The Northern Agrarian

This is my piece from the past issue of The GW Patriot. It was written as a counter-point to a piece by the president of GW’s YAF (Young America’s Foundation) chapter. That issue can be found here. I’ll post my piece here as well. Enjoy:

Conservative political theorist and literary critic Russell Kirk, writing the introduction to his 1953 classic “The Conservative Mind,” described the state of conservatism then as follows: “By and large, radical thinkers have won the day. For a century and a half, conservatives have yielded ground in a manner which, except for occasionally successful rear-guard actions, must be described as a rout.” Kirk’s work, described by conservative icon William F. Buckley Jr. as the primary source of modern conservatism, without which “a dominant conservative movement in America” was inconceivable, tied conservatism to the work of Edmund Burke in Europe and John Adams in the United States. Kirk valued “voluntary community” over “involuntary collectivism,” and cited “the need for prudent restraints upon power and upon human passions” as central to a conservative government. Kirk, who privately suggested that George Bush Sr. be hanged on the front lawn of the White House for America’s first oil war would feel quite out of place in the new (read: neo) conservative movement.

Conservatism has become so distorted that its intellectual fathers would no longer recognize it. Conservatives that claim to adhere to the US Constitution have little to say about the numerous undeclared wars undertaken since World War II. Conservatives that claim to respect our ancestral statesmen bow to globalism and ignore George Washington’s advice to stay out of “the insidious wiles of foreign influence.” Conservatives that believe American world hegemony is essential for world stability–or those that even believe that world stability should be an aim of the American Republic–ignore the words of John Quincy Adams warning America against going “abroad, in search of monsters to destroy.” Abraham Lincoln described conservatism as “adherence to the old and tried against the new and untried,” but those words ring hollow against neoconservatism’s gross expansion of government and its complacency in corporate America’s destruction of small-town America.

Since “The Conservative Mind” was published, the decline of conservatism has accelerated, with the relatively short-lived and overrated Reagan years as the primary exception. Liberalism’s ascent continued through the 50’s, 60’s, and 70’s, and eventually infiltrated intellectual conservatism itself with the rise of neoconservatism. Irving Kristol and Norman Podhoretz were two neoconservative thinkers that abandoned the Left due to its moral relativism and insufficiently interventionist foreign policy and found a new home on the Right.

Despite hundreds of years of American foreign policy tradition, from Eisenhower internationalism to Revolution-era isolationism, men such as Kristol and Podhoretz effectively hijacked the Bush White House in the aftermath of 9/11 and replaced those traditions with go-it-alone militarism. Under this new doctrine, the only way America can ensure its safety is by preemptively destroying or isolating any perceived enemy. It requires the maintenance and continued expansion of a vast imperium of military bases stretching the globe, occupying hundreds of countries and expending billions of dollars. Fiscal conservatism be-damned, the New Right looks to continually hike the military budget and build new bases while attacking bills written by politicians such as Jim Webb of Virginia that propose increases in veterans benefits. How is this conservative?

Still left unaddressed is the three trillion dollar War in Iraq, an effective case study in the faults of modern conservatism. Blood shed for material self-interest, billions of dollars unaccounted for, corruption, and plans to build more bases in Iraq for, as the presumptive “conservative” candidate has stated, “fifty to a hundred years,” are all symptoms of the neoconservative rot on the conservative movement. All this, waged by a “compassionate conservative” president that in 2000 promised a “humble foreign policy.”

What about those conservatives that support a rolling back of the American Empire, the shrinking of the American State, adherence to the American tradition of self-accountability—for both individuals and corporations? They are labeled as selfish, small-minded, ignorant, appeasers of Islamofascism. Indeed the term “islamofascism” itself is indicative of the anti-intellectual nature of the movement. Are Americans really supposed to believe that Palestinian nationalists, Sunni Islamist terrorists, Shi’ite radicals, Ba’athist insurgents, and the government of Iran are all homogenous in the threat they pose to the United States? Yet my friends at the Young Americans Foundation hold their “Islamofascism Awareness Week” every year, meant only to stir the hornets nest of progressive activists on campus.

The GW Patriot is different. At the Patriot one finds an intellectually diverse group of students, from anarcho-libertarians to backwards-traditionalists to Republican party hacks to Forever War supporters. We argue and debate amongst ourselves, but are (almost) always congenial and intellectual. And we hope to offer a forum for non-leftists of any stripe to voice their opinions, no matter how uncouth or taboo they may be. We also hope to offer a unique perspective on campus events. From the SA presidential race to inner-CR politics to race-baiting on campus, the Patriot serves to open minds and stir controversy. The Patriot has done this for almost seven years, and will continue to do so for as long as we are allowed to.

