Wednesday, July 04, 2007

Rock 'Em Part 2

Rock 'Em II: "The Masters of the Universe"

by Mike Vanderboegh

"We're going to get comprehensive reform and we're not going let the bigots stop us ." -- Senator Lindsey Graham to the Reconquista group "La Raza" (The Race) quoted in the Evans-Novak Political Report, 23 March 2007.

"Those determined to find fault with this bill will always be able to look at a narrow slice of it and find something they don't like. If you want to kill the bill, if you don't want to do what's right for America, you can pick one little aspect out of it. You can use it to frighten people, or you can show leadership and solve this problem once and for all." -- George Bush, speech at Glynco, Georgia, 29 May 2007.

"America is at that awkward stage. It's too late to work within the system, but too early to shoot the bastards." -- Claire Wolfe, 101 Things to Do 'Til the Revolution

"What's right for America. . ."

John Fund is the Wall Street Journal's paragon of right-thinking when it comes to the joys and benefits of importing a third-world servant class. He observed recently of the "Gang of Twelve's" bipartisan blitzkrieg in the Senate in favor of the Amnesty Bill:

"Why the rush? Because, to be blunt, the senators don't trust the American people to make sound judgments on such emotional issues as family reunification and national sovereignty. . . There's an old rule in Washington that in dealing with any tough issue, half the politicians hope that citizens don't understand it, while the other half fear that people actually do." (

And now the President, bless his "compassionate conservative" heart, declares that those of us who understand the true nature of this bill and where it will take us don't want to do "what's right for America." The arrogance of this conceit is breathtaking, infuriating and typical of elitist rulers throughout history. According to Bush, et al, our "betters" understand what's good for the country and the rest of us peons had better shut up about it. The Amnesty Conspirators claim that any opposition we have to their machinations is founded upon our own ignorance -- or bigotry. Hence Saxby Chambliss, the supposedly "conservative" Republican Senator from Georgia, reacted to being vigorously booed at his state party meeting by saying that "he took the crowd’s reaction as a lack of popular understanding of the shape of the current immigration system." My web friend David Codrea rightly sniffed: "Like we're too bloody ignorant to know when we're being conned."

Worse, we're called "bigots" and "nativists" by the likes of John McCain's attack poodle Lindsey Graham. Uh, Senator Graham, the paragons of racism in this argument are the people you were talking to. You know, the ones who call themselves "The Race." The race referred to here is the "Bronze Race," first enunciated by the Sixties Chicano leftists who still form the leadership core and philosophy of La Raza, a racial identity organization.

"Brotherhood unites us and love for our brothers makes us a people whose time has come and who struggle against the foreigner 'gabacho' who exploits our riches and destroys our culture. With our heart in our hands and our hands in the soil, we declare the independence of our Mestizo Nation. We are a Bronze People with a Bronze Culture. Before the world, before all of North America, before all our brothers in the Bronze Continent, We Are A Nation, We are a Union of free pueblos, We are Aztlan." -- Plan Espiritual De Aztlan, March 1969, adopted at the Chicano Youth Conference, Denver, CO

For the uninitiated, Aztlan means "the lands to the North" in the Nahuatl language of ancient Mexico and "gabacho" is a racial slur meaning roughly: "dirty Yankee white boy." When called a "gabacho" in an Irondale, AL gas station recently, I pleasantly agreed: "Si, mi gabacho." Then I raised my clenched fist, a la Huey Newton and proclaimed, "Viva Los gabachos con armas!" Or, "Long live dirty Yankee white boys with guns!" The insult-thrower and his friends left in a hurry. Strangely, I have heard African Americans similarly insulted as a "gabacho" and occasionally as "gabacho negro". Thus do the La Raza racists make a contribution to our own native-born racial harmony. Every cloud has a silver lining. (-- insert smiley face here-- )

So, when Lindsey Graham insults us as "bigots" while speaking to the largest Hispanic racist organization in the country, what are we to conclude (besides hypocrisy)? My Michigan farmer grandpa used to say that "when they're calling you names, boy, you're either doing something really bad or something really good." In Graham's mind what we are doing "bad" is disrespecting our "betters'" plans for us. For his part, George Bush avoids calling us bigots, but merely insults our patriotism with claims that we do not want what's "right" for the country.

