parents.  People are made to drink gasoline and then set on fire and rolled down the street stuffed in a tire as a warning.  Lest you think only Africans practice such heinous acts, ask a Vietnam veteran about their stories from Asia or check out how the Latino cartels handle not just their enemies, but regularly assassinate mayors whose version of justice impinges upon their business.  Violence is the reality of the world, and while we in the West have compartmentalized these actions, the rest of the world does not.

The West refuses to believes these examples, thinking their values of liberty, property, and the rule of law are universal.  In fact, these are unique cultural elements of white western culture, and while other people can enjoy them, especially when they are in the minority, they do not represent how the rest of the world organizes, and our assumption that our system will somehow magically convert people from different cultures to have these beliefs is not just short-sighted, but quite probably suicidal.  That we continue to believe this will happen, whether in our interventions abroad or more dangerously, as we bring people into our host nation as we are in America, against all evidence, is an absurdity that drives the current crisis.

Because of our own unique cultural beliefs in individualism influenced by Christian universalism, the Right has allowed the Left to import whomever they wanted for many decades under the assumption our system would lift these people to our level.  While they have indubitably gained economically, if we honestly assess culture and politics, have we not seen the Left realize the opposite?  In culture, we have gone from a single ideal based on virtue and hard work to a proliferation of ideas all opposed to one another, leading to rises in drugs, violence, breakdown of the family, and other social ills.  In response to this as well as based on Marxist doctrine itself, government has become larger, more expansive, more powerful, and less accountable.  An honest assessment would be the price of America becoming more diverse is we have become not just less united, but also more like every other country.

As more Americans awaken to this startling reality, we face a choice.  Should we choose not to act, America will walk the path of South Africa.  Such declination may be gradual over thirty years or as abrupt as ten years, but without wholesale policy and immigration changes, these will come.  Those who lean Right, who are overwhelmingly from the white majority, will need to embrace race realism to survive, and furthermore, will need to act upon their interest.

Although the civil nationalism espoused by Trump has much to commend it, with immigration policies based on merit, an end to the visa lottery, and an end to chain migration as a good start, such actions only ensure the coming demographic collapse approaches at a more moderate pace.  Even a hard moratorium on immigration on a race-blind basis, more than either party has the courage to commit to publicly, will not reverse the trend whereby the future is populated by a majority who lean heavily to the Left.

The presumption civic nationalists offer is the economic prosperity currently being generated will be sufficient to transform minority voting patterns.  Although there are certainly individual examples of conversion, there is zero evidence to suggest these trends are being realized in anything close to resembling mass adoption as needed.  The historical pattern is times of prosperity tend to heighten alienation between the white majority and minorities as the Democrats tend to use such times to highlight cultural messages based on resentment and envy when unable to use economics as their primary focus.  We see this happening today in the public radicalism and extremism.

Since the Right does not control culture or media, it has limited efficacy in countering this narrative.  To succeed, civic nationalism would require its own ability to broadcast culture at a mass level, and while gains have been made in creating a counter-culture, what Trump’s election ha s facilitated is a system wide crackdown on rightward dissent at the global level.  While traditional media and academia steadily beat out the communist line, the Internet itself is being increasingly regulated, with comments being hidden, voices being marginalized, and even speech being criminalized in some places, always to the Right.  For those who persist, they lose their jobs, their friends, and occasionally, their lives.  To this point, the civic nationalists have done nothing about this, other than to bemoan unequal treatment.

Were civic nationalism to succeed, it would have to convert minorities to a well-articulated culture and use the legal authority which it should have in America at least, through control of all three nominal branches of government, to restrict and remove the Left’s dominance in culture.  The Republicans are not doing this and will not do this for fear of being called racist and the criticism the media would therein generate.  But, even presuming they could, the Left took nearly one hundred years to gain their dominance in culture, and the Right, working through voluntary means, would take about half that in a best-case scenario to reach parity.  As demographics show, that’s about seventy years too late to matter.

