Conservatives Never Learn
by Ian McKinney
One thing that's been proven yet again in the recent election fiasco is that conservatives
are unable to learn anything. That's why I gave up being a conservative years ago.
To be more specific, I gave up on conservatives for two reasons:
1) They lack even the most cursory historical perspective that would enable them to
realize just how far they have moved to the left over the past fifty years.
2) They lack the minimal courage needed to face reality.
This is why conservatives will never win. In fact, from a totally objective tactical
perspective I have more respect for the liberals, although I'd like to take all of them who
can't be reformed in a reasonable amount of time and pack them into a giant spaceship headed
for deep space. Regardless of the fact that I despise the liberals and their whole anti-American,
anti-western, anti-White, subversive mindset, I'll give them grudging respect for holding to
their principles and their ability to gain ground on the right. Of course, I understand the
left has a great advantage since the largely Jewish-dominated media support every socially
and morally destructive idea, policy, and attitude that the most debased liberal mind can
devise. Whether it be moral relativism, open borders, homosexuality, multiculturalism,
feminism, race-mixing, trashing our traditions, undermining the family, ad naseum infinitum,
the left aways moves in a certain direction, while dragging the conservatives along just a
few steps behind. The consequence of which is that the liberal position of twenty years ago
becomes the conservative standard of today. Most conservatives refuse to face this fact.
Thirty years ago it was acceptable for conservatives to defend immigration policy on the
basis of race. Virtually ALL conservatives saw it as perfectly reasonable to have an
immigration policy that more or less preserved the racial demographics of our country --
since America was 90% White, 90% of our immigrants should be White. Peter Brimlow discusses
this fact in his book Alien Nation in relation to the suicidal changes made to immigration
policy in 1965 which had the effect of opening our borders to every featherless biped -- as
long as those bipeds were non-white (White featherless bipeds need not apply unless they are
Jewish). In 1965 conservatives openly argued against the revisions with the concern that
the nation's racial demographics would be altered, our cities would become overrun with
non-whites, and that their numbers would expand enormously. The putrid Edward Kennedy, who
at that time was the frontman for those pushing for the change, voiced his by now well-known
lies to soothe stupid and na´ve conservatives that the proposed changes would NEVER cause
such things to happen...
Forward thirty years: Today, NO elected conservative would publicly oppose in racial terms
our present immigration policy, which effectively guarantees that Whites will become a
minority and eventually extinct in the country their ancestors created. The quintessential
example would be Bob Dornan -- widely regarded as an exceptionally aggressive fire-breather
on the right, and a profound and immovable conservative. Dornan lost his seat in the House
in his California district to a Mexican-American put over the top by the votes of illegal
aliens. If anybody had cause to see and denounce the Mexican invasion made inevitable by
our immigration laws, it was Dornan. Yet after contesting his defeat on narrow technical
grounds (and losing) he disappeared. And was subsequently quoted in the media saying that
he had no problem if the older blue-eyed American stocks were displaced by browns. Of such
weak tea are "conservatives" made these days.
All of today's conservatives, practically without exception, mouth the same old idiotic
nonsense about "strength through diversity" and the "melting pot," as if flooding America
with non-whites has been a conservative tradition rather than a (Jewish-interest-advancing)
radical departure from the wisdom of our White forefathers. Based on typical conservative
opinion as expressed today one could be forgiven for thinking the immigration revisions
made in 1965 were actually the work of conservatives instead of the always-subversive
coalition of liberals and Jews! I'm not even slightly convinced that conservatives just
use this racial diversity talk as camoflage to deflect criticism. No, "diversity" has been
adopted as an ideological conservative plank. (The ironic thing about this is the racial
demographic transformation will make future Republican victories fewer and fewer no matter
how much "reaching out" is attempted by boobs like Dubya. The Republicans are not merely
acquiescing in the normalization of policies that will destroy their party and race, they
are celebrating these impending extinctions.) Today's universal "conservative" acclaim for
diversity is an obvious and clear victory for the liberals, though conservatives refuse to
understand it. Yet it is only one example among many where conservatives now embrace
positions exactly the reverse of those their antecedents (even in some cases they themselves)
embraced scant decades ago. The only time-tested pricinciple today's conservatives actually
conserve is the idea that conservatism is a liberal position plus ten to twenty years.
