Bourgeois Liberalism • Chronicles Magazine

Source: Chronicles Magazine

Since some of the articles in this number offer a critical discussion of liberalism, it might be helpful to consider what exactly that term means. Keeping in mind that the meaning has been changing since the end of the 18th century, I’ll start by listing four definitions, only the last of which seems to me to work.

First, we should reference what the media and chattering class label as “liberal,” which signifies whatever the user wants it to mean. For Ezra Klein at The New York Times, liberalism is perfectly compatible with abolishing gender distinctions or with Sarah Jeong’s tweet calling for the disappearance of white men, an apparent indiscretion that Klein passionately defended. This arbitrary use of “liberal” is comparable to the looseness with which the GOP media wield their god term “conservative,” which has been extended to such signs of the age as gay marriage and transgendered Republicans. In neither case do we learn what the terms under consideration mean historically, as opposed to what politicians and political journalists would like them to mean.

A second definition brings us to the common understanding of “liberal” among advocates of the welfare state and government-enforced social policy. It was the rise of what the socialist philosopher John Dewey called “the new liberalism” that inspired me to write After Liberalism, a book that focuses on the differences between the 19th-century concept of liberalism and 20th– century social democracy. The semantic extension of “liberal” was already going on in earlier attempts by the modern administrative state to alter the income curve and to colonize the family. Despite the effort to treat this massive interventionism in civil society as an affirmation of “freedom” based on self-government, it was exactly the opposite of what it claimed to be. Self-described libertarians like Albert J. Nock, H. L. Mencken, Friedrich Hayek, and Murray Rothbard were right to notice this obvious contradiction.

Still, our third definition, the libertarian alternative—particularly when yoked to a defense of radical lifestyles—hardly represents a return to the liberal ideals of an earlier time and society. Terms like “classical liberalism” and “19th-century liberalism” are now routinely linked to expressive individualism and the right of each person to do his own thing. This linkage has arisen from the selective citing of certain 19th-century sources, whether in defense of anarcho-capitalism or of a right to pursue certain peculiar moral practices. Some of the personalities who are associated with this idea of liberalism, like James Mill, his son John Stuart, Richard Cobden, and the German anarcho-individualist Max Stirner were not really “classical liberals.” In the age in which they lived, they were viewed as being on the political fringe. Unlike most liberals of their time, James Mill and Richard Cobden were in favor of both universal suffrage and international free trade. John Stuart Mill, who offered an extravagant defense of listening to all points of view in On Liberty, was an early feminist and advocate of the welfare state.

But outside of England, most self-described liberals in an earlier time were protectionists and defenders of the nation state. Like the English judge and philosopher Fitzjames Stephen and like Francois Guizot, the French premier in the 1830s and 1840s, these liberals resisted the plan to extend the suffrage to those without real property, who paid below a certain tax rate.

Which brings us to our fourth definition: liberalism, properly understood in those earlier times, was the lens through which the educated and propertied bourgeoisie (and note we are not just speaking here about an income group) understood the world and their place within it. Although evidence of this class could be found much earlier, the golden age for the bourgeoisie was the 19th and early 20th centuries. And contrary to what Marxists tell us, the bourgeoisie was not just running around amassing and investing capital. The bourgeoisie built a civilization centered on glittering cities, palatial homes, and the fostering of the arts and education.

Although there were Catholic liberals, perhaps most famously Lord Acton, liberals in general fitted more easily into Protestant than Catholic societies. For centuries, liberals had battled “clerical” enforcement of “just prices” and laws against usury (with roots going back to Aristotelian economics), societal influences of the Catholic Church. The Church also backed guild control of crafts and commerce, which limited trade competition and access to certain vocations. Needless to say, the bourgeoisie opposed such checks on trade and finance from wherever they came, and the Catholic Church represented for liberals the most unified opposition to desired economic change.

Again, there were exceptions, and both Catholic Belgium and the mostly Catholic regions of the Rhineland were among the pacesetters in industrial development and the expansion of investment credit. But there, too, the rising economic sector faced resistance from ecclesiastical authorities. This was true even in England, where the Anglican Church, into the early 19th century, opposed what it considered high interest rates. (Not surprisingly, a disproportionately large number of the English entrepreneurial class came from nonconformist Protestant backgrounds.)

