It also applies within the US… of the old 13 colonies, only one, South Carolina, is solidly Republican, and a full nine are Democrat, defined as never having voted for Trump.
This is a fine argument. I have know, worked with and greatly admired people from distant parts the world. I built restaurants for them. They were successful only because of the qualities they had. That being an over abundance of grace and as businessmen, hard as nails and willing to put in the time and work. All were first generation immigrants. Well, one pair of brothers second generation.
One owner I knew before he spoke English. I loved and respected these people. I have also tried hiring other immigrants that only cared about themselves, and had no decency about them. I refuse to have anything to do with such folks again and do not want them in my society.
This is more an argument about who someone really is than about where they came from.
The message I get from this post is that to over-emphasize soil as a nation's anchor is a mistake. I think over-emphasizing "take you marbles and move" amounts to the same thing.
On an increasingly over-governed earth, the prospect of depopulation to something resembling eighteenth-century population densities, remains a modeling exercise. For now therefor, agricultural property, AKA soil, will remain of paramount importance to the Republic, if we can keep it.
That being so, "claiming" by moving amounts to having the money to do it. I do not begrudge anyone the means to live that way. It simply is not an option for the majority. The idea of forming parallel societies, however, makes sense, even for the majority.
Unfortunately the most visible examples seem to be virtual societies with wealthy members, or at least ones with upper middle class incomes. We need to balance that with parallel organizations that are for lower income families and individuals. Those will perforce be anchored by people with modest assets, anchored in fixed property.
My bottom line; we need both. Autarks of all means should form Guilds of all kinds.
The Scots-Irish are not Irish (celtic). They are anglo-saxons. There's been ethnic hatred between the two group ever since the English ethnically cleansed the border clans into Northern Ireland.
This feels kind of like cope, to be frank. Every great nation was founded by agentic people, and, indeed, Europeans remained quite agentic up through WWII, completely reengineering the political system of the continent for a brief time.
America's federalist system does mean that fleeing to places with better prospects is a better option than holding fast for our most agentic people, and I agree that this ultimately yields better outcomes than the European system of protesting for a few days and then having nowhere to flee in the aftermath. But it's still retreat, and I don't think we can redefine it as the kind of thing our ancestors from the Mayflower did.
Maybe the couple of guys who went off to Russia in search of right wing paradise and fought in the war to get citizenship can make that claim, but in America, there are no claimants to John "Liver-Eating" Johnson's legend quite yet.
Oh, I didn't intend to imply a proposal. This just seems like the current state of affairs for Americans. We can retreat to more salvageable ground (but know that our hometowns will be lost for the foreseeable future) or we can stay where we are and fight a thousand losing battles. Our ancestors did great things, but I don't think we can draw a parallel between the civilizing of the West and what we're forced to do.
Of course, you're in Utah, which is an odd case. Good enough demos that there's no reason to retreat, but still an existential need to (de-)civilize the entire political structure before that's lost.
It also applies within the US… of the old 13 colonies, only one, South Carolina, is solidly Republican, and a full nine are Democrat, defined as never having voted for Trump.
This is great. My ancestor travelled to the ends of the world. Where the rail line ended and no route further remained before settling.
Id like to think he would have kept going had it been possible. Had to leave and travel half again across the world to find a wife.
Fantastic article.
This is a fine argument. I have know, worked with and greatly admired people from distant parts the world. I built restaurants for them. They were successful only because of the qualities they had. That being an over abundance of grace and as businessmen, hard as nails and willing to put in the time and work. All were first generation immigrants. Well, one pair of brothers second generation.
One owner I knew before he spoke English. I loved and respected these people. I have also tried hiring other immigrants that only cared about themselves, and had no decency about them. I refuse to have anything to do with such folks again and do not want them in my society.
This is more an argument about who someone really is than about where they came from.
>and we will only keep it if we find the courage and ingenuity and will to claim it again.
Our future absolutely depends on a triumph of the will. :)
The message I get from this post is that to over-emphasize soil as a nation's anchor is a mistake. I think over-emphasizing "take you marbles and move" amounts to the same thing.
On an increasingly over-governed earth, the prospect of depopulation to something resembling eighteenth-century population densities, remains a modeling exercise. For now therefor, agricultural property, AKA soil, will remain of paramount importance to the Republic, if we can keep it.
That being so, "claiming" by moving amounts to having the money to do it. I do not begrudge anyone the means to live that way. It simply is not an option for the majority. The idea of forming parallel societies, however, makes sense, even for the majority.
Unfortunately the most visible examples seem to be virtual societies with wealthy members, or at least ones with upper middle class incomes. We need to balance that with parallel organizations that are for lower income families and individuals. Those will perforce be anchored by people with modest assets, anchored in fixed property.
My bottom line; we need both. Autarks of all means should form Guilds of all kinds.
the point is to stop thinking about your heritage as an instrumentality for present political needs
Maybe the only way to conserve or honor anything that came before you is to be a pioneer again.
The Scots-Irish are not Irish (celtic). They are anglo-saxons. There's been ethnic hatred between the two group ever since the English ethnically cleansed the border clans into Northern Ireland.
https://paulspooner2.substack.com/p/youre-looking-at-them-the-evolution?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android&r=7lg80u
This feels kind of like cope, to be frank. Every great nation was founded by agentic people, and, indeed, Europeans remained quite agentic up through WWII, completely reengineering the political system of the continent for a brief time.
America's federalist system does mean that fleeing to places with better prospects is a better option than holding fast for our most agentic people, and I agree that this ultimately yields better outcomes than the European system of protesting for a few days and then having nowhere to flee in the aftermath. But it's still retreat, and I don't think we can redefine it as the kind of thing our ancestors from the Mayflower did.
Maybe the couple of guys who went off to Russia in search of right wing paradise and fought in the war to get citizenship can make that claim, but in America, there are no claimants to John "Liver-Eating" Johnson's legend quite yet.
I think you are responding to a proposal I am not making
Oh, I didn't intend to imply a proposal. This just seems like the current state of affairs for Americans. We can retreat to more salvageable ground (but know that our hometowns will be lost for the foreseeable future) or we can stay where we are and fight a thousand losing battles. Our ancestors did great things, but I don't think we can draw a parallel between the civilizing of the West and what we're forced to do.
Of course, you're in Utah, which is an odd case. Good enough demos that there's no reason to retreat, but still an existential need to (de-)civilize the entire political structure before that's lost.