Monday, July 30, 2012

Status Warfare In Action

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/312542/tolerance-enforcers-mark-steyn

Clearly if the fight about gay marriage were really about gay marriage, gay rights, or even gay safety, this juxtaposition would not occur.

If on the other hand you assume it is a status struggle between SWPLs/Elites against 'the wrong kind of white people'/Christians who take Scripture seriously/et al, then this makes perfect sense.
The Islamics aren't viewed by them as a status threat, more as a client group, so from the SWPL perspective, who the hell cares what they say/want/do.

Eventually the non-SWPL white crowd is going to have to declare total political warfare on the SWPLs.  Do things like put nasty Section 8 in THEIR neighborhoods.  Destroy the undercover arrangement that allows NYC to be a functional city (they're allowed to do 'stop and frisk' and all kinds of things that NO OTHER CITY is allowed to do).  Continue destroying things that are precious to them until they beg for mercy.  Then, and only then, can you have a peace treaty.

16 comments:

Anonymous said...

National Review has gone along with the Left's white-hating racism for decades, they've purged some of their best writers at the behest of the Left, done to them exactly what Menino and Mereno are doing to Chick-Fil-A, and now these hypocrites are whining. Steyn makes a crawling, mealy-mouthed appeal in this piece for Liberals not to support these kind of actions because "political winds shift", but he and his colleagues should have thought about "shift" when they were throwing middle and working class white America under the bus on behalf of the Left. Now chickens --> roost. And Liberals don't fear shifting winds anyway, Republicans have neither the guts nor the morals to punish the Left when they get power (and they'll probably never again get power), more often then not they've gone after the enemies of the left. Nobody respects a quisling.

wnthinktank said...

Nice. I totally agree. The SWPLs are too much in the enemy's camp.

Jehu said...

Anonymous, WNthinktank,
Nonelite whites need to get with the who...whom program. Only when you can reward your friends AND punish your enemies can you have peace.

Anonymous said...

How can a non-elite reward/punish anyone? By definition they have no power.

Who are they going to vote for?

Jehu said...

Anonymous,
Nonelites can decline association, friendship, or to buy the products of their enemies. Voting is only one tool of many. At the local level, they can play hell with the lives of any SWPLs in any areas that they control, using Section 8 and zoning as a battering ram.

Anonymous said...

SWPLs don't want to be friends or associate with proles

People don't shop based on morals, not in any large degree. Proles will keep shoping at Wal Mart.

Proles are also unlikely to stay up to date on zoning law debates or be a serious force in them.

There is a reason the inner party lets the proles run free, they are incapable of becoming a viable force against them.

Jehu said...

Anonymous,
Lots of people who aren't proles aren't SWPLs. This is why you have acrimonious intra-family fights about politics---essentially on the OV versus B line.

Anonymous said...

How many of your intra-family political fights have ended in something changing?

Jehu said...

Anonymous,
The only changes in such fights tend to be via attrition. As I've mentioned numerous times, persuasion isn't about reason, but rather repetition and status. I generally follow a 'no first use' policy on political fights, but I'm rather merciless if they are joined.

Anonymous said...

I mean something important changing. Not changing your sisters opinion. Who cares if her opinion changes if she isn't the president and can't actually do something.

Jehu said...

Anonymous,
Intra-family and intra-small organization fights (like churches, clubs, etc) are the retail level of the cultural war. It isn't wise to dismiss them.

Anonymous said...

Jehu,

How can straining family and community relations through political arguing possibly be worth an infintessimely small effect on possible political outcomes?

Jehu said...

Anonymous,
Aversion to conflict is why conservatives generally lose cultural wars. You need to make the other side back down to avoid straining relations with you. Otherwise you find your side walking on eggshells all the time.

Anonymous said...

Jehu,

You aren't listening. Culture wars aren't going to be decided by your actions. Your actions will have an infintesimely small effect on the culture. Meanwhile, antagonizing those around you through conflict can have a large effect on you.

Jehu said...

Anonymous,
What you say is rational, but wars are rarely won by rational men or groups. Another party can always put you in a position where the rational economic man choice is to capitulate without a fight. Such things are team sports that require lots of people to make small impacts that when integrated over society sum to a contribution to a war, cultural or otherwise.

Anonymous said...

It's rational to fight in a long term game where you trust or can build trust with the other players.

That is not the game we are playing today. Everyone senses it, deep down.