Conservative Heritage Times

Strong men are self-sufficient, while weenies look to the mommy-state to protect them. That’s not me saying that – it’s from a scientific survey of hundreds of men’s upper-body strength, biceps size, and political views. Seems there’s a correlation between fitness and independence:

Men who are physically strong are more likely to take a right wing political stance, while weaker men are inclined to support the welfare state, according to a new study.

Researchers discovered political motivations may have evolutionary links to physical strength.

Men’s upper-body strength predicts their political opinions on economic redistribution, according to the research.

The principal investigators – psychological scientists Michael Bang Petersen, of Aarhus University in Denmark, and Daniel Sznycer, of the University of California in the U.S., believe that the link may reflect psychological traits that evolved in response to our early ancestral environments and continue to influence behaviour today.

Professor Petersen said: ‘While many think of politics as a modern phenomenon, it has – in a sense – always been with our species.’

I quite agree. Though we find ourselves in an unnatural environment of desk jobs and gooey yuck from Taco This and Burger That, we still have Ice-Age bodies that long for action and demand fulfillment.

What can we do? For starters, rebel against domestication and softness. Change your diet. Adopt the Paleo diet and lifestyle. Walk. Lift weights. Hunt. Raise a garden. Learn how to defend yourself. Know the exultation of pushing your body beyond endurance.

It might even affect the way you think about yourself.

38 Comments »

Well this is rich. National Review, which fired John Derbyshire (and Sobran, and Brimelow) for crimethink, is criticizing Heritage for firing Jason Richwine for crimethink. Did the hypocrisy of running this article occur to any of the Einsteins at NR?

12 Comments »

In 2010 Jason Richwine wrote two articles that were published by Alternative Right. (They have republished one of them here.) They were in response to Ron Unz’s controversial Hispanic article . Richwine’s “connection” to Alternative Right came up during the PC hysteria over Richwine’s crimethink. Alternative Right, Richard Spencer and the National Policy Institute (NPI) were all mentioned prominently in a Rachel Maddow MSNBC feigned outrage segment. (All PC outrage is feigned except by the most simple-minded. Someone as bright as Rachel Maddow undoubtedly knows that Richwine’s assertions are more or less accurate.)

Spencer addresses the issue here

and here

and here.

5 Comments »

Here is Peter Brimelow on Heritage’s Shame. It is the first part of a fund raising appeal. Consider giving them a donation. VDARE is doing good work.

The firing of Jason Richwine by the Heritage Foundation is the most depressing thing that has happened in American politics for many years—and that’s a very hot competition. Heritage was in an impregnable position:

*Richwine’s PhD was from Harvard University, and had been approved by the three of the most eminent scholars in the U.S. Anyone arguing with him on his specialty was going to lose.
*However, Richwine’s quantitative work on The Heritage Foundation’s Rector Report, on the fiscal cost of the 2013 Amnesty/ Immigration Surge bill, had nothing whatever to do with his Ph.D. dissertation and efforts to link them were clearly unsustainable smears;
*The Heritage Foundation, with a reported budget of well over $80 million in 2010, was simply not subject to the boycotts, faculty hiss fits etc. that enforce totalitarian Political Correctness in the corporate and academic world. It could afford to stand its ground.

Heritage could have honorably rebuffed efforts to smear it and insisted on focusing on its fiscal study—or it could have unleashed Richwine and started the debate about IQ, immigration and other social policies which the American Left has been struggling to suppress since the publication of The Bell Curve nearly twenty year ago. Either way, Cultural Marxism was headed for a major defeat.

Instead, ignominiously and inexplicably, Heritage caved—undercutting its own fiscal study and threatening the entire patriotic resistance to Amnesty/ Immigration surge.

More from Brimelow on Heritage’s shame.

Michelle Malkin

James Kirkpatrick on the “Cowardice of Conservatism, Inc.”