I just realized two things. One, for some odd reason, my “About” section was riddled with grammar errors. Inexcusable! And two, it was very dated. Here is the new one, in case you didn’t know anything about me:

Patrick is a 4th year student at The George Washington University, studying political science and philosophy. He has worked for The GW Patriot for the past 3 years, and he has been editor-in-chief since June, 2007. He interned at The American Conservative magazine, where he edited, blogged, and worked on a research piece. He is also Deputy Editor of Young American Revolution, the publication of Young Americans for Liberty.

Though Patrick’s political views are hard to pigeon-hole, he considers himself an anarcho-traditionalist, a localist libertarian, and an anti-statist with a strong distaste for libertinism and an increasingly vulgar American culture.

Patrick was born in Philadelphia, PA, and grew up in the Northeast. Side interests include Philadelphia sports (especially the Phillies), the Notre Dame Fighting Irish, New-Urbanism, small-scale hardcore punk music, and living as free of technology as possible.

After a long sick period and a hectic schedule around CPAC, I am back and will be writing full-time again. I know I have said as much a couple times before, but I’m serious this time!

In the works:
* A piece on CPAC for the Young American Revolution
* Pieces for NA in the works:

- The Danger of FOX’s “24″
- Burke the Anarcho-Conservative
- Libertarianism’s Rise at CPAC, Welcomes this Traditionalist
- Alan Moore: Enemy of the State

I’m sure you all just can’t contain your excitement. Start commenting again so I know you’re still out there.

A great anti-war song from my favorite songwriter of the underground.

Many friends, colleagues, and acquaintances of mine bit the bullet and voted for Obama this past election. These folks, mostly conservative in temperament, felt that Obama’s stances on the Iraq War and on torture and other civil liberties issues made him the far more preferable candidate to John McCain. I felt Obama was a political opportunist, and cast my vote. rather scandalously, for a principled war opponent on the left.

As the election unfolded and Obama has pieced his administration together, I am feeling better and better about my decision to opt out of the Obamacon trend. With Hillary Clinton–former public enemy number 1 of the Right until she bared her kitty-claws at Iran–as Secretary of State, Obamacons had to give pause. Now, with ranking democrats suggesting that Obama keep the Bush Administration’s Director of National Intelligence, Mike McConnell, and CIA Director, Michael Hayden, two men intimately connected to “enhanced interrogation techniques”, neoconservatives seem to have a friend in Barack the Hawk.

As if that wasn’t bad enough, Dick Cheney recently appeared on ABC news and, among other things, heaped praise on Obama’s national security team:

“I must say, I think it’s a pretty good team,” Cheney said. “I’m not close to Barack Obama, obviously, nor do I identify with him politically. He’s a liberal. I’m a conservative. But I think the idea of keeping Gates at Defense is excellent. I think Jim Jones will be very, very effective as the national security adviser.”

Cheney likewise weighed in on Sen. Hillary Clinton, who Obama has tapped to be the next secretary of state.

“While I would not have hired Sen. Clinton, I think she’s tough,” the vice president added. “She’s smart, she works very hard and she may turn out to be just what President Obama needs.”

The only possible positive I can see coming out of this is that neoconservative policy-makers, once again finding a home on the left, will leave the conservative movement for good. This is highly doubtful, though, especially in light of Michael Brendan Dougherty’s superb recent TAC piece.

At any rate, Barack the Hawk is here to stay. Sorry, Obamacons. It appears you wasted your vote even more than I did.

Sorry to anyone still reading out there. The start of the academic year as well as other obligations have kept me away from the Northern Agrarian for a bit. But I will be writing, with special emphasis on religious and agrarian issues over the next week. Stay tuned.

Note: This originally appeared on @TAC on June 30th, 2008.

Over the past weekend I had the pleasure of seeing Disney-Pixar’s new animated movie “WALL-E.” Set in the apocalyptic-lite 28th century, WALL-E (Waste Allocation Load Lifter Earth-Class) is a small robot left behind on an abandoned planet Earth, which you discover through a set of video clips has been evacuated due to heavy pollution, brought on by mass consumerism and exploitative big business. His chance encounter with EVE (Extraterrestrial Vegetation Evaluator) is the catalyst for a surprisingly poignant love story that becomes the center of the movie’s plot. Without delving too much into my own personal opinions on the film–this post is not meant to be a review–I thought it was visually stunning, powerful, and deeply touching, and by my estimation the first Disney movie that is more meaningful and enjoyable for adults than for children.

The film has been received warmly by an overwhelming majority of critics, but some on the right are upset about some of the movie’s themes. Greg Pollowitz at the NRO blog “Planet Gore” writes:

I saw WALL-E with my five year old on Saturday night. It was like a 90-minute lecture on the dangers of over consumption, big corporations, and the destruction of the environment. All this from mega-company Disney, who wants us to buy WALL-E kitsch for our kids that are manufactured in China at environment-destroying factories and packed in plastic that will take hundreds of year to biodegrade in our landfills.