"Masters of the Universe"

“I am Skeletor, Spawn of the Hellbeast! Hang up the phone and pay homage to my awful power!” -- Will Ferrell to his "wife" in a skit on Saturday Night Live.

Now I've had more than few disagreements with Alabama's own senator Jeff Sessions over the years. Heck, I backed his opponent in almost every primary he was ever in. But ol' Jeff has it right about the likes of Bush and Graham and their new found playmate Teddy Kennedy:

"The bill unites conservatives and liberals who regard enactment of an immigration measure this year as an imperative that can deliver political benefits and long-standing policy objectives to their respective parties. Many lawmakers are suspicious of the group Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., derisively refers to them as 'the masters of the universe.'" -- "‘Gang of 12' Steers Immigration Bill", Julie Hirschfeld Davis, Associated Press, Washington, May 24

Masters of the Universe indeed. I think what Jeff has in mind is The Bonfire of the Vanities, the 1987 Tom Wolfe novel. The protagonist Sherman McCoy, played by Tom Hanks in the movie version, identifies himself (a highly paid bond trader) as a Master of the Universe after seeing a child playing with a Masters of the Universe toy. As a result, the term "Master of the Universe" was briefly popular as a pejorative name for any young, wealthy and conceited financier. Will Ferrell's send-up of the Master of the Universe as silly megalomania was funny because of its kernel of truth. These elitist politicos are, in a reflection of their inner child, acting out Skeletor by demanding of us that we 'pay homage to their awful power!'

Mandarins and Courtiers

"The new aristocracy was made up for the most part of bureaucrats, scientists, technicians, trade-union organizers, publicity experts, sociologists, teachers, journalists, and professional politicians." -- 1984, George Orwell

In my first essay on this subject I described these arrogant anal sphincters as the "mandarin class".

("Rock 'Em: The Last Chance to Stop the Amnesty Conspiracy" which you can find at The Lookout Post, or at David Codrea's War on Guns blog, )

Mandarin is a language, also, an orange. Both terms draw their names from the original Mandarins, who were members of any of nine ranks of high public officials in the Chinese Empire. The Mandarins were answerable only to the Emperor. In recent history the term has come to describe a high government official, bureaucrat or a member of an elite group, especially a person having influence or high status in intellectual or cultural circles -- but one that is not directly accountable to the people.

This is not the first time this species of tone-deaf tyrannical elitists has reared its ugly head on this continent. In their first incarnation, they were called "courtiers." Originally describing an attendant at a sovereign's court, courtier has, like Mandarin, come to adopt a wider meaning Wikipedia says,

"A courtier is a person who attends upon, and thus receives a privileged position from, a powerful person, usually a head of state. In the United States, the term has taken on negative connotations as a synonym for favorite or hanger-on. It is usually also used in a historical context, especially to describe the attendants of a luxurious autocrat such as Louis XIV of France. This context is used by many to make the word quaintly old-fashioned and irrelevant in contemporary circumstances, although 'placemen' and rewarded campaign-donors in the American political system are contemporary examples of de facto courtiers."

Gordon S. Wood, one of the most respected historians of our Revolutionary period describes the place that "courtiers" had in the machinations of the Crown government in the American colonies and the importance they assumed in the minds of the American republic's Founders.

"Most royal officials relied on whatever traditional monarchical instruments of political patronage and influence they had available to them to curb popular disorder and popular pressure -- using intricate maneuvering and personal manipulation of important men in place of Whig and republican appeals to the people." -- Gordon S. Wood, The Radicalism of the American Revolution, New York, 1992, p. 174.

The new American King George the Fourth, picking up in this 21st century where the last king to rule this land left off in the 18th, would certainly recognize the tactics above. For example, Jon Kyl is reputed to be in line for a federal judgeship, regardless of what comes of his kamikaze advocacy of amnesty. Wood continues:

"Americans steeped in the radical whig and republican ideology of opposition to the court regarded these monarchical techniques of personal influence and patronage as 'corruption,' as attempts by great men and their power-hungry minions to promote their private interests at the expense of the public good and to destroy the colonist' balanced constitutions and their private liberty. This corruption had created pockets of royal influence throughout America and had made the crown itself, said John Adams, nothing but a 'private interest.' . . . Americans were warned that they could no longer trust those 'who either hold or expect to hold certain advantages by setting examples of servility to their countrymen.'" Ibid., pp. 174-175