This anticlerical tendency, which prevailed among the bourgeoisie in Catholic countries, did not translate into anything even distantly foreshadowing modern wokeness. Victorian morality thrived among the bourgeoisie; and the practice of separating the sexes socially was far more typical of the bourgeois class than of the older aristocratic order, in which philandering and the keeping of mistresses were hardly frowned upon. Although the affluent bourgeoisie avidly supported opera and civic festivities, their poorer cousins were often engaged in what Leo Strauss, paraphrasing the teaching of John Locke, described as “the joyless pursuit of joy.” Hard work was viewed as godly work, even if it brought, at least initially, scant reward. The prospering capitalist economy did not favor every interest and group equally, and far more ventures foundered than prospered in those regions of the West that were modernizing. Not every ship benefited to the same degree or at the same time from the rising flood of economic growth.

Although the bourgeoisie spoke about expanding freedom, they also stressed its moral limits. Public order took precedence over individual expressiveness; and discussions that were suitable for debating societies and academic lecture halls were not always acceptable in other social settings. Liberal societies were not only tolerant of what are today called “family values.” Such values were basic to their existence, as was the emphasis on women as mothers and wives. The expectation of most girls with whom I went to school in the 1950s was that they would become “homemakers,” and this did not testify to low self-esteem. Rather, it showed to what extent my fellow students were imbued with the social values cherished by our traditional social elites. What Amy Wax has referred to as “our Anglo-Protestant values”—values that once shaped American life and marked all religious denominations—are what sustained the traditional liberal society that existed by the 19th century.

Condemning that liberal order for practicing discrimination or for not imposing our present egalitarian ideology is an example of foolish presentism. Probably no one on the planet a hundred years ago held the social views of our present woke ruling class. Even the suffragettes, whatever their rhetorical excesses, made far less extravagant demands than did later feminists. The suffragettes wanted the right to vote and access to certain professions, and they sought more control over their property. These women also didn’t want their husbands to come home drunk, and many of them were staunch prohibitionists. But these advocates of “women’s rights” did not insist on abortion rights and were generally well-disposed toward being homemakers. Although more sweeping demands may have been implicit in their movement, there is no reason to treat these harbingers of a later feminism as being more radical than they actually were.

Although the liberal bourgeoisie opposed the slave trade and called for “putting slavery on the road to extinction,” they would not have been racial egalitarians even if they thought about such matters. These burghers usually had little contact with blacks, unless they were living in the American South or near a black urban neighborhood. The homage they paid to diversity might have been limited to a recognition that, at least in the sight of our Maker, all humans are in some sense equal. Our liberal bourgeoisie most certainly would not have favored extending voting rights to poor, illiterate blacks, but they also would not have wanted to give those rights to white people of the same economic and educational background. If these civic leaders and captains of industry were glaringly insensitive to any demographic, it would have been toward the predominantly white working class, a group that we on the populist right now champion.

But there is a difference in terms of the historical situation between the present populist right and workers’ organizations circa 1900. The latter were generally on the socialist left and favored government control of the economy and major income distribution. Today the working class has become a source of relative social and cultural stability. Because of both a managerial revolution and the cultural radicalization of the corporate class, our circumstances now differ dramatically from those of earlier times. The working class has been transformed into an ally of the right, a mainstay of the historical nation state, while corporate capitalists are now usually found on the cultural left. The onetime liberal order has now mostly passed; and older confrontations—e.g., between the bourgeoisie and an alliance of church and altar or between the bourgeoisie and the working class—have given way to a new struggle. It is the confrontation between the populist right and a globalist managerial class allied to a woke intelligentsia. This struggle is taking place in a postliberal West; and while we may lament the erosion of our liberal past, it is not about to come back.

Lest there be any confusion on this point, let me state that I’m not calling for the right to ditch traditional constitutional morality or respect for public order. We should uphold such guiding principles to whatever extent that course remains open to us. Unless I’m mistaken, however, such vestiges of the liberal past may be less and less operational going forward. We should therefore not be surprised if the power grabs by the woke left become even more outrageous as our postliberal fate unfolds.

