[Editors Note: This article was originally published on January 27, 2017 at libertymachinenews.com]
When you think of neocons, you probably think of mighty words like ‘warmonger’, ‘hawkish’ – something which reflects their aggressive foreign policy. But don’t mistake their principles for the strong foundations of Western Civilization. The neocons are not the spiritual descendants of the European warrior-explorers, from the aristocracies of the Indo-Europeans to the British Empire. Rather, they are draining all Nietzschean vitality from the West by promoting nonchalant producer/consumers to the middle class and higher, and putting down the thinking man concerned with the bigger picture.
When we think of genuinely highbrow conversations about politics (by which I do not mean one person regurgitating what the Daily Mail said and another, The Guardian), we usually think of the upper classes at dinner, the men retiring to the billiards room to continue. The sincere desire to do more than, for instance, virtue signal how sincerely one has adopted the slave ethic of political correctness, is part of the Western ‘Faustian’ spirit. Of course, their conversation will not change the world overnight, but the host and guests are yet hungry to pursue the truth, long into the night, whether it is attained or not.
The neocon scoffs at such a scene, piously declaring themselves holier than such boors, who would dare discuss politics and religion etc. This is their slave ethic – repressing the hearts and minds of the West, one conversation at a time, if only that they might be clean enough to approach unto the leftist bien pensants of the status quo. And, oh, how they too want to be hypocritical Pharisees of the Cathedral of political correctness.
We expect the subversive pressure of the slave ethic from the left. When Russia was the heart of the Soviet Union, Sweden romanticised them; now they are one of the most conservative elements in Europe, quite the opposite. Just last month, Sweden was flexing its naval muscles and asked its local authorities to step up contingency plans in preparation for a Russian invasion. Yet, in complete contradiction, two thirds of Swedes are scared of a future with anti-war, Putin-friendly Trump as the US President! Which is it, leftists? Either Trump is going to cause WWIII or he’s too friendly with Putin.
More than this, they cannot see that their country has actually been invaded; their own political class has left the gate wide open for mass-immigration and has no interest at all for the physical safety of their kin. In fact, Putin was the one to express his deepest concern and awe at the actions of the Swedish government: ‘It doesn’t fit into my head what on earth they’re thinking over there. This is the result of the dilution of national values [identity].
He’s right, you know. In Russia, recent grand architectural projects are in the traditional, beautiful style their nation has contributed to European culture. In Northern Europe, modern and post-modern plastic rectangles and glass bubbles, which aren’t really meant to convey anything, are the not so cheap and not at all cheerful alternative the state offers up to the people. Similarly, Putin has made serious attempts to promote the traditional family and values in order to stave off the worst of the coming demographic winter in the West.
What have the self-interested political classes of Europe done? Well, this month’s discovery of yet another sex slave held in the basement of a hookah cafe by ‘stateless refugees’ (tr. Arabs) is just the tip of the iceberg of Sweden’s woeful situation as the rape capital of Europe. But, wherever one looks in the West, we see the inadequate treatment of such matters by the courts and either silence or rapid diminuendo from the media.
But, I digress. The point is, neocons are no better. Some of them would want to appease their true-right friends by stating they aren’t in favour of foreign aid but, when it comes to the alien state of Israel (a country that doesn’t need anyone’s help), their eyes glaze over. Every one of them instantly metamorphoses into obedient golems who would defend her with their last.
Domestically speaking, they would follow the extreme racial blindness of popular neocons like Niall Ferguson, believing that ethnic changes in demography change nothing, so long as you have capitalism, democracy and modern medicine; but, when it comes to the ethno-nepotism of Israel, no questions are allowed. To question Israeli racism is apparently racist. A full-blown SJW couldn’t have said it better.
So, how is this a proper slave ethic? In response to the master ethics of thinking for oneself and possessing the masculine virtue of protecting one’s own people and traditions from others, neocons propose a subversive counter-ethic in which success is measured simply in how efficient an economic unit one is. Not just, figuratively, how much cotton they can pick, but how readily they will spend most of their wage, or even encumber themselves with debt, in order to add more fuel to the house fire that is the modern Keynesian economy.
Of course, having a greater earning potential has a lot to do with physiological strengths but the weakness of the neocon is their inner-resentment of the traditional, thinking man. They loathe those who objectively question the decline of the West as this robs them of any sense of glory, unmasking them as nothing more than a rat racing cheerily to the precipice of the River Weser, to the Pied Piper of Hamelin’s tune.
Their slave ethic is played out on a global scale against anti-war alpha-male leaders, such as Trump and Putin. On the local scale, it is against those who would stand for cultural and/or ethnic homogeneity – the primary factor for creating a high trust society, or against those who refuse to turn a blind eye to interventionist foreign policy. Such thinking horrifies the neocon bourgeoisie who readily cry the modern equivalents of ‘heretic’. Politics and religion are not on their table. Traditionalism? This is the 21st century, don’t you know? No, the consumerist serf’s idea of intellectual discussion is a tame book club in which faux-right talk is a cover for measuring each other’s ‘success’, as is church or any other social occasion.
Neocons may have had a good run at disguising themselves as part of the right, but they cannot disguise the cowardly and subversive nature of their ideology which betrays its origins, having no root in conservatism or traditionalism. Being built on sand, its days are numbered and it is already being replaced by stronger nationalistic movements. Where there is a strong Western Civilization, there can be no platform for neoconservatism.