The SPLC has labeled Liberty Alliance a hate group. Liberty Alliance affiliated sites send me a lot of emails, and while they tend to promote articles full of red meat for the base, they are always well within the norm of mainstream conservatism. So the SPLC is essentially naming a mainstream conservative enterprise a hate group because it’s perhaps a more scrappy mainstream conservative group. That’s a reach even by SPLC smear standards.
(The most interesting part of this story is identifying the various Liberty Alliance sites which explains why I often get similar emails from different sites.)
As a Southern paleocon who has often argued with Unionist neocons over the virtue of the Union invasion of the South and the merits of Lincoln, the current events taking place in Ukraine and the neocons’ reaction to it has me scratching my head. Let’s see…
Neocons, especially those of the Straussian variety, allegedly oppose secession. They oppose the historic secession of the South and reject secession as a legitimate political option for US states at present.
As a result of their inherent nationalism and opposition to secession, neocons venerate Abraham Lincoln above any other American.
Ukraine is a product of a quiet recent, historically speaking, secession from the former Soviet Union.
Putin is reoccupying part of Ukraine.
Therefore, if neocons are to be intellectually consistent, shouldn’t they support Putin as a Lincolnesq figure attempting to restore a political entity, the USSR, that traitorous upstart secessionist in Ukraine have recently ripped apart? And just as they should view Putin as a modern day Lincoln, shouldn’t they view the Russian Army as a modern day equivalent of the Union Army, and the Ukraine military as a modern equivalent of the Rebel Confederate Army?
But instead, the neocons are supporting the former secessionist Ukrainian revolutionaries and opposing Lincolnesq Putin’s attempt to reoccupy a former Soviet territory.
In a similar situation, Bill Clinton’s ordered American troops to intervene in the Balkans.
In the Balkan intervention, American troops were facilitating the secession of Bosnia from part of the former Yugoslavia.
If neocons are to be intellectually consistent, shouldn’t they have opposed the secession of Bosnia? Shouldn’t they have likened the US forces in the Balkans to the Confederate Army for facilitating secession and Clinton to Jefferson Davis?
Instead, neocons enthusiastically supported Clinton’s Bosnian intervention even while many conservatives at the time were returning to their non-interventionist roots and opposing the action.
Perhaps it isn’t really secession that neocons oppose. They seem quite happy with secession when it is breaking up countries that they view as challenging US hegemony. Perhaps the real problem they have with the secession of the South or the modern secession of US states is that it challenges their (mistaken) conception of America as a unitary modern state with a special mission to spread the values of liberal democracy across the globe.
Originally posted at Intellectual Conservative.
Sorry for the recent downtime. Apparently we were hacked. Most likely we were hacked because we have the Powers That Be shaking in their boots due to the quality of our anti-Establishment arguments. I guess it’s possible that there is a more mundane explanation, but I’m pretty sure we were the victim of a well orchestrated hack. I’m guessing a combination of the Bilderberg Group and Skull and Bones.
In an earlier post I commented on the website Rare, which at the time was new to me. But a little research showed me that Rare wasn’t as new as I thought it was and was felt at the time to be struggling. (I’ll look for those links when I have more time.) That said, this is an interesting development.
Rare and Crown Forum, one of America’s leading publishers of politically conservative authors, Tuesday announced the launch of Rare Forum, an exclusive content and marketing partnership to bring conservative writers to a new and broader readership. Rare Forum pairs the best-selling authors published by Crown Forum with the online news and social-media reach of Rare, which has annualized page views of 25 million.
The Rare Forum partnership will highlight exclusive, first-look content from esteemed Crown Forum authors through the Rare platform as well as a speaking series, book forums, and other online events and sites.
Crown Forum publishes many of the most prominent conservative writers, thought leaders, and political figures, including Pulitzer-Prize winner Charles Krauthammer; “The Five” co-host Greg Gutfeld; former Congressman Allen West (R-Fla.); American Enterprise Institute fellow Charles Murray; syndicated columnist Michael Barone; and former presidential adviser Pat Buchanan, among others. – See more at: http://rare.us/story/rare-and-crown-forum-join-forces-to-advance-conservative-voices/#sthash.IfZEslgw.dpuf
Any entity that would tout Charles Krauthammer as a “prominent conservative” or “thought leader” clearly has some things to learn from our standpoint, but this partnership is worth noting because we here at CHT like to cover developments in the conservative movement, and because I suspect we will see more of these sorts of pairings in the future.
Whether these partnerships will allow for greater or lesser entry into the mainstream conservative sphere for dissident conservatives like ourselves remains to be seen. My hunch is that at the Rare level it does not, although I could see a Mike Church or someone like that breaking through. But could something similar be done on a smaller level? New publishing platforms such as Create Space makes publishing a relatively inexpensive venture.
Hat tip: Jack Hunter’s Facebook post.