Much to Disney’s chagrin, I will do my part to avoid future environmental armageddon by boycotting any and all WALL-E merchandise and I hope others join my crusade.

These sentiments have been echoed by Shannen Coffin on The Corner, claiming the movie is a “Godforsaken dreck” and was upset about being “bombarded with leftist propaganda about the evils of mankind.” Indeed, a point that Coffin makes that is echoed by outraged film critic Kyle Smith is that, when the audience is introduced to the fat, dumb, technologically-enslaved humans, Pixar is insulting their target audience:

Wall-E…supposes that the human race of the future will become a flabby mass of peabrained idiots who are literally too fat to walk. Instead they zip around in flying wheelchairs surfing the Web, chatting on phone lines and stuffing their faces with food meant to be sucked down like milkshakes while unquestioningly taking orders from the master corporation that controls all aspects of their existence. I’m trying to think of a major Disney cartoon feature that was anywhere near as dark or cynical as this. I’m coming up blank. I’m also not sure I’ve ever seen a major corporation spend so much money to issue an insult to its customers.

The real tragedy of these callous conservative critics (say that three times fast) is that they are missing the real lessons of the movie, ones I found immediately attractive to a traditional conservative. In the film, it becomes clear that mass consumerism is not just the product of big business, but of big business wedded with big government. In fact, the two are indistinguishable in WALL-E’s future. The government unilaterally provided it’s citizens with everything they needed, and this lack of variety led to Earth’s downfall.

Another lesson missed is portrayed perfectly in Coffin’s claim that WALL-E points out the “evils of mankind.” The only evils of mankind portrayed are those that come about from losing touch with our own humanity. Staples of small-town conservative life such as the small farm, the “nuclear family,” and old-fashioned and wholesome entertainment like “Hello, Dolly” are looked upon by the suddenly awakened humans as beautiful and desirable. By steering conservative families away from WALL-E, these commentators are doing their readers a great disservice.

It can do anything, I suppose. It checks your email, surfs the web, plays music, directs you with built in GPS, plays YouTube videos, takes pictures, updates you on stocks and weather, and it houses applications (”apps” in Mac-speak) to do nearly everything else, such as run eBay, post Tweets, play piano, and play “Super Monkey Ball“. It also makes phone calls. It’s the new iPhone 3G and it delivers everything Americans want in their pocket, and it does it faster and cheaper than ever. A question best left unanswered: Is the 21st century American Dream now fully realized in the iPhone?

iPhone madness has hit, and with one million sold in three days it doesn’t look to be letting up anytime soon. Opening day was a zoo, with people camping out for days to ensure their acquisition of the “culture changing” gadget. Here’s why people do it:

“This device has changed my life,” declares Ilan Fehler, a 21-year-old student at the University of Arizona, who considers himself lucky to be third in line.

Dale Larson is customer No.1 at this store. The 39-year old consultant on mobile products said says he’s not particularly tied to Apple gear but he acknowledges he started camping out on Wednesday evening.

“I would get excited over any product that works as well,” Larson said. “But nothing does. This device opens everything up. Developers can develop and consumers can take advantage of their innovation.”

Am I the only one that thinks this does not bode well for civilization? In the Victorian era, people lined up for long periods of time to hear Dickens read the latest chapter in one of his novels. In the sixties, Beatlemania hit our shores and parents endured sleepless nights filled with worry over what bowl-cutted Brits were doing to their children. Now we wait for days for a piece of machinery, seemingly leading us to a paradoxical time where we do everything and nothing for ourselves. Where does our cultural trajectory point to next?

I’m no surly old man, but even at my ripe-young age I can see the iPhone for what it is: scary. It mainstreams a world previously left only to 80 hour a week workaholics, a world where every moment is dictated by a new email, a new text message, new stock quotes, new twitter feeds, GPS direction, and, when it all slows down a little, new “Monkey Ball” games, all the while those little white ear buds blast Coldplay and The Pussycat Dolls. The iPhone is a utopian fantasy, where we manage each nook and cranny of our lives in every waking second, leaving no stone unturned and not a minute unoccupied.

In the world of the iPhone, everything revolves around “me”. Everything that I want, I need, and everything that I need, I need right now. Desires become rights. And impossibly enough, while the iPhone gives me everything I want, it leaves me with no time for myself. Who has time to sit and read when you’re forwarding emails, answering text messages, bidding on iPhone accessories, and watching Miss Teen South Carolina on YouTube? What was once mere distraction has now become your life.

Look at all the lonely people. Where do they all belong? On their iPhones.

Note: This was originally posted on @TAC.