A conservative colleague tells me to terminate VFR
I just got a phone call from a long-time acquaintance I haven’t heard from in a long time. He said right off the bat: “America is finished and therefore you should shut down VFR.”
I hung up the phone. He called again. After saying that he hadn’t meant any disrespect, he explained that since America is finished, there is no point in conservative political activism, and therefore there’s no point in VFR. He said, “I have put my money where my mouth is,” since he had just resigned his job at a political activist organization, because there was no point in it any more, and is now going to focus only on his private life.
I explained to him, first, that VFR is obviously not a conservative political activist site (and having read VFR from the start how could he not know this?), but is primarily about understanding, and, through understanding, helping to cultivate a remnant.
Second, even if the historical American order is finished, which I believe it is and have said so repeatedly (which he also seemed to have missed), the world hasn’t ended, we are still living in it and have to try to make sense of it and figure out how we are going to live in it. Indeed, I continued, I and readers are at this moment trying to come to terms with the overwhelming disaster that has come upon us, and that’s part of what VFR is about.
He replied that he already understood my criticisms of liberalism, and others do too, and therefore there’s no point in my continuing to write such criticisms. He said it was “very strange” that I didn’t see that.
In other words, at the very moment that liberalism has gained a whole new level of power over the country, he believes we should stop paying attention to it and why people believe in it and how it operates and will continue to operate to harm us.
I told him that because he believes only in power, not in truth, the moment he sees no possibility of gaining power, he gives up.
Also, on the matter of activism, I might have added that even if America as it has existed is over, it has not simply disappeared. Oblivion would be simple. What has happened is far more complicated and threatening than mere oblivion, namely that America has been replaced by a lawless leftist regime that intends our harm and will imminently be doing all kinds of things to harm us. So we can’t simply ignore politics, can we? When the countries of Eastern and Central Europe were taken over by the U.S.S.R., did anti-Communists simply give up and stop resisting Communist rule in whatever means were available to them, even if those means were just intellectual? Because the historical civilization of Russia had been destroyed by Communism, would my acquaintance have advised Alexander Solzenitsyn not to write his books exposing Communist evil and laying out the principles of moral and social order?
Along the lines of your conversation with your defeated friend, I would say that the study of liberalism as a specific mental/emotional construct with fatal flaws may be the salvation of the country. I offer the following proposition for further thought.Gintas writes:
I believe 1960 was the high point of America, so we’re into year 52 of the decline, and who knows how much longer to go? It’s not as though this is the just the beginning of the decline, so we ought to be used to it, but it may be the point beyond which there is no reversing the decline. Let the liberal conservatives go. When they are in power we end up fighting them anyway, with their amnesties and offshoring and Hispandering and truckling to women and searching for the Great Conservative Black Hope and endless cowering and appeasing. The right-liberal GOP has to go.Steven T. writes:
If the full consequences of liberalism are ever to be realized, it will be far too late to change direction. We are no longer preaching to the unbelievers, or even to the converted—we are preaching to the future remnant, as the prophet Isaiah did. This remnant may have a chance to reeducate society or maintain a sovereign enclave, so they must be initiated now into the traditional order of being to have a fighting chance.Gerald M. writes:
Occasionally, you bowl me over with epigrammatic power. Today:JMC writes;
What did Churchill say?LA replies:
While readers’ attraction to Churchill at a terrrible moment like this is understandable, I’m not sure that his situation was analogous to ours. He had a functioning country to defend from invasion. That country was independent and in charge of its own affairs. Beginning on May 10, 1940 he exercised supreme power in that country. He had an army and an air force and a navy.JMC replies:
The analogy does admittedly, as analogies often do, limp. But the point is Churchill’s unwillingness to yield to defeatism and despair in the face of overwhelming opposition.Simon P. writes:
I agree with you that studying and exposing liberalism is as important as ever, but this recent shift should cause right wingers to reevaluate their tactics. The dissidents of the USSR were not attempting to replace their regime with a slightly less oppressive one, but this is exactly what mainstream republicans want.
Posted by Lawrence Auster at November 07, 2012 06:51 PM | Send