Video Introduction to Episode 52
Episode 52. June 30, 2020
CLP Topic: Republican Vichy Collaborators
The Republican Party After Gorsuch.
Introduction.
Since 2008, anxious listeners have been calling into the Rush Limbaugh show asking him if it is time to panic about socialism. Rush always assures his listeners that he will tell them when it is time to panic.
Rush generally combines the issue of time to panic with another issue that there is no “pushback,” without ever identifying who or what organization is supposed to be “pushing back.”
Rush notes,
“There has yet to be any pushback on this…When there’s no pushback, you’re gonna feel alone. Not only is there not pushback, the few who do push back don’t get defended by very many people. You never see any pushback. You never see anybody responding, so you think that you must be in the minority.”
Tucker Carlson made the same statement about pushing back with regard to the riots,
“No one attempted to stop the Democratic power grab. Where are the protectors of the American Heritage.”
We use the recent Gorsuch decision to explain why the Republicans never confronted the Democrat socialists. (The Restoration of the American Natural Rights Republic: Correcting the Consequences of the Republican Party Abdication of Natural Rights and Individualism, Laurie Thomas Vass. GabbyPress, 2017).
The Republicans never pushed back against Black Lives Matter because the Democrats had effectively branded the Republican Party as racist, and the branding by the Democrats was permanently debilitating with a majority of voters on any issue related to social justice.
In 2008, the Republicans never pushed back against Obama when he branded them as a racist party, and in 2020, they never pushed back against the rioters. They never attempted to defend themselves or offer their own public relations brand.
Being branded as a racist political party did not detract them from the main mission of the National Republican Party to promote corporate cronyism, which they pursue as collaborators with the Democrats.
The Establishment Republican Party never pushed back against their branding, because that is not their job, as they see it. Their job is to preserve and protect their heritage of economic advantage.
We do not dwell on the legal intricacies of texturalism and originalism in the Gorsuch decision in Bostock, other than to note in passing that “because of” sex redefines the concept of individual natural rights.
Prior to Gorsuch, natural rights inured to individual citizens, because they were citizen members of the United States.
After Gorsuch, rights inure to gays and trans people because they are members of collectivist identity group, defined by Marxist theology as “oppressed” by the capitalist system.
Madison’s Constitution can be interpreted from any texturalist reading, because Madison’s Constitution does not contain the legal maximand of individual freedom in the Preamble.
As the Gorsuch ruling demonstrates, texturalism applied to the Preamble can mean anything. “A more perfect union” depends on whether a more perfect union means more centralized socialism or more state sovereignty freedom.
Sandra Sperino, a law professor at the University of Cincinnati, makes this point about texturalism in one of her articles.
She notes that the same text which is used by conservatives to,
“dismiss the statutory discrimination claims of all groups—black and brown workers, religious minorities, women, people with disabilities, LGBTQ employees was used by Gorsuch to extend rights to these same groups.”
In other words, in one simple stroke, Gorsuch used texturalism to embrace the left’s Marxist ideology of group identity politics, and extended rights to oppressed groups, because of their sex.
Our podcast today examines the significance and political implications of the Gorsuch decision on the future of the Republican Party as a repository for natural rights conservatives.
We make the point that if the Constitution can mean anything, at anytime, whenever the Court’s majority says it, that it is essential to understand why certain types of Republican appointees are placed on the Court.
We disagree with other conservatives who suggest that Gorsuch is a RINO. The only type of Republican that constitutes the Establishment Republican Party are RINOS.
We argue that there is no such mythical beast, other than RINOs, that constitute the National Republican Establishment.
Gorsuch reflects the ideology of the National Republicans perfectly, and his decision in Bostock was widely acclaimed by the RINO global corporate crony capitalists who run the National Republican Party.
We argue that if there is any mythical political beast in America, it is the so-called conservative legal movement, that Gorsuch was rumored to be a member of, during his confirmation hearing.
We argue that Trump, the man, is a pragmatist, who wakes up every day trying to figure out how to make America great.
We argue that Trump, the man, is not a Republican RINO, but rather a populist, who loves the American people, and a nationalist, who loves the Nation.
Trump, the man, does not have a coherent ideology of individualism. When he counterpunches against Pelosi or Schumer, he never places his counterpunch into a coherent ideology of individual freedom, in contrast to the Democrat’s socialism.
