Living Under Enemy Occupation

We’ve lost.

The Left won the culture war, and with it, the war for our society’s political soul. “Politics is downstream of Culture” is a maxim the Right was either ignorant of, dismissive of, or fully ignored, until it was too little, too late. We must now come to terms with the idea that we are living under enemy occupation. Insufficiently Progressive citizens are rapidly becoming the legitimate targets of social and economic forms of violence from actors at all levels of “The Cathedral” (or “The Synagogue”, whichever you prefer). The further Right you are, the greater the heresy committed, and the harsher the penance required.

Federal and State governments are beginning to devote more time and resources into efforts to force citizens to use their private property to provide service to individuals we might wish not to, regardless of our moral or religious reasoning, under the threat of severe and potentially crippling financial penalties. This is not a new development; freedom of association has been dead in private enterprise since the Civil Rights era. Unfortunately, “Civil Rights” tends to remain a nebulous and easily expandable concept; it can be used in many situations by the government to quickly expand the legal reach of the state, and so we should expect to see new and novel ways for this particular idea to be used to further encroach upon our lives and livelihoods.

Beyond the targeted oppression of the judicial, legislative, and executive branches, we also find ourselves further and further under the jurisdiction of bureaucratic, faceless, and near unaccountable organizations that wield significant amounts of real-world power. They answer to the Executive branch, and they are the means by which the President can most effectively implement their agenda. To give an example of how these organizations are used against us, let’s turn to the Department of Housing and Urban Development. Not only are they now tracking neighborhood diversity data, they are also making a concerted effort to diversify ethnically homogeneous communities. Make no mistake; this is specifically designed to break up ethnically homogeneous neighborhoods and undermine the social fabric and communal trust throughout the country. Barack Obama has been quite the effective President; he has certainly lived up to his promise to “fundamentally transform” America.

Lastly, the general Left-leaning media and the public it manipulates are used to track down and attempt to shame into submission via economic violence those who are insufficiently keeping up with “Progress”. This is done by either attacking your employment status if you are a traditional employee, or by targeting your social business network if you own a business. Unless you are sufficiently Antifragile, this social and economic violence is highly effective in attaining the desired outcomes, regardless of the hardened hearts and vindictive attitudes it creates in those who are attacked.

So how do we move forward? How do we attempt to live in a society that is actively targeting us for agitation, attempting to loot the spoils of political war by enforcing their will on the conquered population? I’d argue that we need to take a page out of the playbook of other minority groups scattered throughout the West and begin taking steps to build a parallel society. A parallel society is one where a minority, often bound together by ethnic or religious ties, self-organizes in a manner that reduces and minimizes contact with the majority society. I think this provides us the best option for low-level resistance. What might this look like in practice?

I believe our best chance of success in taking the initial steps towards building a parallel society lies in establishing a private club, similar in legal structure to the Knights of Columbus or the Freemasons, for our purposes. The head chapter would then allow people who they feel are responsible and well-intentioned to establish city and region-specific chapters around the nation. This would permit the club’s members to function in a decentralized nature, while still retaining the shared bonds between us anywhere a chapter exists. I would hope that membership criteria remain stringent to ensure quality club members, but the minimal criteria for joining is something that could be determined by the original founders. These things could be anything from a mere shared political outlook to things as strict as a certain threshold of income and a genetics report from 23 and Me. I’d suggest the founding chapter lay out minimum requirements for club admission, and each chapter could add on additional requirements if there were other considerations based on regional and cultural differences. I’d imagine criteria for admission might be different in Washington than in Florida, depending on local factors.

You might be wondering why I am suggesting a private club as opposed to some other form of organization. Whereas the government says that a business must serve anyone who enters it based on the criteria laid forth in the Civil Rights act, this act does not apply to private clubs not open to the public. A private club is allowed to discriminate on who is allowed entrance to the club based on whatever criteria the club wants, on a federal level. There are particular states that go beyond the Federal requirements and apply these laws to private clubs, such as New Jersey, but those states are in the minority. This gives us the ultimate control over who is allowed access to our network and any benefits that come from membership.

Once a club is established and the chapters grow, this promotes real-life bonds between local families and might function as the beginnings of a supportive, tight-knit local community that does what it can to shield members from the social and economic violence of the Left. These clubs can open up trusts in the name of the chapter and use collected dues for any number of things, such as:

  • providing relief for local member families who fall under hard times
  • purchasing land and facilities for members to share and enjoy
  • setting up scholarships for the children of members to attend University or technical trainings
  • providing for legal defense of any member who incurs the wrath of the diversity racket
  • setting up an internal club credit union that gives favorable term loans to members rather than require members to rely on predatory banks and credit card companies for access to capital

A private, chapter-based club might just provide us the base infrastructure and networks necessary for building closer bonds between like-minded people at the local, regional, and national levels, and it appears to me like a very solid first step to beginning the move offline to develop our own parallel communities that can withstand the direction our society is heading. What do you think?