Jason Richwine has just resigned from the Heritage Foundation – a purely voluntary move I’m sure. The usual suspects have begun their gloating – but what really needs to be discussed is what the Heritage Foundation thinks it is gaining from all of this.

Interestingly, before this resignation, there were real signs of resistance within the Conservative Movement to the usual PC bullying. Michelle Malkin contributed a typically gutsy column enthusiastically defending Richwine. Ann Coulter slammed the anti-science left. Most importantly, Rush Limbaugh launched an extended discourse defending Richwine and his work and criticizing the “RINO’s” calling for his resignation.

However, the Heritage Foundation itself ran shrieking for cover from the moment it began. It embarrassingly searched for public relations flacks to help them explain away the controversy. It refused to clarify whether it had actually read Richwine’s dissertation before it hired him – which at the least suggests utterly incompetent human relations policies. Finally, it stuck its head in the ground regarding the resignation itself, muttering tersely that they don’t comment on internal personnel policies.

As Talleyrand said, it’s worse than a crime – it’s a blunder. Forcing or even allowing Richwine to resign is an admission of guilt. Tactically speaking, not only should Jason Richwine not have been pressured to resign, he should have been forbidden to resign.

4 Comments »

Remember the speculation that Jim DeMint might make Heritage more conservative? Well I guess not. DeMint has proven himself to be just another spineless member of Conservative Inc. who takes his marching orders from the PC though police. First Heritage scurried to distance itself from Jason Richwine at the first sign that the PC rightthink enforcement crew was unhappy. Now Richwine has “resigned.”

Sorry we are late covering this story. I’ll make a separate post tomorrow compiling important links.

13 Comments »

Howard Phillips (no relation) has passed away. This is sad news. He was a good Christian, a good man and a good conservative. He will be missed. Phillips was a Nixon Administration official, but left the GOP due to its ever leftward drift. He founded the Constitution Party and was three times its candidate for President. May he Rest in Peace. The (real) conservative movement has lost a giant.

Addendum: I’ll add remembrances as I come across them.

Chalcedon

It turns out that he had dementia. I didn’t know this.

The Washington Times.

TAC

Gary North

Thomas DiLorenzo

4 Comments »

The energetic discussion generated by the question of what organizing principle best advances liberty has been a pleasant surprise to me. Check out the various arguments raised here, here, and here.

Another worthy contribution to the debate is posted at The Classic Liberal. It’s definitely worth reading in its entirety.

Here’s as brief a summary as I can offer of the difference between conservatism and all the other little isms: Conservatism was first described in reaction to the advent of leftism in the Western world, the French Revolution. The Jacobins saw reason as sovereign, and desired to sweep away all the imperfections and irrational practices that they imagined had held mankind back. Burke vigorously rejected that notion, and countered that custom and tradition are sovereign. The accumulated wisdom of an organic society is priceless and irreplaceable.

Click here to continue.

No Comments »

Tom Piatak has called out TAC for their generally less than conservative coverage of the gay “marriage” debate.

There is, of course, nothing conservative about support for gay marriage. Gay marriage is an utter novelty, with no historical precedent.  Gay marriage seeks to enshrine homosexual acts, but those acts have always been condemned as immoral by Christianity, a condemnation echoed by most other religions and reflected in American law until only recently.  Gay marriage also completely severs marriage from procreation, even though marriage and the families it naturally creates have been the means by which human culture is formed and transmitted.

Gay marriage is not only antithetical to Christianity. It is antithetical to the natural law, to tradition, even to Darwin. Those arguing for it should at least have the decency to drop the pretense that they are conservatives.

Read more…

I have made the same observation that Tom has. Most of the articles at TAC have been tut-tutting social conservatives for botching the debate rather than calling the gay “marriage” supporters out for being advocates of Godlessness. I have a comment pending on this post stating as much. We’ll see if it makes the cut.

Update: My comment did make the cut. Here it is: “I’ve got an idea. How ’bout someone at a magazine that calls itself conservative actually bemoan the fact that America is becoming a secular Godless wasteland and call for national repentance and revival instead of tut-tutting social conservatives. Whatever faults the socons have, and they have many, they are not the problem here. The problem is our culture that is more and more rejecting God’s Word.”

