n "The Flight 93 Election," Decius considered the 2016 election as a game of Russian roulette for conservatives. A President Clinton would all but assure annihilation of everything they hold dear. "With Trump, at least you can spin the cylinder and take your chances," he wrote. Decius's spin turned out well for him—now he's at the front of the battle line, saving Rome.http://www.claremont.org/crb/contributor-list/2031/
"The election of 2016 is a test—in my view, the final test—of whether there is any virtù left in what used to be the core of the American nation. If they cannot rouse themselves simply to vote for the first candidate in a generation who pledges to advance their interests, and to vote against the one who openly boasts that she will do the opposite (a million more Syrians, anyone?), then they are doomed. They may not deserve the fate that will befall them, but they will suffer it regardless." - PDM F93E
"Can we at least finally admit, squarely, that conservatism has failed? On the very terms that it set for itself? I don’t mean that in an accusatory or celebratory way—I’m, quite sad about it, honest!—only as a matter of plain fact."
"One of those who most objected to the Flight 93 analogy also accused me of 'sophistry.' I remind him that, according to Aristotle, 'the Sophists identified or almost identified politics with rhetoric. In other words, the Sophists believed or tended to believe in the omnipotence of speech.' Is that not a near-perfect description of modern conservative intellectuals, or at least of their revealed preferences? Except that one wonders what, in their case, is the source of that belief, since they haven’t been able to accomplish anything in the political realm through speech or any other means in a generation."
"One can point to a few enduring successes: Tax rates haven’t approached their former stratosphere highs. On the other hand, the Left is busy undoing welfare and policing reform. Beyond that, we’ve not been able to implement our agenda even when we win elections—which we do less and less. Conservatism had a project for national renewal that it failed to implement, while the Left made—and still makes—gain after gain after gain. Consider conservatism’s aims: 'civic renewal,' 'federalism,' 'originalism,' 'morality and family values,' 'small government,' 'limited government,' 'Judeo-Christian values,' 'strong national defense,' 'respect among nations,' 'economic freedom,' 'an expanding pie,' 'the American dream.' I support all of that. And all of it has been in retreat for 30 years. At least. But conservatism cannot admit as much, not even to itself, in the middle of the night with the door closed, the lights out and no one listening."
"I tried to tell it, and it got mad." - PDM ROF93
I think this guy has a reasonable grasp on things, and while I find it interesting he chose as a pseudonym the name of a relatively obscure Roman Consul who gave his life for the greater glory of Rome (and he admits he has no intention of dying) it is still a name for one who fights...and in this latter day arena, one who fights for principles. In his "sanctimony" article he goes after his main antagonists...which is like sending Hercules to take care of two feeble old cripples...at least it looked that one-sided to me. The Old Guard Republicanism is dead, may it never come back. In his "prudence" article he tells another detractor within the ranks that "he is tending a corpse", and basically says people can take "respectability" and stuff it, people have "had enough" and he, and certainly we, agree. The Old Way of doing things is dead. It is this new attitude of "up yours, we're doing this...help lead, follow...or just GTFO of the way!".
Liberty is getting a breather, what comes after that is entirely up to us.
Wouldn't want it any other way.