I didn’t plan on doing this, but I guess I have to.
Have you ever had one of those moments where you’re not exactly sure if your team is on the same page, but the others are like: ‘eeeh don’t worry ’bout it we got this’ and you figure ‘I guess they might got it’ but then it turns out they totally don’t got it? Yeah that happened to me.
Where to start? Let’s start here:
Scientism makes an excellent point: we do need theory. Without theory you get a bunch of loudmouths shouting for whatever free stuff they can grab, and lo and behold, that is exactly what is happening in France. That BAP, of all people, does not get this, for me was one of those facepalm moments.
You NEED theory. Of course, I will meet BAP in that you need the right theory: if you’ve got everybody theorizing, everybody’s going to theorize that their theories are holier than the person next to them and you end up with a load of nonsense, i.e. all of Western philosophy since Nietzsche.
So, you need to attain the right theory from the right guys. Well waddyaknow, we have that theory: it is called Neoreaction, Reaction, the Dark Enlightenment or whatever you want to call it. It’s there, most importantly: it’s done. Well, the most important parts, the parts that we need right now anyway. For an excellent summary, please check Jim’s blog. IT’S ALL THERE.
Way too many guys on the right are re-inventing the wheel: instead of saying ‘hey this guy is pretty good at theorizing, perhaps I should copy his theories and focus on what I’m good at’ they go: ‘hey this guy is getting attention for his theories, I want attention for my theories!’ It is stupid and greedy. If an ally of mine is better at cooking up theories than I am, I say that out loud and I cooperate with him to strengthen his theories instead of stealing his stuff and passing it off as a failed version of my own. THIS IS COOPERATION 101.
If you don’t have the right theory, you’ll find that you have to re-invent your politics everyday, because you have no theory. Consequently, you’ll find entryists and leftists at every corner, sucking up to you, imitating your language and inserting Marxist ideas in your movement. Don’t like Marxist ideas? Well too bad because you refused to listen to the guys who could keep the Marxists out.
Essentially, BAP is saying: ‘a car? I don’t need a car! I prefer über, I like the spontaneity.’ Good luck with quality control: you will, mysteriously yet inevitably find yourself being übered by people who pretend to like you but in actuality hate your guts.
I’m saying you need a car. In fact, I’m saying you need the best car around: a Ferrari? BMW? Lambhorgini? You name it, we’ll have it delivered. We deal in the best cars. So you can focus on the stuff you’re good at, without having to hike a fucking ride every day.
Delegation frees up energy and allows for specialization according to people’s talents. Jim has the best theory: listen to him.
Of course this problem is not confined to just BAP. Very smart intellectuals suffer from the similar problem, where their ego does not allow them to admit that someone else’s ideas are sufficient for our situation, sufficient to fight our enemies and beat them. For instance, when intellectuals debate the future direction of the right, they are amazing at coming up with the most long-winded, beautifully complex ideas. We need border control! Ethnicity! Re-define conservatism! Populism! God-Emperor! Etc etc etc.
If your theory cannot be summarized in 1 word, it is a bad theory, and if that 1 word does not cut reality at the joints, it is an even worse theory because it will be hijacked by entryists. Conservatism, thus, is a dead word, for it has been hijacked by entryists like Ben Shapiro who pretend to espouse it but in fact are controlled opposition. So what we need is a new idea, a new theory that is summarized in 1 word, and that that word cuts reality at the joints. That word is Jim, Jimism, or Jimianity.
This is really not the first time in history that the ideas of one man shaped a society. Perhaps you can think of some examples in the past? Maybe some Jewish guy, some 2000 years ago, perhaps? Maybe dozens of others? The formula works.
If you say you are a Jimian, there is absolutely no mistake on what your ideas are, on what you stand for and what you fight for. It cuts through the crap. It puts a stop to the entire twitter diarrhea, which often boils down to one intellectual saying to the other: ‘I think I am more important than you.’ No, what counts is the best idea, and we already have the best ideas. Get your ass in line, stop reinventing the wheel.
So I guess I also have a bone to pick with Hestia, who stopped linking Jim. I was blinded for liking Nick B Steves, but I’ll rectify that now. See, Hestia’s given reason for not linking Jim is that he is a ‘dangerous man’ and that they would rather not risk getting into trouble for linking him. NO SHIT. You want to topple the deep state, WHAT DID YOU EXPECT? ‘yeah guys we’re writing samizdat, we’re being edgy, but not so edgy that we could lose our jobs!’ Really??
I mean, I get it, I do. Not everyone has to be a hero. But have some goddamn balls. We need heroes, we need those people to be leaders, we need them to set an example for others, to inspire others. If everyone is pussying out, how the hell do you expect to accomplish anything? You are setting yourself up for failure before the fight has even started. Look for people who are not scared to lose their jobs.
Look. I’m not saying put on a white robe and go to Times Square preaching the gospel of Jim. What I’m saying is, stop leaving your flanks open to enemy theory attack. When political theory stuff comes up, ask yourself: ‘what has Jim said on this subject?’ for you may bet he has said something on it and you may bet that it is sufficient to deal with the conversation. What I am saying is: delegate the responsibility of theorycrafting to Jim, so that you can get on with stuff you are good at.
That’s all. I’m not even gonna proofread this one.