In February they ran this article by Jon Huntsman arguing that gay “marriage” is conservative. Whatever gay “marriage” may be, conservative is not one of them. This was my comment on that thread:

If you had a room full of very bright conservatives and you told them to brainstorm and come up with the most radical idea possible, it would be difficult to come up with an idea more radical than gay “marriage.” That gay marriage is somehow conservative is so preposterous it is difficult to hold back a snicker.

31 Comments »

There’s nothing like a red-blooded debate to clarify your thinking and focus your activism. We have such a debate here and here about the difference between conservatism and libertarianism.

Let’s cut to the chase: The real distinction between the two is the question of what man is and what political arrangement suits him best.

The answer to that question determines everything else. For example, if you believe man is a peaceful, sharing creature, and that all people are equal, then the inequality you see all around MUST be evil and artificial. You would then be acting consistently with your basic belief to advocate an all-powerful government that nationalized all private property for the good of all. That government would be doing good by destroying traditional society and forcing people to live according to your ideals. And you don’t have to imagine the consequences: It’s been tried.

Click here to continue

41 Comments »

Sure, says Andrew Sullivan, who approvingly quotes David Frum, who now agrees with Sullivan. All “principled conservatives,” says Sullivan, support same-sex marriage.

Right. Let’s not forget that both were prominent chickenhawk war boosters for the disastrous invasion of Iraq. Frum slammed REAL conservatives who questioned W’s lunatic crusade as “unpatriotic,” and Sullivan called for nuking Iraq, convinced that Saddam was behind the anthrax scares. In fact, Sullivan even advised fellow homosexuals to support regime change in Iraq and Afghanistan in the name of “gay liberation.”

“Principled conservatives,” indeed.

8 Comments »

Since we’re into anniversaries, the 10th anniversary of the National Review’s “Unapatritotic Conservatives” articled from David Frum has provked some discussion among our writers and editors and those at The American Conservative. Here’s my take on it:

2 Comments »

If CPAC is any indication, maybe so. (Link to the always insightful James Kirkpatrick.)

While we have had our differences with Coulter on some things, she has always been fearless on immigration.

Ann Coulter distinguished herself from the Conservative Inc. herd at CPAC by declaring herself a single-issue amnesty voter. (Link to the always solid Ilana Mercer.)

“What public policy will harm average Americans, drive up unemployment, change America permanently in negative way, and is supported by businessmen who will never vote for a Republican anyway?

14 Comments »

There are two ways for authentic conservatives to deal with CPAC. You can eschew it because it is an unfaithful representation of the real thing, or you can attempt to represent the real think at a meeting of the unfaithful masses. I noticed both these approaches on Facebook prior to the event.

Palemetto Patriot of the Southern Nationalist Network said eschew it.

2 Comments »

Senator Rand Paul won the “C”PAC vote, which is both impressive, and a reminder that the bad guys are onto him.

Back in the day, Ron Paul folks had to actually travel and buy tickets–but then they got to boo Dick Cheney and Rummy, so I can see how it would be worth the price for a little political theater.

Senator Rubio came in second, and must be feeling concerned about the whole Amnesty Bill  he is promoting with Lindsey Graham and John McCain.

The paleo simply notes that without a dog in the fight, there is only one potential free agent, Rand Paul, who might take some tactical advice.

3 Comments »

There is so much CPAP info out there in the conservative blogosphere, this is just a summary of some things that caught my attention.

From the Palmetto Patriot’s Facebook page: “I have it on good authority that CPAC is going to be covered with ‘secede’ stickers. We shall see if the ‘respectable conservatives’ there mention it.”

The consensus seems to be that Rand Paul wowed them.

See TAC

See WND

Time: “Rand Paul Steals Show from Marco Rubio”

The Daily Beast: “Rand Paul is so Hot Right Now”

And here are a couple of stories from VDARE. (VDARE has been on fire lately.)