But, Trump voters have extended to Trump their own natural rights ideology, and those followers are bewildered by the Gorsuch decision, and bewildered by why the Republicans never confronted the Democrat rioters.
The Trump followers have been advised by Limbaugh, to continue to vote for Republicans, but, after 30 years of broadcasting the same message, Limbaugh’s political strategy of voting for Republicans is not working to preserve the national culture of individual liberty.
In answer to a caller’s question, after Gorsuch, who asks “Why Keep Voting Republican?” Limbaugh answers,
“Here’s the answer: “Because even now, there is no reasonable alternative. There isn’t anybody else to vote for.”
This is the same advice Jared Kushner gives to Trump about going easy on the rioters. Kushner assures Trump that Trump voters have nowhere else to go.
It is the same answer the Democrats have given to Black voters since 1964. Black voters have nowhere else to go, other than continue to vote for the Democrats.
The Gorsuch decision lays bare the irreconcilable conflict between a culture based upon individualism and a culture based upon collectivist group identity.
There is nothing in the Republican ideology of crony global corporatism about individualism.
On the other hand, there is nothing incompatible between a globalist corporate seamless economy and a globalist, collectivist, socialist dictatorship.
The Republican Party, and the elite donor class of corporations, after Gorsuch, will increase the intensity of their efforts to destroy Trump’s Make America Great because national sovereignty is incompatible with corporate globalism.
We argue that a more accurate description of the National Republican Establishment is Vichy Republican Collaborators with the socialist Democrats.
In her recent article, History Will Judge the Complicit, on the origins of the French elite class Vichy collaboration with the Nazis, Anne Applebaum asks, “Why have Republican leaders abandoned their principles?”
Her article is mostly an anti-Trump screed, but it contains a valuable nugget of history about wealthy Vichy collaborators, in France, that describes the Republican Party after Gorsuch.
She explains, that in the historical context of French Nazi collaboration, a collaborator is,
“Someone who works with the enemy, with the occupying power, with the dictatorial regime. In this negative sense, collaborator is closely related to another set of words: collusion, complicity, connivance…collaborator carries an implication of treason: betrayal of one’s nation, of one’s ideology, of one’s morality, of one’s values.”
Applied to the Republican Establishment today, she notes,
“the (historical) analogy makes sense. The point is not to compare Trump to Hitler or Stalin; the point is to compare the experiences of high- ranking members of the American Republican Party, especially those who work most closely with the White House, to the experiences of Frenchmen in 1940, or of East Germans in 194. These are experiences of people who are forced to accept an alien ideology or a set of values that are in sharp conflict with their own.”
Applied to Republicans Vichy Collaborators, they tolerate Trump, but collaborate with Democrats to extend the globalist ideology of a one-world government.
The full text and audio of the most recent podcast is available for free at clpnewsnetwork.com. The entire historical text and audio archive of all the CLP News Network podcasts are available for an annual subscription of $30.
Section 1. After Gorsuch, The Death of the Republican Crony Capitalist Party.
Trump’s populist love of the people, and his nationalism, is in sharp conflict with the ideology of both global socialism and global corporatism.
When Lindsey Graham states that he will not confirm the Federal DA in New York, until he gains the approval of Schumer, he is demonstrating Republican Vichy Collaboration.
When Burr refuses to hold hearings on the Russian collusion hoax, unless Warner approves, he is acting as a Republican Vichy Collaborator.
When the Republican Party fails to counter-attack the Democrat Marxist rioters, they are acting as collaborators.
When Republicans fail to protect citizens from the Democrat’s lockdown tyranny, they are acting as collaborators.
When Gorsuch rules as a Marxist, he is collaborating with the Democrats.
We call our own ideology of individualism, economic populism, and nationalism “natural rights conservative.”
Trump, the man, has never described himself as a natural rights conservative, or a populist, but his followers describe that ideology as their own, and they have applied it to Trump.
And, his followers desperately want Trump to be the defender of individual liberty, in the same level of desperation that the frantic Limbaugh callers ask him if it is time to panic.
The Trump voters are stuck in a contradiction. They have a coherent ideology of individual freedom, but they are in search of a national political party that champions their cause.
