Review of “Cuckservative”

I have been anticipating “Cuckservative” written by John Red Eagle and Vox Day since it was first announced. The book was intended to be a provocative attack on the conservative movement. “Cuckservative” provides that in strides.

The book promises and delivers a thorough take-down of the conservative movement’s response to the immigration reform of 1965, which has changed and will change America in the future; and not in a way that maintains the traditional rights of Englishmen, promotes laissez-faire capitalism or maintains Christian culture.

The focus on immigration clearly serves a larger purpose. The entire conservative movement is indicted in “Cuckservative”, and the immigration issue serves to put the authors in a position to undermine the entire movement. It is, in military terms, an example of infiltration tactics in political rhetoric.

cuck_480

The book starts with a rousing foreword by Mike Cernovich which appropriately sets the tone for the book. The target is painted squarely on the backs of conservatives who are utter failures at conserving anything but their own positions. The title, cover, and foreword work together to illicit a strong reaction to whoever comes across it

Once the book itself starts, it begins by dismantling the myth of the American melting pot. The point of this exercise is to make the reader susceptible to persuasion. By convincing the reader that a core piece of the national mythology is wrong, the reader opens up to new arguments they previously wouldn’t consider.

The book spends most of its time making arguments against the kind of immigration seen today. It offers arguments against the current immigration regime in many flavors. There is the anthropological argument, the biological argument, the philosophical argument, the political argument, the nationalist argument, the economical argument, the historical argument, and the Christian argument.

As I’m currently in the middle of reading Aristotle’s “Rhetoric”, I can’t help but see the structure of the book follows that laid out in Book III. I should also note that each chapter is a different take on why post-1965 immigration in the US is a bad thing. Even if you don’t buy one or two, or most of the arguments, the ones that remain force you to reconsider your position, and is a good example of effective rhetoric.

The place where this book shines, for me, as someone the authors don’t need to convince of their premise, are the subtler jabs taken at the conservative movement as a whole.

And while they may be subtler, they sting and stuck with me even more. Noting that the principles behind the conservative movement would have led conservatives to stand with loyalists during the American Revolution is a strike straight to the heart of of conservative identity.

Pointing out Ronald Reagan was never the movement-approved candidate for president when he ran in competitive presidential primaries in 1968, 1976 and 1980 does the same. These aren’t arguments against the ideas and practice of the conservative movement, these undermine the very identity of a conservative.

kg3
The side Russel Kirk would have supported

The weakest part of the book for me is the section on economics. While the book certainly unveils the weaknesses and limitations in Ricardo’s Theory of Comparative Advantage, the follow up analysis feels lacking to me, and I have a few minor quibbles with it.

That being said, no one is going to be convinced by every argument made in the book. But chances are one or more will convince you, and only one needs to work for you to accept the central thesis of the book.

There are some cases where “Cuckservative” might even pull a few punches. In the first few chapters there are hints of arguments on the many other failures of the conservative movement, not just immigration. These aren’t touched on again, and if this book is successful, there is plenty of opportunity for follow-up barrages.

I think the case against free immigration includes, in addition to the arguments presented in the book, that it is simply just not a strategy that produces a Nash equilibrium. In a situation with internationally open borders, it always benefits a nation to reject some immigrants and make other nations deal with them. Even if there were no longer individual nations, administrative subdivisions, or any spontaneous association of people,  would still have incentive to have less-than-free immigration. In the long run, internationally open borders just aren’t feasible.

Alternatively, one country opening its borders on its own is even worse for it than to be done for all countries. If every country does it, every part of the world winds up being equally poor. If your country is the only one doing it, immigration won’t cease until your country is so undesirable, no one would choose to move there.

So all in all, is “Cuckservative” an effective book? I have no doubt it will generate some level of controversy amongst the intended targets. But I don’t know whether it will achieve the widespread scorn it seeks to receive from its targets. If, within a week or two, we see articles of condemnation in conservative media, the book will have done its job: to promote a right-wing that is outside the conservative movement. It will motivate some to seek sources of information away from the conservative movement, which is always a good thing.

I look forward to seeing the reaction that “Cuckservative” generates. It might be a very fun Christmas season for those of us who enjoy watching the ensuing discussion.

 

 

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s