Guest Post by The Zman
For generations, the source of conflict in the American political system is that it represents a small slice of the American people. The Yankee elite that rose up in the aftermath of the Civil War, later joined by Jews in the 20th century, represents not only a narrow cultural slice of American society, but a narrow economic slice as well. Since the end of the Cold War this has become acute. In 30 years, there have been three major reformist movements attempting to broaden the ruling coalition.
It seems like a lifetime ago, but Ross Perot was in many respects the prototype for Donald Trump’s 2016 run. Perot ran as an outsider, on the back of his folksy observations about the federal government. Despite being very rich, he was clearly a man of the lower classes. His picaresque presentation was very appealing to a large portion of the population open to populist appeals. If not for his enigmatic personality, he probably would have won the White House in 1992.
Of course, what opened the door for Perot’s 1992 run was the Buchanan challenge to George H. W. Bush in the Republican primary. When asked why he was running against Bush he said, “If the country wants to go in a liberal direction, it doesn’t bother me as long as I’ve made the best case I can. What I can’t stand are the backroom deals. They’re all in on it, the insider game, the establishment game—this is what we’re running against.” That should sound familiar.
Both of those efforts to broaden the establishment coalition to include the majority of white Americans failed, but they set up the 2016 Trump run. While it is clear that the Perot and Buchanan efforts failed in their mission, it is too soon to know if the Trump effort is a failure. The cracking of important institutions like the media and now the voting process will have consequences into the future. Perot and Buchanan focused on the people, while Trump focused on the system itself.
What we have seen thus far in the 30 years since the end of the Cold War is two of the three ways people can attempt to broaden the ruling coalition. Both are reform efforts that start outside with the desire to end up inside. Perot wanted to bring in new people, who would represent the broader public. Buchanan and Trump both wanted to reform the system by reforming one of the parties. Buchanan wanted a genuine right-wing party, while Trump wanted a populist party.
The third way, of course, is the purely outsider movement. This is when the unrepresented create an alternative outside the ruling coalition. They either peacefully compel the ruling elite to acknowledge their interests or they replace the ruling elite, and the system they rule, with a new elite and a new system. This is exactly what happened with the American Revolution. A new elite replaced the old elite and created a system that worked for them to replace the old system.
This is what makes the current moment so dangerous. Within one generation three efforts to broaden the ruling coalition have failed, while the condition of the unrepresented has declined. Just as important, the number of people feeling threatened by the status quo has increased. In the 1990’s, reformers were speaking for the white working class. Today, it is the broader middle-class that is becoming increasingly radicalized by the intransigence of the ruling class.
Another subtle point of comparison between now and that previous revolutionary moment is the divide between the reform from within crowd and the emerging outsiders, rallying around the election fraud. Ann Coulter took a swipe at Nick Fuentes over his criticism of some things she said. Coulter’s Tory instincts got the better of her and she inadvertently confirms the Fuentes criticism. Despite her reformist rhetoric, Queen Ann has always been a loyalist.
Another little glimpse of this divide is in the Ed Dutton interview of Steve Sailer last week, in which the election was a topic. Sailer strangely says that he has seen no evidence of election fraud. This is something you hear from other old paleocons and it reflects that old loyalist instinct. They cannot question the integrity of the system, as their goal has always been to join the system as a reformer. Therefore, their faith in the system is unshakable. It is civic nationalism in a nutshell.
Finally, the other bit of comparison is that the Founders did not view themselves as radicals or revolutionaries. The Declaration itself is a bourgeoise document filled with objectivist rhetoric explaining their actions. Even at the point of the break, they sounded like men willing to meet the crown halfway. Certainly, many of them knew this was impossible and saw this moment coming for a long time, but the need to show they were forced into this position was important to them.