We agree with the conclusion of Stanley Greenburg, in his recent book, RIP GOP: How the New America Is Dooming the Republicans, that the Republican Party will die, but not for the same reasons as Greenburg.
Greenburg argues that millennial demographics is destiny, and assumes that all millennials are socialists, who will vote for Democrats.
In his book, Greenburg makes a common mistake of leftist writers in misidentifying the Republican Party, as if it were Trump, in order to provide the framework for his attack on Trump, and his argument of the ascendancy of the new socialist Democrat Party.
He assumes that Trump, the man, is the embodiment of the Republican Party, and misidentifies the mythical “Tea Party” as the primary political force of the Party.
Greenburg reaches the right conclusion about the death of the GOP, with his ass-backwords social construction of reality that all the millennials are scialists.
We argue that the ideology individual freedom is eternal, and attractive to milliennials, if they could ever hear a coherent message from a political party.
The Republican Party, after Gorsuch, will eventually cease to exist because natural rights Trump voters will eventually stop voting for Republicans. The ideology of corporatism and globalism will continue to function, but under the auspices of one-party Democrat rule.
After the Gorsuch ruling, the U. S. Chamber of Commerce noted its approval by stating,
“The U.S. Chamber of Commerce is pleased that, as a result of today’s Supreme Court ruling, federal law prohibits discrimination in the workplace against gay, lesbian and transgender employees…Combatting discrimination also allows our diverse workforce and free enterprise system to reach its full potential.”
The U. S. Chamber’s use of the royal collectivist “Our free enterprise system” means the crony corporate global capitalist system, not the free enterprise entrepreneurial capitalist system.
The crony capitalist system will reach its full potential after the implementation of a one-party global dictatorship, aided and abetted by the Gorsuch ruling.
Trump voters will not vote for more people like Gorsuch, or Fiorina or Haley, who express support for BLM, or the Chamber of Commerce Republicans, who implemented the NAFTA and China trade deals.
We conclude that natural rights conservatives must stop being bamboozled by ideological charlatans, like Gorsuch, and must hurry to create a new party, before the Republican collaboration with Democrats leads to a permanent, one-party, one-world, tyranny.
The Trump conservatives down in Florida, which we cite below, need their own legitimate political party, based upon the principles of liberty in Jefferson’s Declaration.
We conclude that there is nothing of value left in rehabilitating the Republican crony capitalist party, and nothing of enduring value left in reviving Madison’s defective representative republic that empowered the natural aristocracy class over the common citizens, and ended with the Gorsuch decision that enshrined collectivism over individualism.
We agree with Matt Taibbi that Trump is not an Establishment RINO Republican, and that the real power in the Republican Party is global crony corporatism.
In his analysis, Taibbi suggests that Trump is going to eat the Republican Establishment.
In his article, Trump’s Next Victim? The Entire Republican Party, he states that Trump’s 2016 victory was,
“The inevitable consequence of the basic dynamic of the party, which by the end was little more than a collection plate for global business interests…the newly global employer class cut regular working stiffs loose, forcing them to compete with billions of foreigners without rights or political power who would eat toxic waste for five cents a day. There never was any real connection between the George Wills, Andrew Sullivans and David Brookses and the gun-toting, Jesus-loving ex-middle-class voters they claimed to embrace. All those intellectuals ever did for Middle America was cook up a sales pitch designed to get them to vote for politicians who would instantly betray them to business interests eager to ship their jobs off to China and India. The most successful trick was linking the corporate mantra of profit without responsibility to the concept of individual liberty.”
In explaining the political power of crony capitalism, Taibbi exposes another weakness in the Greenburg analysis, which overlooks the relationship between the crony corporations and the Democrats.
Taibbi notes that both parties feed at the trough of crony capitalism. He explains,
“From the Walter Mondale years on, Democrats have eaten from the same trough as Republicans. They’ve grown fat off cash from behemoths like Cisco, Pfizer, Exxon Mobil, Citigroup, Goldman and countless others, companies that moved jobs overseas, offshored profits, helped finance the construction of factories in rival states like China and India, and sometimes all of the above.”