All these facts considered, the civic nationalism of Trump will fail in preventing victory by the Left in the cultural civil war now starting unless it does one of two things and perhaps both.  It must either find a way to permanently realize power for the Right and remake the cultural apparatus of education and media to no longer actively promote communist ideals and minority radicalization, which could only be undertaken under martial law scenarios.  Or, conversely, it could act decisively to try to change the population mix, increasing the white population and radicalization through immigration, family planning, and selective migration.  It’s very possible, to preserve the culture and identity upon which liberty depends and has only ever existed, both will be necessary.  It’s also almost certainly the case such policies could never be successfully enacted through the conventional political process, and either would quite possibly lead to insurrection by the Left.

The refusal to act leads to a victory for the Left by default.  While the current situation of the Right controlling government presents the appearance that the Left is in greater peril, even eight years of Trump will do little more to stop the march leftward of America than eight years of Eisenhower did in slowing welfare or Reagan in stopping cultural Marxism.  The only difference is should the Trump years prove a respite instead of a revolution, our future will be one where our destines are not our own to decide.

If we wait until then to act, we will be forced to fight a battle against a hostile government, a socialist or communist majority, and with innumerable technological and surveillance challenges.  Furthermore, we will have consigned yet another generation to the very education system that loves to teach these Marxist ideals, even more radicalized than the street violence we see from groups like antifa today.  Our odds in such a fight would be considerably worse than they are today where we still have parity numerically and the considerable advantage, at least temporarily, of a government not diametrically opposed to the people and their liberties.

If the Left was smart, they would just keep quiet through the reign of Trump, as older more shrewd hands with the Democrats advocate.  They know they are on the verge of ultimate victory in remaking America as well as the West.  Yet, their fatal flaw is the people they have so agitated against the majority are hungry for power, and in their taste for control, reveal their true nature in how violently they stalk the streets and how they show no care for the rule of law, but only that of the jungle.  They would take power if we give them the opportunity.

How we face this challenge and articulate our own ideals, wanting to preserve our liberty, needing to defend our people, but seeking to retain our morality in the most responsible manner is our crisis.  For we, we civilized few, cannot simply engage in a battle where we hold ourselves to a higher standard.  But I venture this:  Even if we cannot simply make this us versus them, which I understand would undo too much good work done to awaken people to the light of reason and the comforts of faith, can we not at least hold accountable those who refuse to awaken?

If we do not, we have already surrendered.  I love my nation too much for that, and in asking these hard questions, the National Right will seek to find this path to preserve our liberties.  I have no illusions this will be an easy road and will state very publicly that fighting seems far preferable to me than surrender.  A movement with no future is one which cannot win, and our challenge together is how we make sure the best ideas of our past find new meaning as we step into this most uncertain future?

When we answer that question, we will be ready to stand in opposition to the Left.  Until then, for all we have accomplished, we have not yet truly begun to fight.

Advertisements

Why Democrats Would Also Lose A Second Civil War

It’s obvious that the central tenet of the Democrat Party platform is now hatred and contempt for Normal Americans.

Taking their cue from the elites in Europe and Canada who are stripping dissenters of their free speech rights and religious freedoms, the leftist elite is moving to solidify its hold on power here with the eager assistance of tech companies and the moral support of the Fredocons who yearn to return to pseudo-relevance as the ruling class’s slobberingly loyal opposition. In California, the leftist government is practically firing on Fort Sumter. And nationally, these aspiring fascists are especially eager to disarm Normal Americans – doing so would be an object lesson in who’s the boss, as well as solving that frustrating problem of the Normals having the ability to resist.

Probably because I’ve spent time where they actually had a civil war, many people ask me – people whose names you know – whether I think this turmoil will all end in a Second Civil War. They are seriously concerned, and not without cause – the left’s hatred for Normal Americans and its dedication to totally stripping the people who are the backbone of this country of their ability to participate in their own governance is threatening to rip the country apart.

Do I think there will be a civil war? No, but there could be. This is the Age of Black Swans, and anything is possible – we could easily see the country split into red and blue. Civil war is unlikely, but never underestimate Democrat stupidity and hatred. The Schlichter family learned that lesson a century and half ago, the last time the Democrats decided to try to impose their hatred of basic human rights on the rest of the country, when an army of Democrats burned our family hometown.