Real Grug-Brain Dismissal of the Ideologies of Democracy, a Republic, Libertarianism, Communism and A Reminder of What Worked in the Past

A prelude…you should read this incredibly salient, cogent essay that was written nearly thirty years ago, before the internet was even public:

Then I have to tell you it was written by the Unabomber. Had he chosen to mail this essay, instead of explosive devices, who knows, he may have been made EMPORER.

Democracy: there is a system of voting, with which the majority vote creates policy. There is no restrictions on what can be changed.

The Poisonous Spread of “Democracy” in the age of the newly defangled NEW WORLD ORDER – and the rising from the ashes of a New World Order once again.

Republic: there is a system of voting, with which majority vote creates policy, however, there is an irrevocable doctrine (in America it’s called the Constitution) with which all policy must adhere to Constitutional Law.

Libertarianism: this ideology is one that believes in a stateless society. There is an understanding amongst members of society of a non-aggression principle, interpret that as you will. Everyone has castle law type rights over their property and their rights to generate economic growth. It’s a nice idea, however, in a multicultural, consumerist, nihilistic, borderless society it is inevitable that conflicting cultures will not adhere to the Lolebretarian NAP. So in reality, this is a recipe for all out anarchy. The purveyors of this ideology do indeed offer excellent insight and critique of our modern day piss-earth, corporate controlled Neo-Liberal capitalist hellscape. Libertarianism is best left as a philosophy.

Here, from the horse’s mouth:

Essay: Why the State Demands Control of Money – Hans-Hermann Hoppe

Alot to say…Libertarianism that is.

As far as a system?

It can’t be adapted given the material conditions of our reality.

Libertarians are bound to wake up to the fact that monolithic, ethnocentric, homogeneous communities are necessary to even think of implementation. Then they realize it’s impossible. Where do they go next?

Communism: this system abandons any type of voting and what not, petitioning to the leaders of the communist system may enact change. A primary element of this ideology is that societal class, ie, the affluent v the poor, class is eliminated. The “workers” own the means of production. However, there is a superior body that rules over the workers. It wouldn’t work well in the current year, nor any year, going forward. I care not to explain the realities of the Bolshevik Revolution. If you have had your head up your Reddit ass for the last five years than you missed this one:

Europa: The Last Battle (2017 Documentary)

There are many augmentations of Marxism. Spend your own twenty years studying this. Then tell me your thoughts.

Right now, I care not to explain to fucking retards what North Korean Juche is and why it works.

Nor will I engage in ZOG-styled, Neo-Liberal criticism of the CCP. Many people are unaware of the undertaking of the Chimericafication of China spearheaded by David Rockefeller and Henry Kissinger in the 1970s. It’s called the Trilateral Commission and it’s another one of those ridiculous conspiracy theories that Slate, Salon, Mother Jones, Vox, NY Times, etc have relegated as such. At the behest of the ADL. So that’s that. It never happened.

The moves that men with the power that Kissinger and Rockefeller have – this is what leads to seismic shifts in economic frameworks, like NAFTA. But Washington Post and The Atlantic forget NAFTA ever happened. Fuck, even the Economist (owned by Rothschild), Barron’s, Forbes, Bloomberg, Fortune, Wall Street Journal…haven’t mentioned NAFTA since, well, forever. So therefore American manufacturing was never relocated to China, amongst other places. American production of consumer goods never left America. Walmart sells all American products right?

China welcomed investment into infrastructure. It’s called trade. America as of late engages in too much financialization for it to be called trade.

China has the Belt and Road Initiative. They trade infrastructure for resources. And it’s working. It’s big.

America has pronouns, Adderall and Kosher-certified bubble gum.

To demonstrate that national sovereignty is antiquated in the hearts and minds and actions of the Supranational Globalist Machine, take a look at BlackRock (which manages $10 trillion dollars) as it has invested complex mezzanine financial instruments with the CCP. Larry Fink, the Founder and CEO of BlackRock also is on the Board of Directors of the World Economic Forum. And the Council on Foreign Relations. This is what a globalist is.

