NatCon II: Rich Lowry

It is hard to say what is going on at NatCon II.

I can only find some clips trickling out on Twitter. It is easy to mock David French who has become a punchline on the Right over the last five years, but these people are styling themselves as the alternative to mainstream conservatism. Should we be taking them more seriously?

I noticed that Rich Lowry, the author of The Case for Nationalism, was back to deliver another rousing speech. He is ready to fight on the beaches to defend American heritage. Nothing says you are striking a blow against the old “fusionism” like having John Bolton or the editor of National Review address your conference. Lowry has repeatedly made the case for toppling Confederate monuments. In his book The Case for Nationalism, he literally said that America’s national identity was watching NFL games on a flat screen television on Thanksgiving. Then he indignantly complained last summer on his website that “the assault on America’s national identity” was going too far. At the very height of the assault on American heritage, Lowry warned against “the slippery slope fallacy” in National Review.

“An American cultural nationalism is an inclusive nationalism. As we saw in the early history of the blues, we shouldn’t believe the lie perpetrated by white nationalists that our culture is in any meaningful sense “white” or the countervailing lie perpetrated by black nationalists that blacks are anything other than fully American. The emphasis in the phrase “African American” should decidedly be on American. …

We should have a more capacious and merciful self-understanding. We all are Thomas Jefferson and W. C. Handy, the Pilgrims and Frederick Douglass, British and African, black and white, sitting at a vast Thanksgiving table within sight of an an enormous flat-screen tuned to a Lions or Cowboys game under the watchful gaze of a red, white, and blue–bedecked Eagle, sharing, laughing, squabbling, commiserating, and doing it all loudly in the distinct, instantly recognizable American style that makes its indelible imprint on us all.”

I said it was weak sauce at the time.

Everything that has happened since then has demonstrated that I was right.

National Review:

“In the wave of cancellations sweeping America, Confederate statues have been particularly hard hit.

They have been graffitied, assaulted, and torn down, while authorities rush to remove them.

For his part, President Donald Trump has been a steadfast defender of the statues and other forms of recognition of the Confederacy. He has come out in favor of preserving the names of military bases named after Confederate generals and pointedly said that we should build on our heritage rather than tear it down.

Conservatives tend to think the same way. They reflexively oppose politically correct campaigns to destroy anything giving offense.

They fear where the slippery slope of woke iconoclasm will lead — first it’s Jefferson Davis, ultimately George Washington.

They value tradition and worry we are trashing part of our history.

This impulse, though, is a mistake. Confederate statues and symbols deserve to be reevaluated, and often mothballed. …”

Yes, where does it lead?

If anything is true, national disintegration has accelerated since NatCon I.

We now know definitively that it doesn’t stop with Confederate monuments. In hindsight, we also know that Rich Lowry’s inclusive liberal civic nationalism which he outlined in his 2019 book was utterly worthless and tantamount to “fascism” to these people.

About Hunter Wallace 11911 Articles
Founder and Editor-in-Chief of Occidental Dissent

18 Comments

  1. Rich Lowry is making the case for cuckholdery for Native White Males-in addition to endless war for Israel in the Middle East….and antagonizing Russa on its borders…

    The National Review

    The National Cuckholdery Review

    Lowry is a gd cuck…

  2. National conservatism is just repackaged neoconservatism. They are worried that patriotardism has been waning on the right, diminishing support for American imperialism, so they are attempting to revive it under the anti-racist liberal cultural nationalism label. It won’t work, of course, because there is no common American culture or identity around which any “cultural nationalism” can form.

    Still it just shows that nothing good can ever come from the Republican party. Vote for the lesser evil. Vote Democrat.

  3. >It is hard to say what is going on at NatCon II.

    I’m not sure that trying to figure it out is worth the effort.

    A couple of Lowry tweets (both from 2015, but still …):

    linkMy column today, “The Majesty of the Black Church”

    link“Yes, Republicans Can Win Black Voters”

    Platinum Plan™! — maybe Lowry is one of those guys who doesn’t understand per capita — if by pandering to/trying to buy black votes you alienate 5% of the white male vote to get 5% more of the black vote, that’s a big net loss.

  4. “national disintegration has accelerated”

    It’s inevitable, with a multiracial society.
    Our ancestors knew the critical value of racial hygiene and protecting it.

    Now, a generation of fools have fallen for vapid slogans, “diversity is our strength”.

    A few toxic slogans to destroy a once great nation, ‘such a deal’.

    • >It’s inevitable, with a multiracial society.

