New York Times: Hawks Are Standing In the Way of a New Republican Party

In the wake of the Trump years, I have become more upbeat, optimistic and productive. I’ve done this by drawing an important distinction within the Republican Party.

Since I only have one vote and I live in Alabama, I don’t think much about voting for politicians. I’m just an analyst. I see myself as working in media. I focus now exclusively on sharing my thoughts on this blog and trends in public opinion. I’m content to leave the voting to other people now.

As far as the Republican Party goes, there is a lot to be positive about. Specifically, the electorate changed and voters have become more nationalist and populist and have warmed up to our views in most areas. There are a lot of positive things going on in conservative media where the old taboos are being broken. Conservative intellectuals have also broken away from the stale old Reaganite orthodoxy. There is a lot to be happy about like the normies waking up and becoming more radical under Joe Biden.

At the level of elected Republican politicians, however, we’re still looking at Mitch McConnell and Kevin McCarthy returning to power and maybe Dump in 2024. We’re looking at the same gerontocracy in the Senate with maybe the occasional outlier like Josh Hawley. While we can probably count on these people to block Joe Biden’s agenda (this isn’t nothing), we can’t expect much else from them.

New York Times:

“A painful contradiction lies at the heart of the American right. Even as conservatives are breaking with some Cold War orthodoxies on domestic policy, Republican politicians remain wedded to that era’s violently expansionist foreign policy. They oppose liberal imperialism in the United States —the aggressive push to impose progressive values, often joined to corporate power — while still contriving to spread the same order to the ends of the earth.

It’s a contradictory vision, and for many members of the so-called new right who are pushing for a political realignment of the Republican Party,  it presents a major stumbling block. We do not want to see this new vision of conservative American politics co-opted by hawkish ideologues more interested in posturing abroad than in reform here at home. Conservatives must make a clear break with neo-neoconservative foreign policy and instead emphasize widely shared material development at home and cultural nonaggression abroad as the keys to U.S. security.

The crisis in Ukraine illustrates the problem. Even Republicans sympathetic to the new right haven’t been able to resist the hawkish temptation. Among the loudest voices calling for escalation were Republican Senators Tom Cotton of Arkansas and Marco Rubio of Florida, politicians who have otherwise tried to articulate a more populist domestic vision for their party. Senator Rubio resorted to inapt Churchill-Hitler parallels (though he later said he opposes deploying troops to Eastern Europe); Senator Cotton lambasted President Biden for “appeasing Vladimir Putin.” …”

Obviously, I agree with Sohrab Ahmari, Patrick Deneen and Gladden Pappin on this specific issue. I don’t give a shit about protecting liberal democracy in Ukraine. I don’t know anyone who cares about what goes on in places like that either. I don’t see it as being any of my business or my problem.

Do we seriously want to use force to remake the rest of the world in the image of the contemporary United States? Do we want to risk nuclear war to spread this cancer? Really?

Will Admiral Rachel Levine be leading us into battle?

About Hunter Wallace 12320 Articles
Founder and Editor-in-Chief of Occidental Dissent

7 Comments

  1. Levine puss has frag me written all over it. The top brass know this, that is why nukes will be the first and only choice. There is no conventional war America can win,.Our troop would be too busy trying to kill each other instead of the enemy. And how do you win a war like that?

  2. How did it go from being a doctor, and being appointed to all of these government agencies…to becoming an admiral? How did that happen? I thought you had to be in a branch of the military to work your way up to that. Guess I’m wrong.

  3. Will Admiral Rachel Levine be leading us into battle?

    We can always dream can’t we? It would be truly the ultimate peak clown-world event. Pedo-wood might even make a super-hero movie about the heroic admiral storming the Crimean beaches with the Murikan Light brigade cavalry astride rainbow unicorns, wearing high-heeled fuzzy pink booties. I’m sure Lady G will be there with her retinue, including her house-negro Mr. Tim. Gen. Silverback should be right up there leading the charge with the admiral.

  4. Someone should make a version of the famous Uncle Sam poster (I want YOU) featuring this perverted monster and circulate it. Also a meme of this picture asking: Is THIS what you are willing to kill and die for US soldiers? could be useful. Let Lady G and Mitch the Bitch go and get their heads blown off in the Ukraine if they think it’s so important.

Comments are closed.