Oh, they paid for it. And they would pay again. Democrats are 0-1 in insurrections, and if they went for another round, they would be 0-2. It’s a matter of terrain, numbers, and morale.

Democrats, who think history began when Obama was elected, don’t understand the dangerous game they are playing when they talk about how they want to impose their brown shirt vision upon red America. The keyboard commandos of the left seek to hand wave away the massive strategic challenge of imposing control by force upon a well-armed, decentralized citizenry occupying the vast majority of the territory, so they babble about drones and tanks as counterinsurgency trump cards. But there are no trump cards in war. There are men, with rifles, standing on patches of dirt, killing the people trying to push them off. That’s the ugly reality of war. And multiply the usual brutality of war by ten when it’s a civil war.

There are two Civil War II scenarios, and the left is poorly positioned to prevail in either one. The first scenario is that the Democrats take power and violate the Constitution in order to use the apparatus of the federal government to suppress and oppress Normal Americans. In that scenario, red Americans are the insurgents. In the second scenario, which we can even now see the stirrings of in California’s campaign to nullify federal immigration law, it is the blue states that are the insurgents.

The Democrats lose both wars. Big time.

Let’s talk terrain and numbers. Remember the famous red v. blue voting map? There is a lot of red, and in the interior the few blue splotches are all cities like Las Vegas or Denver. That is a lot of territory for a counter-insurgent force to control, and this is critical. The red is where the food is grown, the oil pumped, and through which everything is transported. And that red space is filled with millions of American citizens with small arms, a fairly large percentage of whom have military training.

Remember what two untrained idiots did in Boston with a couple of pistols? They shut a city down. Now multiply that by several million, with better weapons and training.

Let’s look at the counter-insurgent forces in the Democrat oppression scenario should they attempt to misuse our law enforcement and military in an unconstitutional manner to take the rights of American citizens. There are a lot of civilian law enforcement officers, but the vast majority of the agencies are local – sheriffs, small town police departments. They will not be reliable allies in supporting unlawful oppression of their friends and neighbors. The major cities’ police departments are run by Democrat appointees, so the commands would be loyal. But the rank-and-file? A small percentage would be ideologically loyal. More would be loyal because that’s their paycheck – they could be swayed or intimidated to support the rebels. Others would be actively sympathetic to the insurgents. This is true of federal law enforcement agencies as well.

And the military? Well, wouldn’t the military just crush any resistance? Not so fast. The military would have the combat power to win any major engagement, but insurgents don’t get into major engagements with forces that have more combat power. They instead leverage their decentralized ability to strike at the counter-insurgents’ weak points to eliminate the government’s firepower advantage. In other words, hit and run, and no stand-up fights.

For example, how do a bunch of hunters in Wisconsin defeat a company of M1A2 Abrams tanks? They ambush the fuel and ammo trucks. Oh, and they wait until the gunner pops the hatch to take a leak and put a .30-06 round in his back from 300 meters. Then they disappear. What do the tanks do then? Go level the nearest town? Great. Now they just moved the needle in favor of the insurgents among the population. Pretty soon, they can’t be outside of their armored vehicles in public. Their forces are spending 90% of their efforts not on actual counter-insurgency operations but on force protection. Sure, they own their forward operating bases, and they own a few hundred meters around them wherever they happen to be standing at the moment, but the rest of the territory is bright red. As my recent novel illustrates, American guerillas with small arms are a deadly threat to the forces of a dictatorship.

But the military is so big it would overwhelm any rebels, right? Well, how big do you think the military is? And, more importantly, how many actual boots on the ground can it deploy? Let’s put it in terms of brigade combat teams, which total about 4,500 troops each. There are about 60 brigades in the Army, active and reserve, here and abroad, and let’s give the Marines another 10 brigades, for about 70 brigades. Sounds impressive. But that’s deceptive.