      I agree, and almost my sole online aim for many years now has been to get other Whites to see/realize this — as I wrote in another comment here (link):

      The genetic link to IQ, as well as important behavioral traits, and thus the irremediable nature of ‘the gap’ and all its consequences, is already a full blown litmus test.

  5. ” We all are Thomas Jefferson and W. C. Handy, the Pilgrims and Frederick Douglass, British and African, black and white, sitting at a vast Thanksgiving table within sight of an an enormous flat-screen tuned to a Lions or Cowboys game under the watchful gaze of a red, white, and blue–bedecked Eagle, sharing, laughing, squabbling, commiserating, and doing it all loudly in the distinct, instantly recognizable American style that makes its indelible imprint on us all.”

    Pardon my vulgarity, but what is this bullshit? I have NEVER been MLK, Frederick Douglass, a Niggerball addict/idolator. I also do not believe in arguing with inferiors, either ontological or intellectual. I don’t throw my pearls before swine, as Christ said.

    My ancestors are White, Anglo-Saxon, Celtic and European. JUST AS AMERICA IS.

    The Negro problem was NEVER my problem. I was 15 before I even TALKED to a darkie- and they smelled as bad then, as they do now. America – if it is to be ‘multicultural/multiracial/heretical’ has NO instantly recognizable ‘style’- it is naught but a morass of degeneracy, perversity, abominations, and hellholes, that NEVER were America….

    And never will be. Lowry can go to hell. And I’ll cast the first stone. Gladly.

  6. “we shouldn’t believe the lie perpetrated by white nationalists (…) or the countervailing lie perpetrated by black nationalists”:

    He recommends inter-racial and inter-ethnic mixing and mingling, as if that were natural, and he ignores the reality of the natural human condition of ethnicity or tribe, and ethnic/tribal culture, community and cohesion. His conservatism conserves unnatural capitalism, and opposes natural ethno-socialism.

  7. “inclusive nationalism”:

    A contradiction in terms, or meaningful in the sense of the capitalist imperialist “inclusion” of all nations in the empire of money.

    Unlike capitalist imperialists, ethnosocialists are internationalists in the sense of having respect for all human beings of all tribes and ethnicities, who all have the same rights and all share the same planet.

  8. The whole point of the National Review version of “conservatism” is nothing more than a form of globalism and multi-culturalism sailing under a false flag. The purpose of the “conservative” movement has always been to confuse and bewilder our people and channel their energy into futile efforts….like electing Geo. W. Bush, among others.

    How do we achieve moral and intellectual clarity? We define our premises. Ayn Rand, although controversial, had an interesting technique. She’d ask people, “What are your premises?” This simple direct question left most people speechless. Who thinks so logically as that? Who gets beyond platitudes and partisan talking points?

    Very few people.

    So…what are our premises?

    1. White people are a separate and distinct race with separate and distinct interests.

    2. The most important white interest is the interest in existence. White people have a right to exist. “We must secure the existence of our people and a future for white children.” Pretty basic. Pretty concise. A great step toward clarity.

    3. White people have the same rights to organize, associate and advocate for white interests as other races.

    4. White people have a right to defend their existence as white people.

    5. White people have a right to their own geogrphical areas, our own white country.

    These are the starting points. I’m sure there are others. The important point I’m making is that no thinking white person should be left speechless if asked, “What are your premises?”

    • Thanks for this — while not as concise as the 14 words, you have nicely formulated the ideas that motivate many of us; we ought to keep them in mind and ‘upload’ them occasionally so more people will see them.

    • I would only add – White people have the right to demand official, public and institutional recognition and respect of their unique culture and history the same as any other group of people.

      White people should NEVER be required to apologize for their existence in any public, corporate or private setting and should expect reverence of their culture the same as any other group of people.

  9. National Conservatism is Neo-Conservatism redux. And if that nebbish Rich Lowry isn’t a heeb I’ll eat my kippah.

  10. Moshiach is the enemy that needs to be fought. Too bad Rick and his kind are owned by the Moshiach, are the property of the Moshiach, and will do exactly as the Moshiach commands. The game is no longer the economic, or the political, the game is now the religious. Rich and his kind need to tell us why he serves at the beck and call of the Moshiach.

  11. Soooo, Rich Lowry is ” . . . going to fight them on the beaches . . . ” etc. Really? Rich and his ilk would be the type who say: “this fucking M-60 MG is too heavy, I’m leaving it behind” then wonder why his unit got slaughtered.

    Rich Lowry, David “Mr. Dickhead” French, Big head Charlie Kirk et al. are exactly the type who would leave their “allies” behind in a tough spot and squawk to the Feds in a heartbeat, they are worthless.

Comments are closed.