American Performance Art

Posted by Grimoire on September 10, 2010, 12:25 AM | #

The Republican party needs only a few more clowns and it will be a real circus.

Posted by Notus Wind on September 10, 2010, 01:50 AM | #

For me the speech works on at least two levels.

First, it’s an off the wall funny speech that rewards multiple viewings.

But at the same time I can’t help but feel a little admiration for Mr. Davison for speaking in such a heroic and, dare I say, Nietzschean style in trying to impose his will on the audience and mad dog his way to the Republican nomination for county treasurer (when he spoke of knowledge as a weapon he even went through the hand motions of unsheathing a sword).  In all fairness, I’m not sure that it’s possible to speak in such a style without coming across as more then a little crazy in our modern liberal world.

Posted by Gorboduc on September 10, 2010, 04:09 AM | #

Wow.

Mixed feelings.

Goebbels ain’t in it.

Did the degree in communications require a live presentation?

What would an official letter written by this guy be like?

All the same I like him.

Did he get the nomination? We need a few more secs. to find how long the applause went on for - and how many were clapping!

How does he spend his Sundays? Is he a preacher?

And then I think of all thr great English orators who wept while speaking AND had to fill, unamplified, huge spaces.

Does this man inherit a largely lost tradition of ancient public discourse?

Posted by Leon Haller on September 10, 2010, 07:41 AM | #

I can’t listen to more than 2 minutes of this. This guy is an utter lunatic. Passionate intensity is appropriate to passionate controversies and significant offices. This guy is not running for anything warranting such passion.

The great problem we face in the US (the West?) today is that we need men who are at once very ‘presentable’ in dress, speech and general demeanor, but who are willing to defend a very radical (by today’s Left-PC standards) agenda - and we just don’t have them. Those of us who could fit this bill are either not interested in politics, or otherwise can’t financially afford to engage in professionally risky and quixotic political activities.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on September 10, 2010, 08:11 AM | #

“we need men who are at once very ‘presentable’ in dress, speech and general demeanor, but who are willing to defend a very radical (by today’s Left-PC standards) agenda - and we just don’t have them.”  (—Leon Haller)

We have them.  We’ve always had them.  The Jewish-contolled media demonize them, resulting in their relegation to the margins.  They’re not marginal but have been marginalized.  By the Jews.  (Ooops!  I forgot we’re not supposed to talk too much or too explicitly about the you-know-who around here.  I’ll switch over to the fill-in-the-blank method)  On the other hand, the genuinely marginal have been mainstreamed, also by the (fill in the blank) ______ .  When half of voters are clueless women it’s not hard to demonize in precisely the brainless “liberal” way the (fill in the blank) ______ always manage to pull it off:  50% of your audience will always be 100% receptive and deeply appreciative, guaranteed.  When only men could vote it would have been something like 15%.  This is why when writing constitutions and bills of rights for white polities you have to know two things, are women going to have the vote? and will there be Jews in the country?  If so, things have to be set up with certain iron-clad protections written in, very different from what we perish under now.

Posted by Guessedworker on September 10, 2010, 08:28 AM | #

Fred,

In a polity operating under a constitution with racial guarantees the iron-clad protections are easy to construct.  The Upper House has control over legislation pertinent to those guarantees.  The lower house deals with the price of potatos.  The lower house can be elected by men and women of the founder people - broad definition required - on the basis of an equally-weighted vote for all tax-payers.  The upper house is elected by the same constituency but on an unequally weighted vote whereby the property-owner, the head of the household, the business owner receives an additional vote.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on September 10, 2010, 08:37 AM | #

GW that’s good.  And make it also that the only vote that counts on race or immigration matters is the upper house’s.  On those matters the lower house “votes” only unofficially, the result counting for exactly zero.  Sort of like the people’s vote in the U.S. right now — on race and immigration matters it counts for exactly zero, and the way the overlords nullify it is simply by sending in their appointed federal judges to declare unconstitutional every race and immigration voting result of the people that goes against race-replacement.  So, we’re already used to having our votes on race and immigration count for exactly zero, this would just make it official.

Posted by Guessedworker on September 10, 2010, 08:57 AM | #

It would only be necessary to give the Upper House the power of veto over a category of legislation - let’s call it Category A - which is of existential import, ie, constitutionally, it addresses the racial guarantees written into the founding state document.  The House would only have the power to express an opinion and send back general, Category B legislation to the Lower House for reconsideration and amendment.  It would never have the power to initiate legislation of any kind, but obviously none could become statute without its agreement.  There would have to come a point where conflict over Category B legislation was resolved in favour of the Lower House.

The point of weakness over what constitutes an existential issue would be overcome by the Upper House having the power to decide.  This power would qualify members of the Upper House as men and women of some moral standing and worth rather than simply clones of the eponymous political animal.

That’s the theory, anyway.

Posted by Fred Scrooby on September 10, 2010, 09:04 AM | #

“The Jewish-contolled media demonize them, resulting in their relegation to the margins.  They’re not marginal but have been marginalized.  By the Jews.”  (—my comment above, replying to Leon)

And because they’re so effectively marginalized no new ones come forward.  So it seems like a desert out there where “presentable” white advocates are concerned but again, we have them.  We’ve always had them but they get targeted by (fill in the blank) _____ , picked off, and destroyed and no one wants to be the next victim so nobody comes forward.  This keeps normal peaceful remediation of the race problem from happening, leaving only violent revolution which takes much longer to foment — it increases the energy of activation, if I remember my college chemistry terms right.  The (fill in the blank) _____ yell and scream when things finally explode but they’re the ones who for decades prevented things getting sorted out in any more peaceful manner. 

