The Katrina Election

By Grant Brooks

In a much quieter scene than his first announcement, Donald Trump declared for the Presidency a few days ago. Having ignominiously departed the Oval Office over two years ago, he now seeks reelection. And this leads to the inevitable question of what Nationalists should do as regards the Republican primary, and the election generally.

Compared against some of his promises, like a wall and an end to border invasions, and being the people’s man in the White House, the record of the 45th President is mixed to disappointing. Especially for those who witnessed the 2020 Election and J6, it would be hard to blame them for feeling the New York titan has lost his luster. And yet, I believe, Donald Trump’s campaign for President represents another great opportunity for National Republicans. But to explain it, we have to wind the clock back 17 years, to the City of New Orleans.

Katrina had just hit, to this day one of the most destructive hurricanes of the 21st century. Much of the city was underwater, and all of it was in utter chaos. In a place that already dealt with a significant crime and social problem, the social equilibrium was utterly undone. It was a terrible time, but there was also an opportunity. Katrina had opened the door to settle scores consequence free. In the words of Hans Lander,

“I heard stories of good ole boys basically wacking 25, 30 looters a pop, and working out a deal with the county sheriff where you just dump them in a landfill and don’t talk about it.”

In a real sense, Trump’s continued presence and active participation is a hurricane Katrina for the Republican Party. Obviously, this is a situation that is way less than ideal or even tolerable, but this is a unique chance to settle scores from the last four decades of Republican politics. The consultant class that has sought to suck the blood of the white conservative voters they pretend to represent loathe Trump, regardless of his actual impact.

The sixth party system, beginning with the gradual shift of the south towards the Republican Party, is generally accepted as having been cemented in 1980, and the electric election of Ronald Reagan. According to more than one scholar,2 this system may be about to give way to a new party system, meaning new coalitions, new geographic battlegrounds, and most importantly different parties. It will still bear the label Democrat and Republican but the actual priorities and driving issues are being reset. According to Matt Kerbel,

“In key respects, 2020 is reminiscent of the last realignment we experienced in 1980. Then, a nascent coalition emerged gradually over many years, as constituent groups once loyal to the New Deal – most notably white southerners – peeled away from the Democratic Party. Richard Nixon’s narrow 1968 victory foreshadowed a majority conservative coalition, much like Obama’s 2008 victory foreshadowed today’s emerging majority, but it didn’t come to fruition until Ronald Reagan’s unambiguous defeat of Jimmy Carter in 1980 – and, even then, Republicans wouldn’t realize a House majority until fourteen years later.”

Matt Kerbel, “Birth Pangs of the Seventh Party System,” Wolves and Sheep: Political Analysis outside the Beltway, Sept. 18, 2020

Sixth Party System according to presidential elections from 1980-2020.

Chris Vance further explains,

“The election of 2016 started, or perhaps accelerated, the movement towards a seventh party system. Reaganite elites lost touch with the Republican base, and lost control over their party. Republican base voters support Trump because they agree with him. They are instinctively protectionist and isolationist. And their nativist passion to restrict immigration is now the driving force of the new “conservative movement.”

The Republican Party of the sixth party system is gone. The GOP has lost college educated voters, especially women, and with them, the suburbs they used to win. The party now is made up primarily of white, evangelical protestants — which is a huge voting bloc — and non-college educated whites. And those in control of the GOP now are content to double down on this coalition, rather than try and take back moderate suburbanites.”

Chris Vance, “The Great Realignment: Are You Ready For America’s Seventh Version Of Political Parties?” Post Alley | Seattle, Sept. 13, 2019

So what does it mean? It means that for those in favor of a muscular and nationalist Republican Party, a window is open to settling scores of their own. The GOP consultant class, exemplified and spurred on by publications like National Review, The American Conservative, and men like David French and Jonah Goldberg, cannot resist posturing and walking into the light to demonstrate their disdain for Trump.

Taking this at face value, unprecedented opportunity is avalible. The best chance of most people’s lifetimes to alter the Republican Party is in this window of a few years. This new party might be one not committed to Randian abstractions and losing the culture war, but to the nativism and protectionism that once stood as bedrocks of Republican politics.

And so, as Trump is the Katrina which temporarily suspends the social equilibrium, Nationalists use this suspension to expel enemies and traitors from the GOP. And so they must if the ship is to be righted.

11 Comments Add yours

  1. Aeoli Pera says:

    I’m tempted to let the optimism go simply because it’s an endangered species.


    1. Aeoli Pera says:

      Here’s what I’ll say: In the world of running you can decrease your time for some distance (say a mile or 5k) by 10% by running 10x that distance each week for 10 weeks. There’s also “the 10 percent rule” which says to never increase your running volume (miles run) by more than 10% per week, or you’re going to hurt yourself.

      With that in mind, let’s look at the NJP and imagine exponential growth. For all my reservations about their religious quest to rehab Hitler’s reputation, they have the right idea about advocating in person for obvious white victims. That’s good shit. But is national-level presidential politics in the cards in 2024? That’s only about one hundred weeks. Will Eric Striker have settled on a news website by then?

      I’ve been talking to a guy online for maybe seven years. Every year he sets the same goals, and every time I tell him to shoot lower and work his way up because they aren’t achievable. “I just have to get my shit together this time.” But it’s not an all or nothing thing, it’s a process of consistent, steady growth on a longer timeline.

      To be perfectly frank, it’s narcissism. And here I am seven years later trying to argue with a narcissist after seven years of failure, which I guess makes me a narcissist too.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Aeoli Pera says:

        “I’m gonna squat 500 pounds…in a month!”

        “Now listen here young man, let’s be reasonable…”

        The young, having never accomplished anything, have no conception of what can be accomplished in a year. And the elderly, having never convinced anyone of anything, have no conception of how you reason with someone who thinks he can pick up 500 punds with pure enthusiasm. Don’t we just deserve each other?

        Liked by 1 person

      2. Aeoli Pera says:

        I guess the tl;dr is you should try electing a dogcatcher before taking a shot at the king. It will be a lot harder than you imagine, but you’ll learn enough to try for something bigger the next time.

        Liked by 1 person

      3. GDR says:

        Absolutely correct. Along with that, we don’t need to win national election. We can just ignore the fedgov. Set up state level FDA, CDC, DoE, etc. Stop paying federal taxes, impose tariffs, deport undesirables seize property of Blackrock and Democrats,…

        Here’s an idea: declare certain people or classes of people as persona non grata, and issue pardons or refuse to prosecute any crimes committed against them. I’d love to own a house; legally ethnically cleansing it from an illegal or progressive is even better.

        How will the feds enforce it if state govt makes it legal to commit any crime against the feds?

        Also consider how much public land is owned by the fedgov. That land should belong to states or Americans, not fedgov. So should the oil lease profits. Fedgov has no right to limit oil and gas drilling in Idaho; that’s our land.


  2. nc says:

    About time for another Mot20c episode!


  3. Eric says:

    Reblogged this on Calculus of Decay .


  4. Tony The Tigere says:

    Mot20C puts out consistently great episodes. There are other pods on our side of things where people just get on to listen to themselves talk, for hours on end. I think Myth does it the better way!


    1. Gnillik Yot says:

      GDR is either a fed or an imbecile and I would not have sex with him.


      1. GDR says:

        Too dumb to reply to the correct comment?


  5. Alt-fons says:

    Trust the plan guyyys. Just harder this time


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s