That same instinct is turning up in the election protests. The young people out on the streets in state capitals are using the language of reform, but are clearly ready to make a break with the system entirely. They are young and enthusiastic, so they may not see it, but the logic of their arguments can only lead to a rejection of the system as being illegitimate. If the voting system is fraudulent, then the results of it are fraudulent, making this government the fruit of a poisoned tree.
It is tempting to dismiss what is happening as heat of the moment rhetoric that will fade as passions fade. There is some truth to it. The establishment will rehabilitate some former Trump supporters like Coulter, putting them back on television. Others will temper their rhetoric in the hope of being rehabilitated. The media will try to surround the remnant in a cone of silence. The ruling class will apply the same ointments they used the last time they suffered a populist outbreak.
The trouble is, the causes of this last populist outbreak have not gone away and they promise to get worse. The fundamental problem that existed at the end of the Cold War exists today. That is, forty percent of Americans have no representation in either political party and as a result have no voice in government. The number is certainly larger, but blacks and most white liberals are so easily deluded with ceremonial tokens they imagine themselves as vital parts of the ruling coalition.
The Declaration of Independence was at the time and is today a very radical document, which is why our rulers don’t mention it much anymore. A couple of generations ago it was the center piece of civics instruction. Today it has been replaced by critical race theory and other nonsense from the multicultural fever swamps. Even so, the message still resonates today. Whenever any form of government ceases to represent the will of the people, it is the right and duty of the people to abolish it.
It is my sincere desire to provide readers of this site with the best unbiased information available, and a forum where it can be discussed openly, as our Founders intended. But it is not easy nor inexpensive to do so, especially when those who wish to prevent us from making the truth known, attack us without mercy on all fronts on a daily basis. So each time you visit the site, I would ask that you consider the value that you receive and have received from The Burning Platform and the community of which you are a vital part. I can't do it all alone, and I need your help and support to keep it alive. Please consider contributing an amount commensurate to the value that you receive from this site and community, or even by becoming a sustaining supporter through periodic contributions. [Burning Platform LLC - PO Box 1520 Kulpsville, PA 19443] or Paypal
-----------------------------------------------------
To donate via Stripe, click here.
-----------------------------------------------------
Use promo code ILMF2, and save up to 66% on all MyPillow purchases. (The Burning Platform benefits when you use this promo code.)
Trump gave the Traitors plenty of rope to hang themselves with and if this reformation fails, it’s strike three for TPTSNB; they’re out of government or they’re going clear out of this World.
Whenever any form of government ceases to represent the will of the people, it is the right and duty of the people to abolish it.
This is the unavoidable fulcrum upon which everything else balances. As was said at the time of the fomenting of the revolutionary process in the colonies, reasonable persons will avoid the consequences of a violent break with authority as long as it can be maintained there is hope for relief, or at least some reform. When that is finally seen as a fool’s errand that plays into even more oppression, the die is cast.
I maintain those who have believed in Trump populism are very quickly coming to that revolutionary conclusion. Very few of this group trusts the words of those in government, in business, in media, in healthcare…in anything. They simply don’t buy it anymore. The question is, how will that rejection be played out in our society?
It is my conclusion we are going to see a ratcheting up of resistance, starting with civil protest and relatively benign opposition. But as TPTB apply increasing pressure, more draconian rules, more senseless restrictions, more pain to the many and gain to the few, we are going to see folks begin to vote from the rooftops.
This would be a true civil war, not like the Late Unpleasantness that ended in 1865. Those who side with the oppressors will, after a period of moral hesitancy, be dealt with ruthlessly. No quarter will be given by either side.
This is a terrible, brutal future if it comes true. The problem is, there is absolutely nothing on the horizon that would indicate a way out. Short of deus ex machina, we will play this out to the bitter end. America will never be the same again…and that may be the best we can hope for.
The reason why third parties don’t work, is that the Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA[L]) creates one set of laws for the two government parties, and a different set for any/all other parties. The FECAL was created in 1971 to ensure the constant survival of the Republicrat swamp.