Slaying The Dragon

Posted by James Bowery on Monday, 05 August 2024 15:32.

To my cousins in England from an American Orange Man, the deep history of your manhood you feel needs this perspective to guide your actions. I offer my body as your Sovereign to be sacrificed by you my people if you will but take heed and follow this lead.

Feudalism arises from JudeoChristanity’s prohibition of a “commoner” challenging a “noble” to single combat to the death – the ancient appeal of last resort in dispute processing going back 600 million years to the inception of masculine aggression’s Cambrian explosion. This is because, in so doing, it ensures a perpetual state of war preparedness: individual masculine aggression is abjured to the noble so that war mobilization may commence at a moment’s notice. Initially, this takes the form of clan warfare with clan chiefs acting as nobles: Feuds. Then as “civilization” develops, it increasingly becomes an organic relationship between nobles and commoners in which the commoners are entitled to their homesteads – with the Malthusian rents extracted in group rather than individual combat, ie: war.

A problem arises when you get intermediates between the sovereign and the commoners – who I’ve called “mesopredators” – who don’t have the ultimate responsibility for maintaining the war-making machine in good order. They begin to feed on the foundation of the machine at the expense of the Sovereign – the locus of masculine agency that supplants individual sovereignty of 600M years. That’s when you get a conflict between the barons of Henry VII’s era and the Sovereign and that’s when the Sovereign must become the Apex Predator eating the substance of the mere mesopredators. The problem, then, is how the Apex Predator deals with the base of the food chain. In natural systems, this is of no concern to the Apex Predator but in artificial selection regimes that aspire to the war-making readiness of the hive, it is what distinguishes an “Arthur” from a tyrant.

In Militia Money this is solved by a fiat money backed by “property rights” held by mesopredators aka barons. The mesopredators pay the rents from those “property rights” to “The Sovereign” but rather than going into the hands of one individual sovereign (and his “managerial class”), they go as “retainers” to the “commoners” who then give up any notion of one man one vote and, instead, vote with their retainer fees in the capitalist market.

This, of course, pisses off Mammon Worshipers including not just the mesopredators, but the preachers of just about every “church” (including media and academia) who, ultimately, serve not God but the mesopredators that donate or “patronize” them.

This is the critical failure of those who identify as “libertarians” with their ersatz “individual sovereignty” – as is most egregiously on display in the network effect monopolies that have become the instrument of tyranny.

With this background of the “feu” in mind, here’s the critical passage from Leyburn’s “The Scotch Irish: A Social History”:

Feu Fees 1

Feu Fees 2

Tags:

Comments:

Posted by Al Ross on Wed, 07 Aug 2024 06:04 | #

Interesting. Thanks JB. Some historical context is understandably missing , however.

The Scots who settled in ( mainly ) Ulster were permitted to do so because the London govt felt surrounded by potential enemies . Catholic France to the East , Catholic Ireland to the West and until 1707 , a recently uncertain loyal Scotland to the North , so the pacification of Ireland was militarily and politically ” the art of the possible” writ large.

Ulster’s Scots were mainly Lowlanders ( Highlanders were sometimes recalcitrantly Catholic) and avowed Presbyterians and featured heroically and historically in that wonderful book about so - called ” White Trash Hillbillies ” , ‘Born Fighting’ .

I read it years ago but have forgotten the author’s name.

Posted by James Bowery on Wed, 07 Aug 2024 19:15 | #

#1 “Born Fighting: How the Scots-Irish Shaped America” by James Webb

There is a 2 part Smithsonian series on that book by Webb:

Part 1

Part 2

Senator Webb delivered the Democrat Party’s response to George W. Bush’s sixth State of the Union address.

He ran for President on the Democratic ticket in 2016 but was shut out by the Democrat leadership because he didn’t support anti-whiteism.

Here is his WSJ op ed on the election of Donald Trump:

Op-Eds by Jim
WSJ: The Promise of President Trump – Jim Webb
By Jim Webb

Jan. 19, 2017 6:23 p.m. ET WSJ

By virtue of Mr. Trump’s electoral base and genuine status as a political outsider, he is positioned to bring two much-needed adjustments to our governing process.

First, his administration should break the damaging “turnstile” that has given an unelected elite far too much power, particularly in foreign policy. What can one say of an establishment whose members repeatedly swap slots in law firms and think tanks for titles in various presidential administrations but rarely come up with fresh, independent advice? How can one set of “Republican” advisers persuade George W. Bush to make the strategic blunder of invading Iraq, and then a new set of “Democratic” advisers lure Barack Obama into the debacle of the Libyan intervention? It was no accident that many Republican mandarins endorsed Hillary Clinton last year. The new administration should bid them all goodbye. Rex Tillerson’s selection as secretary of state is a welcome signal to that end.

The second opportunity is to reset the national discussion, as well as government policies, on race. Few would dispute the original purpose of affirmative action, which was to help African-Americans remove the “badges of slavery.” But after the 1965 Immigration Reform Act, the ethnic makeup of the country dramatically changed. Affirmative action expanded into broader diversity programs, often discriminating against poorer blacks and Americans who happened to be white. Working whites have been hit particularly hard, since white America is not a monolith but a composite of cultures widely stratified in terms of education and income. The disparate impact of diversity programs on different white cultures is not apparent using broad statistics based on race. In addition, more frequent racial intermarriage has blurred the data further, and will continue to do so.

In short, the discussion is mired in the biracial dialogue of the 1960s, while our challenges have become multicultural and mixed with reverse discrimination. Many people who want to remedy this voted for Mr. Trump. One can hope his administration will seek policies to reduce racial tensions and increase fairness for all Americans.

His candidacy has been memoryholed.

If you can stomach it, CNN carried a Presidential debate in which one can see him defy the Democrat Party’s betrayal of what in UK is called “Labor”.

Posted by Thorn on Wed, 07 Aug 2024 19:58 | #

“But after the 1965 Immigration Reform Act, the ethnic makeup of the country dramatically changed.”

If I recall correctly the 2020 US Census data revealed that Whites in the 18 and under group comprised only 47%. Today, five years later, it’s safe to assume that that 47% dropped down to 42%.

When I cite such stats to your average white person, they either become disoriented or evasive. It’s almost like they want to run from the truth even though reality is all around them staring them straight in the face. I suppose their conditioning has them believing whites are the racial majority on the planet and everyone else is a minority and it will always remain that way.

Posted by Al Ross on Thu, 08 Aug 2024 04:31 | #

#2 , That’s our guy . James Webb .

Thank you for the links , much appreciated.