The reason that large Republican Establishment corporations are currently funding BLM is to fund their Vichy political party. The path of corporate funding to BLM is through Democrat Party front groups, which distribute a portion of the corporate funds to BLM to support the rioting.
Greenburg’s own funding to support his socialist propaganda is also from the globalist political movement. As he notes in his book,
“Steven Katzenberg gave us the seed money for the first research, and Steve Bing, who funded us for a decade, allowed us to pay for the research ourselves. That changed fundamentally when Michael Vachon, adviser to Soros Fund Management said, “This work(Grennburg’s propaganda) has to happen.”
And, while his funding is from global corporations, Greenburg also identifies both political parties as feeding from the crony capitalist trough.
Greenburg states,
“The elites of both parties supported the global disruption that made growing metropolitan areas more dynamic. In the Rust Belt, 4.5 million people have lost jobs since the passage of NAFTA and China’s full integration into the economy.”
In his book Greenburg eventually makes the right distinction between Trump, the man, and the Republican Party, with the observation that the Establishment crony capitalist Republicans do not care about the unfair economic system.
He states,
“Republicans didn’t notice or care that two thirds of Americans believed “the economic system in this country unfairly favors powerful interests and economic inequality is a very big problem.”
To be more accurate, Greenburg could have stated that the Establishment Republicans doesn’t care about the unfair economic system, but that Trump, the man, and Trump voters, do care about economic inequality, and seek a fair economic system that promotes equal rights for all and special privileges for none. (Equal Rights For All. Special Privileges For None.: Re-Examining the Agrarian Arguments Against A Centralized American Government, Laurie Thomas Vass. GabbyPress, 2017.)
After the Gorsuch betrayal, Trump voters may move forward on creating that new political party that embraces the economic populism of competitive free market entrepreneurialism.
The unexpected outcome for Greenburg is that the economic populism of the new party will be based upon creating a multi-racial entrepreneurial free market economy, aimed at improving the lives of the American middle and working class.
The economic platform of the new party will not be the Marxist economic populism of Bernie.
Greenburg notes,
“Democratic voters today look at the chief executives of major corporations and they see the face of an era where greed was unchecked, where companies failed to invest in their workers and used their big donations and lobbyists to rig the political system against the middle and working classes.”
Trump voters see the same economic defects in the crony capitalist Establishment Republican Party, as the socialists, and Trumpicans would welcome former Democrat middle class voters who seek a political party that represents their economic populist and nationalist values.
Section 2. Trumpicans and the Right’s Political Bargain With Republicans.
In his description of the Gorsuch ruling, Senator Josh Hawley explained that the social contact of conservatives with the National Republican Establishment to protect religious freedom was not working.
Hawley stated,
“If this (Gorsuch) case makes anything clear, it is that the bargain that has been offered to religious conservatives for years now is a bad one. It’s time to reject it…The bargain is that you go along with the party establishment, you support their policies and priorities and, in return, the establishment will put some judges on the bench who supposedly will protect your constitutional rights to freedom of worship, to freedom of exercise.”
Hawley made reference to a mythical conservative political beast that does not exist in reality.
The Gorsuch decision, he stated,
“Represents the end of the conservative legal movement, or the conservative legal project, as we know it…After Bostock, that effort as we know it, as it has existed up to now, it’s over.”
Matt Ford, a socialist writer for the New Republic, also cites the social contract of the mythical conservative legal project, by stating that “Neil Gorsuch Just Upended the Conservative Legal Project.”
Ford writes,
“The conservative justice’s ruling in favor of gay, queer, and transgender workers shows the limits of the right’s Faustian bargain on judges… Gorsuch is a landmark ruling written by a conservative justice in textualist terms that runs counter to conservatives’ preferred policy outcome…Whether the conservative legal movement will fully apostatize Gorsuch for the heavy blow he delivered to its policy goals remains to be seen.
We argue that there never was a credible “conservative legal movement” flying under the auspices of the Establishment Republican Party.
We argue that there never was an authentic political contract between conservatives and the Establishment Republican Party.
As we note in our book about the abdication of the Republican Party, they never agreed to represent the values of liberty, and Madison’s Constitution does not require that of them.
Rather, we agree with the conclusions of Adam Cohen’s new book, Supreme Inequality: The Supreme Court’s Fifty-Year Battle for a More Unjust America, who cites the relationship between the crony capitalist corporations and the Republican Party.