Do you think this swinging dick gives a fuck about your Constitution?

Post #2 – Modern Globalists behind Agenda 2030 / Great Reset – Larry Fink and BlackRock

BlackRock runs the show.

BlackRock – the New Vampire Squid

Most of those aspiring for an American Soy-Viet union have absolutely zero sense of Eastern thought. Asian ways of thinking. The patience that they have, in general, in aggregate, versus, let’s say, wiggers that harp on sneaker-head websites waiting for the next $500 pair of Jordans to drop. And drop half a week’s pay on a pair of sneakers. Which is nice to treat yourself. But what about the 666 other pairs of sneakers you have? Why do you live at your parents house at age 37? Nice lambo-feeties. Chevrolegz.

And while the Church hangs the flag of Globohomo to keep donations coming in to Joel Osteen types and the State Department hung the same flag at the embassy in Afghanistan a meager few months before Afghanistan was reclaimed by Afghan tribes, in the form of a collective called the Taliban. Fuck you George Bush/Floyd worshiping wiggers. Enjoy your sneakers. WordStar nigggggggggaaaaaa!!!!!!!

Globohomogayplex-BatFlu Virus Regime-BLM-LGBTQIAAPPCNNMSNBCJEW-Hydrogen-Bomb-Thing-Secured Via SURVEILLANCE (the current ideology the United States of Weimerica is operating under):

A primer: what is this Globohomo?

This is what we have now. Some ten, maybe five years ago those in the neo-reactionary, dark enlightenment, dissident right, Third Position, traditionalist circles called this reality clownworld. Even classic liberals (who believe in free speech, anti-war, anti-corporatist, pro-worker) grew dissatisfied with the direction the Left had taken. There was already something brewing. Those that understand history, within the framework of pattern recognition when sequenced across complex, multifaceted, highly complicated systems, know things happen. Big things. Things that hit you over the fucking head like a peaceful protestor. Right in your fucking face. Again and again. Like September 11. And the coverup of the real conspirators. The Iraq war lies. War crime to the highest magnitude yet I recall the anticipation of “shock and awe” was turned into an IMAX-3D-4K-Dolby Surround Sound-Blow Your Fucking Ear Drums Out-type of media production like Hollywood would author (the same people that run Hollywood, Broadway, etc also run the Media, it’s the same people. Look at shareholders, Boards of Directors, PR releases, SEC filings – it’s all public record and for those that brush this off as a “conspiracy theory” then I suggest you get back to watching Rachel Maddow – why are you all obsessed with the anti-vax, white right?) Yeah.

The sensationalism of war combined with the Call of Duty video game infused sizzle baked into recruiting young men to join in the fight in the War on Terror ™, Nation Building ™ and Democracy ™. Then came “hope and change”. The Patriot Act is still in full effect as is taxpayer funding of Palestinian destruction. Libya’s Mu’ammar Al-Qadhdhāfī demonized when he challenged the Petrodollar system, then NATO (which was created to confront the Soviet Union – long gone since, literally, the elder Bush was president) led the carpet bombing of Libya. Followed by the CIA-created jihadist Mercenaries to capture, torture and kill the man that kept Libya from falling deep into the permanent, asymmetrical battlefield it has become: a staging ground for weapons to be smuggled into Turkey, bound for ZOG-mercenaries in Syria.

Benghazi anyone? Obama’s redline. Wait a second what the fuck are we in Syria for? Oh right, for Israel.

Pardon me. I thought American Patriots were in control.

