The announcement from Paul Ryan, currently the Speaker of the House of Representatives, that he will not stand for re-election in the 2018 midterms has been greeted with optimism among pro-freedom and pro-Trump conservatives. They seem confident that anyone would make a better Speaker than Ryan. Admittedly, Ryan hasn’t been terribly effective in that post, but the midterm election could change the power balance in the chamber. At this juncture, how confident should we be that the Representatives returned to us in January 2019 will present a more conservative and pro-Trump appearance?
It’s not looking good from here, I’ll tell you that much. The Republican caucuses in Congress have evoked massive disappointment from the Republican base. It seems to many that they regard thwarting President Trump as a higher priority than advancing a conservative agenda. The appearance that this is so gives plausibility to the notion that there’s really only one major party: a Permanent Bipartisan Party of the Political Elite, dedicated above all else to retaining an iron grip on the levers of power.
The electoral system being heavily biased toward incumbents, it’s highly unlikely that any amount of conventional politicking would result in a large-scale replacement of the members of Congress. And if you find the implications of that distasteful, well...welcome to the club.
“Special prosecutor” Robert Mueller’s recent overreach in having the FBI raid the offices of Michael Cohen, President Trump’s personal lawyer, has a lot of pro-Trump folks slavering over the prospect that Trump will at long last “cowboy up” and fire the vicious, unprincipled bastard. While it is within the president’s power to do so, it’s unlikely that Trump will take that step. Virtually the whole of Congress is arrayed against it. Some have spoken of impeachment proceedings before this. More would undoubtedly do so should Mueller be fired...and some of them might be Republicans. Remember that John McCain still sits on Capitol Hill.
President Trump has already reversed course in one important matter: he has declared that he will not submit to an interview by Mueller or any of his henchmen. That’s all to the good, as it has become plain that Mueller and his team are determined to force Trump out of the White House and will seize on any pretext to advance toward that end. A skilled interviewer could make it impossible for Trump to answer his questions in a fashion invulnerable to misinterpretation. That’s how the DoJ rattled Mike Flynn into a guilty plea, put Martha Stewart behind bars, and ruined Lewis “Scooter” Libby.
Given the above, I’d be unsurprised should Establishment Republicans, many of whom still nurse a grudge against Trump for defeating them in the 2016 primaries (and making them look like fat-cats and fools since then), mount pressure on Trump to allow Mueller to interview him. It’s the sort of thing one does to an enemy toward whom one must pretend amity.
The native peoples of Europe have begun a wheeling turn back toward national pride and opposition to mass immigration to their countries. It’s about time. Europe, the source of nearly everything good about contemporary civilization and one of the few places where the white race remains in the majority, is in danger of being destroyed by the horde of Muslim and African “refugees” battering at its gates. Hungary’s election of Viktor Orban suggests that Europeans’ recognition of their civilizational peril, while too long delayed, is firming toward a decisive reversal in policy.
In the long run it won’t matter. Whites of European descent have ceased to reproduce quickly enough to replace themselves. The Middle Eastern and African savages who’ve managed to penetrate Europe are reproducing far more swiftly. You can point this out to any white European. No matter his overt reaction, he’ll regard it as “not my problem,” and pass on to whatever he deems more important than breeding for the sake of a future he doesn’t expect to see.
It’s unlikely that any nation in Europe will become a second Lebanon or Zimbabwe in what remains of my lifetime. Nevertheless, I must counsel my younger Gentle Readers: If you’ve toyed with the idea of touring Europe, don’t put it off any longer than you must. Once the savage fraction reaches a certain threshold, there won’t be anything much left of the Old World from which our New one sprang.
For a while I was cheered by the rapid development of privately owned and operated orbital transport. It seemed that free enterprise had at last accepted the challenge of taking Man to the ultimate frontier from which the U.S. government had retreated. And indeed, companies such as SpaceX and Blue Origin have made considerable strides toward more economical (albeit still too expensive for a holiday weekend) access to Earth orbit. Perhaps, in another decade or two, we’d see construction begin on space habitats, and perhaps on some persistent human-occupied installations on the Moon.
Maybe...but more likely not. The principal customers for orbital access are national governments. It would be in those governments’ interest to squash any private effort to colonize space or any of the other bodies in the Solar System. They could do so rather easily, either by terminating all contracts with the company that tries it or by invoking “national security” laws to forbid the effort altogether. Of those two paths, the latter is the more likely. Any government with a “national security” statute could claim that its “security” depends on not being bombed from orbit – and never mind that the owners of a privately-operated space station would have neither a reason nor an incentive to do so.
The High Frontier remains Mankind’s best chance at contriving an escape from ever more tyrannical Earthly governments. It’s where I’ve framed my most optimistic vision of the future. I have no doubt whatsoever that the movers and shakers within national political elites are just as aware of that as are you and I. The implications are left to my Gentle Readers.
Not a usual sort of Liberty’s Torch column, eh? Well, sometimes I get like this. The onset is always slow and steady. When it reaches a certain level I must resort to pixels of gloom. Happily, it usually doesn’t last long.
I married a cockeyed optimist, which provides a certain perverse impetus to “balance” her out now and then. When she catches me in such a state, she usually just chuckles. However, this morning I discovered that she’s acquired a new arrow for her quiver. “Why be such a pessimist?” she said. “You know it doesn’t do any good.”
I reflected on that thrust for a moment, said, “Yeah, you’re right,” and sat down to write the above.
Have a nice weekend, Gentle Reader. Maybe the sun will come out, though, frankly, I doubt it.
I was watching a Lauren Southern video in which she said, paraphrased, that governments tax people to the point where they can't afford to have large families (never mind other factors which we do know exist)... and then use those taxes to pay generous welfare benefits to migrants to replace the existing populations.
ReplyDeleteThis is civilizational-level treason.
I like this solution - neat, well-reasoned, and NOT involving firing.
ReplyDeletehttp://dailycaller.com/2018/04/11/dershowitz-rosenstein-recuse/
The falling populations is a real concern. For a woman to dedicate her life to her family's well-being, is quite a personal sacrifice. Too few women are willing to do it.
ReplyDeleteI'll confess, I was in-and-out of that life choice for many years - I would work when it was needed, or when the money was too good to turn down. At other times, when the family need was greater, or our finances improved, I stayed home with the kids. If I had it to do over again, I'd have thrown myself more fully into my time at home.
Sometimes, male and female, we fail to throw ourselves fully into an experience. Instead, we fulfill our responsibilities, but don't completely engage. Perhaps that's one reason that grandparents have so much patience with their grandchildren - they are making up for the times that they gave the minimum to their own kids.
I've heard other female writers say that they regretted not taking their work seriously enough when they had young kids. They feel they would have made so much more progress, if they had.
I'm not so sure. I know my writing time is more precious now, as I have a sense that the time is all too short. But, honestly, I just don't think I could have managed to create a professional body of work with all the other things going on, while my kids were young.