Cohen offers a detailed review of 50 years of rulings on the Supreme Court that advanced the socialist agenda, while entrenching the power of the corporations.
The values that hold socialism together with Republicans are the ideological values of corporate new world order globalism.
Cohen states that the best explanation for the Supreme Court’s decisions, which includes the Gorsuch decision, is that the decisions upheld,
“a massive transfer of wealth to corporations, corporate executives, and share-holders” from “ordinary Americans … as consumers, employees, and innocent bystanders.”
We argue that so-called “Trumpicans,” after Gorsuch, now see through the Republican sham.
In her article about Trump voters, ‘We are Trumpicans – We Don’t Even Call Ourselves Republicans,” Myra Adams interviews a Trump voter from Florida, named Delgado.
Delgado states,
“The establishment in DC took over both parties as the globalist agenda, special interest money, and lobbyists found that they could alter politics with big money. President Trump changed all of that when he could not be bought.”
We think that when Delgado uses the term “establishment,” she means the same thing that we do when we use the term “crony corporate capitalist, which means the same thing that Trump means when he says “drain the swamp.”
We believe this term “establishment” is the common understanding that both socialists and conservatives have about the unfair, unequal, rigged political system, where powerful corporations use political power to direct economic benefits to themselves.
The power of the Establishment Republicans to continue to hold conservatives in line from forming a new political party is the insight by Taibbi, about their subterfuge of liberty.
Taibbi states,
“The (Republicans) most successful trick was linking the corporate mantra of profit without responsibility to the concept of individual liberty.”
Using the subterfuge of liberty, the crony corporate class has infiltrated conservative front groups to use them to attract conservative voters, in order to continue their election sham.
The subterfuge works because conservative voters suspect they are voting for liberty, but in fact are voting to empower the crony capitalists.
As noted by Pedro Gonzalez, in his American Greatness, article, “As Rome Burns,” an example of a front group is the Texas Public Policy Foundation.
Gonzales writes,
“From 2003 until 2018, Brooke Rollins was president and CEO of the Texas Public Policy Foundation (TPPF), a think tank aptly characterized by journalist Mark Hand as “a Koch-funded research and advocacy group.” A list posted online revealed Koch Industries, Inc. to be one of Rollin’s chief donors. Companies like Chevron and ExxonMobil also feature prominently in the donor roll…The organization has little in the way of ideology; it is merely a vehicle for securing corporate interests, from rolling back environmental regulations, progressive prison reform, and radically increasing immigration levels.”
The person Gonzales cites, Brooke Rollins, is now chief domestic policy advisor to Trump, and works under the direction of Jared Kushner.
Since Rollins took over, according to Gonzales, the White House appears increasingly aligned with the interests of TPPF’s donors, in other words the crony capitalists of the Establishment Republican Party.
As reported by Tucker Carlson, it is Rollins and Kushner who are advising Trump to go easy on the rioters.
Carlson notes,
“On a White House executive staff call just this morning, on the night Underwood died, key domestic policy advisors Brooke Rollins and Ja’Ron Smith argued that it might seem ‘racist’ to say anything about the rioting in Minneapolis, or elsewhere for that matter.”
Christopher Roach, in American Greatness, cites the success of the subterfuge by noting that the rioters are more concerned about racism than the corporate privilege.
He states,
“The protesters are not paying attention to the policies and privileges of a rich and powerful establishment which is mostly indifferent to the nation in which it (crony capitalism) prospers…What is perhaps most jarring is the emergence of an alliance between big business and leftist radicals. None of these corporations are willing to stand for law and order. Instead, they all stand for the same extreme version of racial justice preached by the radicals, one that labels America’s past a story of “systemic racism.” With America so labeled, there is little reason to oppose the vandalism and symbolic destruction of the heroes and symbols of America’s past.”
Joanna Wuest, in her article, The Supreme Court, Capital, and Queer Equality, sees this same alliance between Democrat Marxism and crony capitalism.