James Kirkpatrick on the CPAC immigration panel.

And Patrick Cleburne at VDARE.

5 Comments »

Below I mention Judge Nap’s libertarian immigration problem. In another thread C Bowen praised James Kirkpatrick for having a “plan.” Here is a new VDARE article from James Kirkpatrick (Is that his real name?) called “CPAC 2013: Conservatism Inc. vs. Libertarianism Inc.?” It is a very insightful article. I am growing fond of Mr. Kirkpatrick’s writing. Here is the makings of a paleo ”plan.”

While neoconservatives lectured us that the national interest consisted of becoming a “universal nation” and spreading democracy overseas, the new left-libertarianism tells us the national interest doesn’t even exist.

The good news: the American people simply don’t support root-canal libertarianism.

Which provides an opportunity. There is no reason that immigration patriots should go down with U.S.S. Conservatism Inc. As elite opinion solidifies behind amnesty, immigration patriots gain a political opening for a populist movement that can be anti-corporate, economically nationalist, racially realist—and politically dangerous to “conservatives,” progressives, and libertarians alike.

Immigration patriots can build a new movement that can stand up for the historic American nation that the Beltway Right—libertarian and “conservative”—has utterly betrayed.

9 Comments »

Because the Rand Paul dead horse still needs more beating:

Daniel Laison comments on “Movement Conservative Reactions…”

Larison’s comments are in response to this article by Jim Antle.

Aaron Wolfe on the reaction of National Review. Aaron, quoting Sam Francis, makes an important point here. Neocons (and mainstream conservatives in general) have always taken a dim view of extremism qua extremism?

James Kirkpatrick at VDARE takes a more critical view of Rand.

Pat Buchanan asks “Who Now Speaks for the GOP?…”

Justin Raimondo appears to have climbed aboard the Rand train. See here and here. Before he was highly critical of Rand.

1 Comment »

Alternative Right has undergone a significant format change. I wasn’t crazy about the whole Gothic aesthetic at AltRight, and I found the multiple blog/article categories  confusing, but it was clearly a sophisticated web design. This new look is very minimalistic by comparison. Richard Spencer explains the rationale behind the change here. To me I think they went too far in the minimalist direction. The stark white with the darker background looks very blog like to me. Not that CHT is the height of sophisticated web design, but we really are just a blog, not a web magazine or whatever.

Thoughts?

25 Comments »

This whole article from VDARE is well worth a read. My how far Conservative Inc. has fallen.

Apparently the organizers (and funders) of CPAC, like the innumerate GOP pro-amnesty caucus, either have a death wish for their causes and their party or they can’t do simple math.

The demographic shift unleashed over the last 40 years by massive immigration—legal and illegal—is on course to crush Republicans and conservatives utterly.

Of course, paleoconservative writers have been warning about this since the 1980s. But Conservatism Inc. has done nothing to stop or even slow the invasion. 

7 Comments »

Apparently Jeb Bush is another one of those Republicans who either has a death wish for his party or can’t do simple math. As I have said before and will say again and again until it sinks in, immigration restrictionism is the only position that is compatible with the future existence of the Republican Party as a viable force at the national level.

But this spectacle is too pathetic for words. Jeb’s book, which went to press in Dec., was supposed to move the debate in the GOP in the direction of liberalization by proposing legalized residence for illegal aliens but without a path to citizenship. Now that the innumerate* caucus of the GOP (McAmnesty, Grahamesty, Rubio, etc.) have gotten out in front on a path to citizenship, Jeb’s position seems downright reactionary. Hence the groveling apologies.

Would somebody please implant these mathmatical illiterates with a pair of testicles. They are both IQ and testosterone deficient, and their humiliating public attempts to court favor with the PC Thought Police is shameful.

* unfamiliar with mathematical concepts and methods (courtesy of the Yahoo dictionary)

12 Comments »