Wednesday, August 11, 2010

Impolite Conservatism

July 13, 2007
By Patrick Grimm

If you turn on your AM radio, you will get a mental picture as well as an audio earful of the haggard, tired face of American “conservatism” in all its mediocre malsplendor (which is a word I just coined, fusing together malformed and splendor). Everything related to the American brand of supposed cutting-edge “conservative” thought (or groupthink) is polite, archaically out-dated and washed-up. Rush Limbaugh, once the poster boy for a new style of radio, iconoclastic as it jeered liberal sacred cows, now seems recycled and a format out of steam and any fresh ideas. It’s just Republicans vs. Democrats in all its knee-jerk and unthinking staleness, rehashed again and again and again. What amazes me is that people still digest this drivel with a straight face almost as if they are actually digesting profundities rather than banalities, banalities that ceased to be relevant a long time ago.

The most unsettling aspect of “conservative” talk radio is the utterly polite nature of it. Not only are the pundits, Limbaugh, Hannity and O’Reilly predictable, they are so boring and “paint-by-numbers” that you can anticipate their position on any given issue before the words even leave their mouths, spewing the public airwaves with silliness and anti-thought. What transpires on AM radio is not a real intellectual process, but a series of what I would deem “postures and gestures” signifying little or anything more than the host’s delight in hearing his own voice. It’s polite, polite, polite, which means that it’s vanilla, and a vanilla that has been sitting on the counter of Baskin-Robbins a few days before consumption.

What we need is a new conservative movement in this country, what I will christen an “impolite conservative movement” that is unafraid of defying convention and the big guns of both parties. In fact, the two-party system and their antiquated platforms would have to be discarded completely by this new “impolite conservatism” I am attempting to flesh out. What would be some of the public positions that would be seen as “impolite” by the Establishment? Allow me to list them.

Patrick Grimm’s Impolite Conservatism

1. Pro-European-American

For once, just once, conservatism would revert back to its paleo roots. This would mean that white people would dare to be “impolite” to the Jewish media and dare to agitate for their own interests, without apology, without equivocation and without hesitation. We would oppose immigration, not because it hurts our economy or saps our social services or opens us to terror threats. These are all phony and limp-wristed reasons given by frightened white politicians for opposing the immigrant invasion.

We would give a big middle finger to the Jewsmedia and say in a loud voice and with a hard and grim (or perhaps Grimm) expression “We want an America with a white majority! We are not going to be displaced! We, the white people founded this country and we are going to control our own nation! That means we are going back to a pro-European immigration policy, one not decided by Jews! We will not be invaded, displaced or shoved aside! We will have an America based on the principles of our Founders!”

If enough white people and white politicians spoke this way, the Zionist media would have to back off and they would know that they could no longer stigmatize and frighten us. Whites could become as galvanized and organized for their concerns as every other group.

2. America First

In an “impolite” conservative world, taking an America First position on all matters, foreign and domestic would mean no wars in Iraq, Afghanistan or Iran. It would mean that the altar of free trade worshipped by the neo-con one-worlder Mammonites would be pulled to the ground. It would signify the death knell for the Federal Reserve and American involvement with the World Bank. It would signal a policy shift from what’s good for Tel Aviv to what’s good for the United States. It would require a move from constant and over weaning interventionism to a clear-eyed and cautious semi-isolationism.

3. Revived Anti-Zionism

This is the area where being “impolite” is really the only way to travel. Impolite conservatives would recognize the dangers of supporting the crooked and two-faced state of Israel, both because of the higher oil prices we pay as punishment from the Arab world and the ensuing Muslim terrorism stirred like a boiling cauldron by our dishonest brokering efforts in the MidEast peace process, resulting in Americans being further imperiled.

Impolite conservatives would shoot down every media push for more foreign imperialist adventurism for the Israeli common good, which always results in the American bad. Israel would fight her own wars with no assistance from our American men and women.

Israel would be defunded entirely. We would rip the hungry Hebrew mouth from the American teat and make the Israelis get their funding from their shylock friends in the Rothschild banking family. No more military technology would be sent to a state intent on stealing and selling our secrets to the enemy, profiting over and over again from our naivety and good will.

The Jewish media monopoly would be broken through strict and unflinching anti-monopoly laws. Impolite conservatives would protest loudly that the incestuous relationship between Israeli interest groups like AIPAC and the Jewish media machine be ended yesterday.

Campaign finance reform laws would be passed and strictly upheld with severe penalties meted out to those who broke them. Political campaigns would all be funded from the public purse, thus ending the spigot of ill-gotten Jewish money that now buys up the politicians of their choice who are then pressured into upholding every dot and tittle of the dirty Zionist agenda.


These are a few “impolite” things that seem to be woefully missing from today’s almost Victorianly-polite conservative movement. The fact remains that today’s conservatives are much too genteel and weak in the knees to get behind the things I have espoused above. They won’t stand for us, which means that they don’t deserve any support from us, financially, morally or what have you.

Let’s take the “politeness” out of the picture and get as “impolite”, pushy and unapologetic in the interests of European-Americans as Jews get when their little paper tiger feelings get bruised or even nudged by truth-trumpeters and patriotic honesty-mongers. Let us dispense with the vanilla and French vanilla pigeonholes that have served us so disreputably in the past and originate and author a new “impolite” and empowering philosophy that removes us from the back of the line. Our interests, our freedoms and our future have been placed on the backburner for too many years. “Impolite paleoconservatism” implemented to the hilt will put us back where we belong, as masters in our own house. If that means tossing our Jewish landlords to the curb, then so be it. They’ve been raising the rent on us for too long anyway.

No comments:

Post a Comment