The most ironic aspect of this election is the idea, which has percolated among the race
traitors like Jack Kemp and his lunatic ilk for a while, but is now mainstream among the
cons, is that conservatives can curry favor with Blacks, Hipanics, and other non-whites,
convert them to conservatism, and thus win future elections. Excuse me while I indulge in
a huge belly laugh. There has been no evidence that I have ever seen that this tactic has
even a remote possibility of success. If anything, the evidence of the recent presidential
election proves just the opposite. Dubya pandered extensively to Hispanics and Blacks. He
even addressed the NAACP, something that even his milquetoast father refused to do. Yet
for all that pandering, Dubya got a smaller percentage of Black votes than even Bob Dole:
7% -- versus 93% for Gore. The truth is that only by adopting every policy of the Democratic
Party and sweetening them could the Republicans have even a slight hope of breaking the
minority voting blocks.
You know, this pandering doesn't even make sense from a practical point of view, given the
relatively small number of Black and Hispanic registered voters. Even if the Republicans
could get 20% of the Black vote, so what? What would make sense is to energize the much
larger White base, especially White women. Increasing the White vote by only 5% in many
states would make Democrat victories almost impossible. The South, where 60-90% of Whites
vote Republican, is a perfect example of what I'm talking about. Even though that region
has a comparatively heavy Black population -- Mississippi, Alambama, Louisiana, to name
three, have Black populations over 30% -- racial solidarity and block voting by White men
and women in those states consistently demolishes the Black block votes and have made
Republican victories a given. Despite that fact, we don't see any effort by Bush to
energize the White voting base, just this ridiculous and pathetic and ineffective "reaching
out to Blacks" tactic instead. One more example not just of cowardice and defeat on the
race issue, but sheer, unbelieveable stupidity.
In a fundamental sense, conservatives can't win, because they essentially stand for nothing.
They would like to maintain the Status Quo, but that is constantly shifting, driven by the
left through the information and entertainment media, which are controlled by Jews, and
over which the conservatives exert no influence. What was radical leftism becomes standard
conservatism as soon as the mass public has been sufficiently marinated in Jewish-leftist
TV propaganda so that opposing it becomes futile. Conservatism is like an army whose only
tactic is defense and which only knows how to retreat and dig in -- only to abandon that
position tomorrow in yet another retreat.
The obvious truth is that the Republicans and Democrats are both supporting policies and
ideas that are destroying the West; the only difference is that with the Republicans it
takes a little longer. Kind of like the proverbial frog in the pot of water on a stove.
The end is the same, but this slow death allows the foolish and cowardly to go on with
their lives without having the rot rammed into their faces, which might force them to take
responsibility and, God forbid, take substantive action. With Bush-style conservatism the
rot remains, but instead of being in the open, as with the Clintons, it festers behind the
curtain. Either way, the deadly corrosive results are the same.
I bring up these uncomfortable things to my conservative friends not because I want to save
the Republican Party or conservatism. Hardly. Both have become irredeemably undermined
and subverted, and really never had the ideological basis or fundamental courage to win
anyway. My point is that conservatism is a lost cause, its pundits and pols are almost
without exception corrupt, foolish, and cowardly. They will accomplish nothing but a few
sporadic token victories that will quickly be reversed by the liberals just as soon as they
can get around to them; meanwhile, the social decline proceeds unabated toward complete
destruction. The truth that must be understood by all decent White Americans is that if
Whites are dispossessed and outnumbered, America is totally finished. No amount of pandering
to non-whites will save us. Only through White racial solidarity and eventual resurgence
can anything be restored and the White-hating leftists, malicious minorities, and subversive
parasites be defeated.