No. They aren’t in control. The world has yet to come to know and understand the indescribable, vastness of the Gislaine Maxwell/Jeffrey Epstein espionage operation and what was at stake. Lesley Wexner brought Epstein into the Roy Cohn/Arthur Finkelstein/Lauder/Bromfeld/Wexner/Netanyahu nexus. He’s the man that founded both Victoria’s Secret and Abercrombie and Fitch. He appointed Epstein as his financial advisor. He owned a townhouse in Manhattan worth $70 million dollars. The townhouse ownership was transferred to Epstein for zero in consideration. In contract law, more specifically, within a Transfer of Asset and Assignment of Ownership agreement, the term “consideration” means something of substance/value/material/necessity that is exchanged between parties. The thing is: the contract provisions must be lawful activities under the jurisdiction of the law, lawful activities monitored by the Secretary of State and Attorney General office of any given of the fifty United States. Lawful activities. So this transaction did not include any consideration received by Wexner (hmm kind of like the Balfour Declaration).

The transfer couldn’t include the Wexner’s directive to catch powerful people on film fucking little boys and girls to use the evidence as blackmail. This is a Mossad operation. They nailed Clinton. Prince Andrew. Tony Blair. Bill Richardson. Bill Gates. Kevin Spacey. These are the popcorn headline worthy names. You must understand:

THEY FUCKING NAILED EVERYONE WHO IS IN THE DECISION MAKING CAPACITY TO DICTATE POLICY TO THE BENEFIT OF ISRAEL.

Take a close look. Or reverse image search. That pyramid on the roof of the Supreme Court of Israel has this ominous structure:

Have you seen the little black book? Have you seen the Lolita flight logs?

They nailed everyone. In New York. Florida. New Mexico. France. And Little St. James Island.

And the Kabbalah symbolism draped over this whole thing is right there in your fucking face and if you still are hung up on who or what this Illuminati/globalist/elite/satanic cabal/etc is then you are either inept or afraid to call into question the values instilled upon you by your public K-12 education.

Three values: Civil War was to end slavery, Martin Luther King was a beacon of hope and the Holocaust was the worst atrocity in the history of mankind. All three of these things didn’t happen as you were told they happened.

Holocaust Warriors Created Holy Warriors – by Sajjad Shaukat (written in 2017)

It’s more like a war of Northern aggression, a black figurehead (with multiple criminal complaints brought against him by women, squashed outside of court) and the Holodomor, no I meant the Holocaust. Sorry I forgot. I’ll never forget. That Israel did 9/11.

Zionist interests plotted 9/11. Research Operation Northwoods. Drone technology was available in 1962, fuck, in 2001 I would bet my left testicle the technology improved. Look at the Office of Special Planning. Look at PNAC. Look at Larry Silverstein’s business moves. Zim Shipping. Michael Chertoff. Paul Wolfowitz. Leo Strauss. Halliburton. Blackwater. Harry Jaffa. Irving Kristol. Ariel Sharon. Mossad. Dancing Israelis.

Too many people are obsessed with Mossad without consideration for infrastructure Israel has in place for Mossad to succeed.

Do you know what the Sayanim is? Sayanim. They are unpaid Jewish civilians that help Mossad out of a sense of devotion for Israel. Admittedly, there are tens of thousands of operatives active in the United States right now, at this fucking minute. I know for a fact this number is largely under reported.

Many are dual-citizens. Obtaining dual citizenship is part of the playbook in this sophisticated operation. Sayanim assist the Mossad with logistics worldwide. The Mossad is in the business of sabotage, espionage, blackmail, assassination – by any means necessary they are operating with malicious intent at the behest of the Greater Israel Project for it is prophecy. America is a Zionist Occupied Government.

Sayanim operate in the Canada, Puerto Rico, Dominican Republic, Mexico, Argentina, Chile, Uruguay, Columbia, Brazil, Peru, UK, Ireland, France, Germany, Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Netherlands, Belgium, Austria, Hungary, Poland, Czechia, Slovakia, Lithuania, Estonia, Latvia, Switzerland, Italy, Spain, Portugal, Cyprus, Luxembourg, Litchenstein, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Albania, Bulgaria, Macedonia, Croatia, Serbia, Greece, Malta, Turkey, Jordan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Bahrain, Pakistan, India, Russia, China, Singapore, Sri Lanka, Japan, Australia, New Zealand, Uganda, Kenya, South Africa, Ghana, Sierra Leone, Senegal, Morocco, Tunisia….then the places that may surprise you: Iran (yes Iran), Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, North FUCKING Korea, PALESTINE…

Still lost on this Zionism thing?