Corruption. Influence. Servility. Yes, indeed. These words leap across the centuries full of warning to those of us today who wish to preserve what is left of the Founders' Republic against the Amnesty Conspiracy of these modern mandarins, these contemporary courtiers. How much was then like now?:

"The great social antagonists of the American Revolution were not poor vs. rich, workers vs. employers, or even democrats vs. aristocrats. They were patriots vs. courtiers -- categories appropriate to the monarchical world in which the colonists had been reared Courtiers were persons whose positions or rank came artificially from above -- from hereditary or personal connections that ultimately flowed from the crown or court. Courtiers, said John Adams, were those who applied themselves 'to the Passions and Prejudices, the Follies and Vices of Great Men in order to obtain their Smiles, Esteem, and Patronage and consequently their favors and Preferments.' Patriots, on the other hand, were those who not only loved their country but were free of dependent connections and influence; their position or rank came naturally from their talent and from below, from recognition by the people. 'A real patriot,' declared one American in 1776, was 'the most illustrious character in human life. Is not the interest and happiness of his fellow creatures his care?'" -- Ibid., pp. 175-176.

Since George Bush has been President and leader of his sadly misnamed "Republican" party, how many times have we seen the "king" intervene in the primaries of that party to thwart a conservative challenger in favor of the lickspittle RINO incumbent? Can anyone say "Arlen Spector?" How many times have we seen appointments go to his inner circle, to his "court?" Can anyone say "Harriet Myers" or "Alberto Gonzales?" If he acts like a king and talks like king, is he not a king? In this specific case of the Amnesty Bill, if his allies (even those who nominally count on reelection by the people) ignore the clearly expressed will of the People, who wish to enforce existing laws before passing new ones, are they not courtiers rather than elected servants of the People? And why do they feel comfortable enough to sell out their own constituencies? Do they know something we don't? Or is it because we have failed to remind them forcefully who they really work for?

The Death of the Republic: Are you going to quit or are you going to fight?

"Paul Weyrich, founder of the conservative Free Congress Foundation, said that 'there are legitimate reasons to oppose this legislation, and I don't think that it behooves the president to call people names or make accusations against them if they disagree with him. He is angering people beyond belief to the point that the Republican Party is going to split in two, thanks to him. If this bill passes, the Republicans will not recover from it,' Mr. Weyrich said." -- Jon Ward, "Bush hits foes of alien bill," The Washington Times, 30 May 2007.

So, I say to those of you who call yourselves Republicans (or even Libertarians): Is this the future you wish? With an atomized Republican party and a permanent flood of natural constituents of the Democrat party ensuring that any small/efficient/constitutional government candidate of any party will NEVER again win on a national level, what then will stop the Masters of the Universe? In that dark future such a term will be no joke.

If we cannot stop this bill now, with the overwhelming and intense anger of the majority of the American people against it, we will never stop another. We may as well hang up any pretensions to future liberty, walk out the door of national politics and go hide in the mountains, leaving the future to these modern royalist courtiers, these "Masters of the Universe." If we cannot stop this, if we cannot summon the will that our Founders had, we are dead as a free society and we might as well admit it.

So you can quit, or you can fight. As Claire Wolfe says, "It's too late to work within the system, but too early to shoot the bastards." But there is another way. You can do what the Sons of Liberty did to the Tories of old. Deliver bricks and stones to them. Through their windows or through their doors by hand or by mail, it's immaterial to me. Let these modern courtiers know that the polls are right and we mean business. Rock 'em, I say. Target the minds of the county bosses who sit on their broad butts in the local headquarters of both political parties. Remind these new royalists who's really still the boss around here Rock 'em, or be prepared to give up any hope of your kids and grandkids growing up in the same country, or a better country, than you did. Resist this Amnesty Conspiracy as free people who intend to remain free or be prepared to teach your kids how best to kiss the rings of their new masters, the Masters of the Universe.

It's now or never. Fight or quit. Your choice. But you had best believe the Founders are watching.

Mike Vanderboegh
PO Box 926
Pinson, AL 35126

NOTE: Like the first essay, Rock 'Em: The Last Chance to Stop the Amnesty Conspiracy, this one will not get circulated unless those who agree with it see to its distribution via private email lists and blogs. And if you hear of any breaking windows, kindly let me know. ;-) MBV

No comments: