At AWOL Civilization, blogger Gary calls for Cultural Insurrection as the best method of resisting the apparent destruction of our society.
He says that the other options include ''going John Galt", as some have termed it, or ''heading for the hills", or compromise with those now holding power. The last option is based on the probably erroneous belief that the soon-to-be administration is showing signs of being more moderate and willing to work with us. That last option is the least realistic one, in my opinion, and we should not let ourselves be lulled into believing it.
But the option Gary recommends is his ''cultural insurrection."
This is something that we've discussed obliquely at least on this blog more than once, although probably in a rather vague way. Rick Darby said some time ago that we needed a 'velvet revolution'.
On various discussion threads in the past we've talked about a right-wing version of the ''long march through the institutions", a kind of reverse of the Gramscian long march. If I am understanding Gary correctly, this is something like his cultural insurrection. He speaks of how we have to reject political correctness and multiculturalism. I think most of us who meet on this blog agree on that issue.
We might, however, have differing visions of how we would best go about this. I've written before of how the leftist counterculture in the 60s and 70s seemed to transform society in the twinkling of an eye, firstly in the social/cultural sphere. The ''sexual revolution", as it was quite aptly named back then, changed the dynamic of male-female relationships. Many people, it seemed, were only going through the motions of believing in old-fashioned Christian morality, and were quite happy to jettison that morality as so much excess baggage and to pursue pleasure unencumbered by any moral scruples. The older generations, who may or may not have joined in the shedding of inhibitions, seemed willing to drop the 'judgmentalism' which was part of enforcing the old mores, and suddenly it became socially acceptable to be promiscuous, to cohabit without marriage, and to have children outside the marital bond. Then the next domino fell: homosexuality was suddenly just another 'choice' about which society had no right to ''judge."
It all happened rather quickly because the old beliefs seemed to have lost their power over many Americans. Even many believing Christians silently accepted what was euphemistically called ''the new morality'', because it seemed that suddenly, being ''judgmental" was one of the worst sins imaginable in the popular mind.
When a critical mass of people no longer believe in an existing set of mores or ideas, those things will fall by the wayside with barely a push. The old morality fell out of fashion, and many people, being the herd creatures that they are, stampeded towards the 'new' 'liberated' lifestyle. The more timid and ''conservative'' members of society did not necessarily join the rush, but they stood out of the way and said nothing. Such is the behavior of most people at such crucial turning points. Most people like to avoid rocking the boat and opposing what seems to be some inevitable wave of the future. The counterculture had momentum on their side, and the so-called 'silent majority' invoked by Richard Nixon stayed silent, and offered no resistance to the onslaughts of the counterculture. Most people don't like to be seen to be on the wrong side of some new trend or movement, and simply go with the flow, as they perceive it.
Could a counter-counterculture prevail now? Can we just simply throw it into reverse and retrace our route to this present disaster? I don't think so. And I don't think our situation now is exactly analogous to the leftist counterculture of 30 or 40 years ago. First of all, though the majority of the older generations probably objected strongly to the 'youth revolution' which was at the vanguard of the counterculture, the 'silent majority' were soon rendered irrelevant by the media, who were ultimately on the side of the counterculture. The popular antipathy to the Vietnam War in the late 60s and early 70s helped the left's cause, making their ideas more credible to many otherwise moderate Americans. The media began to move ever leftward throughout the 70s, so the counterculture had a sympathetic and fully complicit media to tout their ideas.
Do we have such willing allies in the media? Obviously not; the powerful old media, the corporate media, is fully sold out to leftism/liberalism and to globalism and multiculturalism. They deride and vilify everybody on our side, even those who are only moderately rightwing.
We have only the blogosphere as a mass medium through which to make our case or to meet with like minds and strategize. And the blogosphere may not have the freedom we now have for much longer.
How then can we mount our ''cultural insurrection"?
I've written often about the need to simply communicate as honestly as possible with all those in our immediate circles. We need to make them aware of the lateness of the hour and the urgency of our situation. I think we have to emphasize to all those over-complacent souls out there that we can't ''wait for the next election, when we'll get a good conservative in the White House" or ''wait till the midterm elections, when things will turn around, you'll see". No; we can't count on those things and we have to gently take away the false hope that many people are investing in the status quo, especially the failed and corrupted Republican Party.
So how do we proceed? What can be done? Is politics the answer, or is it a combination of a political and a cultural resistance movement?
Can we give political correctness a push and hope that it will fall of its own weight, that of its massive lies and contradictions? Will it fall of its own accord? If not, how can we undermine it?