This is Zionism…

What else is there to say? The queer/feminist/BIPOC agendas are all the same type of thing – the forced political correctness down our fucking throats and being made to accept that somehow we are all equal…the same people that want to celebrate our differences, via diversity….say we are all equal…the agenda is overwhelming…it’s another angle of the attack on the American ethnicity (yes, America is a nation, not an idea. There was once something called an American. Read the 1790 Immigration and Naturalization Act to gain an understanding of what ethnic traits define an American.)

Read these:

Political Correctness Ended the Separation of Church and State

Holy fucking shit where are we now?

Basically, everything that Western Civilization has ever produced, ranging from Greek legends like Aristotle, Socrates, Alexander the Great, to Romans like Augustus, to Kings and Queens, to Napoleon, to The Canon, to Beethoven, to Mozart. Isaac Newton. Darwin. George Washington. Abraham Lincoln. Robert E Lee. Eisenhower.

We have this Tetragrammaton fiat-debt-death grip legerdemain system controlled by outside forces and a lugenpresse as it’s mouthpiece. It’s a big partnership amongst elected officials, law enforcement, moguls of finance, industry, media, telecommunications, infrastructure, consumer goods, professional services, healthcare, pharmaceutical companies, academia, religious institutions, charitable foundations, NGOs, not-for-profits, think tanks, SURVEILLANCE, CENSORSHIP, BIG TECH and your narrow-minded neighbor who wears four masks. Your vote doesn’t count.

The 2020 election was fraudulent as fuck. Look back at 2000 and that too was fraudulent. It’s all fraudulent. Voting and left/right, liberal/conservative, democrat/republican…neatly pigeon whole the peasants into bickering over gun control, abortion, taxes, military spending, social programs, etc.

Nothing really changes to the actual betterment of the common people. The notion this is still a Republic, or that Davos-flavored Democracy is in effect is a rouse and that’s perfect. Distract the feebleminded, fickle, fuckwitted swamp donkey consumerist liberal, self-loathing soyboys, bugmen, cat-lady, vax regime, illegal invader loving amalgamation of tranny penis sucking shit bag Trophozoites that worship Lady Gaga, Whoopy Goldberg, Nancy Pelosi, Joe Biden, Ruth Ginsburg, George Jesus Christ Floyd, Don “white Cock Matters” Lemon and anyone that either lofts off their cock leaving behind an axe wound and calls it a neo-vagina. Or a woman that undergoes a hysterectomy , no an add-a-dick-to-me and is now a man.

Our language is under a carpet bombing assault. Mankind is now people-kind, or some shit. Cultural misappropriation? How about this: the English Language belongs to Western Civilization, it is ours. What the fuck are you offended by if the West is cancelled? If it’s all cancelled and doesn’t exist, well, stop using our language. This is the furthest expanse of debate that’s attainable with Leftists vs. White People.

Another note: no self respecting White person would ever refer to themselves as a White Supremacist. If other races feel inferior and therefore attribute superiority to the White race, that’s their business.

But since the genocide of democracy sacred temple on January 6, 2021, it’s now state policy that Americans that value their Constitutional Law are enemies of the state.

And the Virus-Cyber-Climate hype. Yeah. We are so fucked.

Another important thing, Cryptocurrencies will be confiscated. It’s already begun:

HIGH TREASON: COINBASE IS OFFICIALLY IN BUSINESS WITH THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

When federal law enforcement agencies are making deals with your crypto wallet for the sake of surveillance, specifically, stated, within the deals themselves….there is nothing cryptic about your crypto. Your Crypto will be confiscated. That is an absolute certainty. It’s phased out of China. China has a digital currency they want to be universally adapted. Hence, mediums of exchange that bypass the state approved system must BE CRIMINALIZED.

What is the answer to all of this fuckery?

Let me remind you all that National Socialism in Germany was peaceful. As was Fascism in Italy. Yes, it required force to uproot the rot laid by the Great War. Those nations experienced peace internally for order was restored and instilled into the people. They had a sense of who they were and where they came from.

.