THE PALEOCRAT TRIBUNE

Conservatism is, as Samuel Francis would write in a book by the same title, a beautiful loser. A movement with no creed, no agreed upon set of icons, and no consensus on just what they wish to conserve. Heaven forbid that I decry them for traits common to most all political movements. But to pretend that there is a consensus within the movement, as the more loud and proud would like everyone to believe, is to play the part of the village idiot.

The question I am often asked is where I believe myself to fit in amongst the conservative horde. This was never a difficult question to answer. I have always found myself somewhere between paleolibertarianism and paleoconservativism. Any way you went with it, “paleo” was the necessary prefix.

There were certrainly areas of tension. Finding my home on issues concerning was Wall St. and Main St., tariffs and laissez-faire, as well as restrictionism and amnesty was no easy task. There are still a number of unresolved tensions, but I presume this will be the case for the duration of my life. At any rate, I have found what I would generally refer to as home.

But it would be foolish of me to pretend that I am a cookie-cutter paleoconservative. I maintain a number of positions that may be considered anathema by many of the paleos. My preference for culturism over racialism hasn’t won me many brownie points amongst the more hardline of the crowd. My distaste for capitalism and tentative take on industrialism would place me in dock with many. But my positions on health care, environmentalism, animal treatment, labor unions, and a Just/Living Wage would possibly have me thrown to the gallows along with the ghosts of excommunicants past.

So what am I? Where do I fit? Not sure. But I don’t think I’d prefer it any other way.