She writes,
“Gorsuch and Roberts also appear to have heeded corporate America’s newfound desire for a politics of tolerance. In a slew of amicus briefs, hundreds of corporations and business associations implored the court to rule in favor of the LGBTQ+ plaintiffs. A coalition of businesses with an annual revenue of over $5 trillion, for example, argued that federal legal protections create a corporate climate that “boosts productivity,” “reduces administrative burdens,” and “benefits employers’ ability to attract and retain employees.” In one particularly pithy phrase, a group of CEOs and boards of directors warned that discrimination “would undermine the nation’s business interests.”
We agree with Wuest’s conclusion that this alliance between the Democrats and Establishment Republicans is the future of the Republican Party, after Gorsuch.
Conclusion: Divided We Stand: The Country Is Hopelessly Split.
In his 2018 article, The Country Is Hopelessly Split, Sasha Issenberg asks, “So why not make it official and break up?”
He conjectures that a coalition of socialists states form an interstate compact, and asks.
“What if we could reject a far-off governing structure that no longer seems responsive to our interests in favor of local authority that can more closely match our aspirations and sense of identity as a people?”
We agree with Issenberg that socialist states should be free to form their own new Socialist States of America (SSA), and that natural rights states should proceed to form the Democratic Republic of America, based upon the state sovereignty framework of the Articles of Confederation. (After the Collapse of America: The Democratic Republic of America, Laurie Thomas Vass. GabbyPress, 2019).
We agree with the analysis of Julie Kelly, in her article, The Con of the Surrender Cons, where she details the list of Vichy Republicans who support Black Lives Matter.
We disagree with her conclusion,
“The only small hope is that freedom-loving, America-defending people on the Right unify to reject every single demand of the Left.”
To be able to reject their collectivist ideology would require a political party, other than the Crony Establishment Republicans.
We argue that there are no longer any shared moral or cultural values between conservatives and socialists.
The purpose of the Constitution, in political terms, is to establish a shared narrative that unites the citizens under a single banner, so that they feel enough in common with one another to accept the legitimacy of elections.
After Gorsuch, there is no longer any shared moral values. Individualism is irreconcilable with collectivism.
The consequence of the national division is that socialists will never accept the legitimacy of elections, because their collectivism, and Marxism, suggest that they are always morally superior to conservatives, no matter what the voters say in an election.
Angelo Codevilla makes this same point, when he states,
“In Bostock, the Supreme Court has taken the fateful step to assert that a common word, vital to social relations, can mean whatever anyone wants it to mean. No totalitarian regime has ever explicitly mandated the meaning of words. In roughly two decades, America’s political system has burned through the legitimacy accumulated during the previous two centuries. There is precious little left.”
Victor Davis Hanson is correct that America has an economic class problem, not a race problem. The economic class problem originated in Madison’s Constitution, which permanently created a privileged class of citizens, that he called the “natural aristocracy.”
Today, that privileged economic class is called the crony corporate class, who use the Republican Party to skew economic and financial benefits to themselves.
As Hanson notes,
“We have reached the surreal point at which the nation’s privileged whites on campuses such as Harvard, Yale, and Stanford, in the top echelon of politics, and the corporate and entertainment worlds, all deplore in the abstract something they call “white privilege” in others who have never really experienced it.”
Hanson could easily be talking about the Gorsuch decision, and the Republican Party, after Gorsuch,
Being branded as racist did not detract from the main mission of the Republican Party to promote corporate cronyism, which they pursue as collaborators with the Democrats.
The Crony Capitalists now use the language of “white privilege” to continue to collaborate with the Democrats.
They never pushed back against the racist branding because that is not their job, as they see it.
Their job is to preserve and protect their heritage of economic advantage, and joining the globalist socialist Democrats in creating a global one world government is consistent with their historical economic class privileges.
We conclude that there is nothing of value left in rehabilitating the Republican crony capitalist party, and nothing of enduring value left in reviving Madison’s defective representative republic that empowered the natural aristocracy class over the common citizens, and ended with the Gorsuch decision that enshrined collectivism over individualism.
The only peaceful, non-violent solution to the nation’s conflict is to dissolve the nation into two new nations.
We advocate the creation of a new constitution, based upon on the state sovereignty framework of the Articles of Confederation, which changes the representative republic to a democratic republic.
I am Laurie Thomas Vass, and this podcast is a copyrighted production of the CLP News Network.
Comments are closed, but trackbacks and pingbacks are open.