Let’s put aside a big consideration – the existence of red states that would provide for an insurgent government structure and possibly attract the loyalty of some National Guard and even federal brigades. For example, if President Hillary Clinton put down her chardonnay long enough to sign a ban on privately owned guns, it’s not unreasonable to expect the governor of Texas to reject federal authority – after all, California just taught us that this is totally cool. But in this case, look for several brigades located there to hoist the Lone Star flag.

So, now the blue states are facing unconventional and conventional forces.

Let’s ignore that problem and focus on a different challenge. Even a normal unit has about 10% non-deployable members. Now, if these troops were assigned to combat operations against other Americans, you would have significant additional losses through desertion. Many of the senior leaders would participate – the Obama generation – and there is a certain type of junior officer only too happy to curry favor by sucking up in defiance of their oath (which is to the Constitution, not to some leftist president). You can identify them because they usually have “strategist” in their Twitter bios. But a lot of key, capable officer and NCO leaders, and enlisted troops, would vanish. That is proper. It is a violation of their oath to unconstitutionally oppress fellow Americans; their duty would be to refuse such unlawful orders.

So, you have significantly under strength units going in. Now, how many of the troops in a brigade are actually even front line combat troops? About a third – the rest are support. So a brigade is really about 1500 riflemen tops before you count losses. Cut those in half for sleep, training, and refitting at any one time (which is very generous) and your brigade is really 750 troops on your best day with everyone showing up. Realistically, it’s 300.

That holds one mid-sized town. And there are hundreds of mid-sized towns. Plus there are millions of Normal Americans who would fight back. Nothing would move without their permission – a few guys shooting up big rigs along the interstate would shut down the entire trucking industry. Bottom line: there simply are not enough military forces to clear and hold red America.

What about drones and bombers? Both are useful. But the minute a bombing strike kills some red civilians the families of counter-insurgent drone operators and pilots will be knocking at the base gates to be let inside. Now you’ll need many of those brigades to protect the civilians you now need to protect from retribution.

Civil wars are harsh. That’s why you avoid them.

How about the blue insurgency scenario? That goes even worse for the Democrats. You have the federal government apparatus in the hands of red America, and the insurgents are the opposite of decentralized and armed. They are conveniently centered in gun-unfriendly blue cities. In other words, the blue civilian population is much less of a threat.

A red counter-insurgency avoids the problem of a decentralized insurgency and insecure logistical lines. In the case of California, whose secessionist antics are approaching the point where President Trump could legitimately employ his power to crush insurrections, the tactical problem is relatively simple. For example, San Francisco is a hotbed of treason, but the populace is largely unarmed and is trapped in a confined area. You put a brigade on securing the Golden Gate and Bay Bridges, then put a brigade on the San Francisco Peninsula to cut off the I-280 and US-101 corridors. Next you go to the Crystal Springs Dam and cut off the water. Then you watch and wait as the tech hipsters run out of artisanal sushi rice and kombucha.

After about a week, they surrender. After all, you can’t eat and drink smugness. LA is just bigger in scope – more corridors to cut off, but in the end the population concentrations in large liberal urban areas that are their strength also make them extremely vulnerable to logistical pressure.

Then there’s another factor, an intangible but a crucial one. It’s commitment. The Democrat threat to peace is based on its policies designed to deprive Normal Americans of their right to speak freely, to worship freely, and to defend themselves and their rights with firearms. Make no mistake – millions of Normal Americans are willing to risk death to defend those rights. In fact, many swore to do so when they entered our military and law enforcement. But who is the leftist big talker willing to die to impose the fascist dream of censorship, religious oppression, and disarmament on Normal American citizens? Is the screeching SJW at Yale going to suit up in Kevlar? Is the Vox columnist going to grab a M4? Is the Hollywood poser going to switch her gyno-beanie for a helmet?

No. Hell, we just heard our liberal opponents explaining why a cop shouldn’t be expected to go fight a scumbag murdering kids because it’s scary. America might split apart, but it’s highly unlikely Team Kale n’ Vinyl would fight should their big talk finally push Normal America too far.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DYD82InVoAYr4oh.jpg

Source: By Kurt Schlichter | Town Hall