This is precisely one of the things I began realize starting around 2006 when I first understood the magnitude of (fill in the blank) ______ culpability:  we DO have “presentable” advocates for race sanity and normalness, it’s just that the (fill in the blank) ______ demonize and destroy them so no new ones dare to come forward any more, till the revolution happens and once that starts things get violent unfortunately — the whole sick, unnecessary mess brought to you courtesy of your friendly neighborhood (fill in the blank) ______ .

(Oh, and with plenty of help from clueless women’s suffrage, I forgot to mention.)

Take away Jewish control of the mass media (or take away its partner in crime, women’s suffrage) and this would all be sorted in five minutes or less (here, anyone got a stopwatch?  I’ll time it ....)

Posted by Fred Scrooby on September 10, 2010, 09:17 AM | #

GW, one of the most important subjects this blog has broached, and it broached it from day-one if memory serves, way back at its inception when one of your own entries, GW, broached it, is the fundamental importance of doing away with the present insanity of one-man-one-vote, one-woman-one-clueless-liberal-race-and-nation-destroying-vote.  Your proposals above are the sort of thing that will one day be absolutely crucial to get right — the day our side finally gains the upper hand and needs to set things up the right way.  We’d do well to map them out well in advance — like now, for instance.

Posted by Guessedworker on September 10, 2010, 09:26 AM | #

But it isn’t difficult to do, Fred.  Philosophy is difficult.  But constitutional law, like economics, is a simple art, and is best kept that way.

Posted by Notus Wind on September 10, 2010, 10:09 AM | #

Leon: Passionate intensity is appropriate to passionate controversies and significant offices. This guy is not running for anything warranting such passion.

But the times we live in call for this kind of passionate intensity.  What if - and perhaps this is a big if - the likes of Mr. Davison sense this urgency and are responding to it in the only way they know how.

Gorboduc: Did he get the nomination?

Sadly, no.  I was really hoping that we’d get to hear more of these speeches.

Gorboduc: Does this man inherit a largely lost tradition of ancient public discourse?

I was wondering the same thing.  Watch his speech again and you’ll notice that he starts off by thundering these words, “My name is Phil Davison and I am seeking…I am from the village of Minerva.”  This line in particular struck me as being formulaic and with possible connections to a more ancient form of discourse.  For example, I could easily imagine it being said by a questing Northern hero introducing himself to a village not his own.

Posted by Notus Wind on September 10, 2010, 10:13 AM | #

GW,

But constitutional law, like economics, is a simple art, and is best kept that way.

I completely agree, the intellectual gymnastics that people go through in these fields strikes me as absurd.  Wisdom is required here, not the contortions of intellect.

Posted by Notus Wind on September 10, 2010, 10:32 AM | #

The Mail gets there after MR, referencing the same Politico article given in the main entry along with the same embedded YouTube video (there’s more than one).

Posted by Jimmy Marr on September 10, 2010, 11:02 AM | #

Since Mr. Davison didn’t get the nomination, maybe would have sufficient free time to be interviewed by Søren on MR Radio.

In light of his passion for Stark County finances, I’d like to hear his reaction to a simple model

It might be good to have Matt Parrott on the other line, just for balance.

Look out Fox News!

Posted by PF on September 10, 2010, 01:20 PM | #

Everybody is so relaxed and peaceful in America because they know only good things are in store for us… only good things happen when you have things arranged like we have them…

...that is…until you realize…

THE STAR COUNTY TREASURER’S OFFICE IS A MESS!!!!!!!

Posted by James Bowery on September 10, 2010, 01:40 PM | #

Pedal to the metal.  Clutch too.

Posted by Gorboduc on September 10, 2010, 04:15 PM | #

Leon: Yes, but everyone has to start somewhere. Even a Beer Hall…

NW: There’s a US radio station I can sometimes find relayed here (UK) where the preacher man sounds JUST like this guy. Can’t reference it, it just comes and goes.

I’m interested in American traditional psalmody, and recordings from churches in the 50’s and 6o’s sometimes feature a prayer or sermon much in this manner, with the near-sob much in evidence.

10 mins on Youtube didn’t provide quite what I wanted, but the late Billy Sunday (originator of the deathless phrases “Jesus Christ is one hell of a tough baby” and “There ain’t no flies on the Lamb of God”)is sort of getting there.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ykn8YcIbmfo&feature=related

Of course before PA systems people just had to shout.

Can’t remember all the quote, but Yeats said s’thing like

“The best lack all conviction, and the worst
Are full of passionate intensity”.

What a choice!

Oh yeah muh Lawd!

Posted by Joe of the Mountain on September 10, 2010, 06:00 PM | #

The man is certainly under stress.  Obviously, we don’t know the context but it’s possible Stark County, Ohio is on the verge of destruction… or maybe Davison is on the verge of destruction.  Hard to tell.  My guess is that you’re looking at a man on the edge of the abyss.  This is not commensurate with the occasion as others note across the Net.  However, we are likely to see much more such raw drama in the coming months and years as more and more of us find ourselves slammed against the wall by a system that would rather we were dead.

So what do we take from this?  The man certainly is capable of fighting.  His pacing would have made me nervous, sitting in the audience.  Most likely his professional career is now terminated - but his personal reputation will likely benefit from this as do so many folk heroes from Guy Fawkes to that JetBlue dude.

All in all, he seems to be just one more White man that cracked up, a la “Lubey’s Cafeteria” but he might take solace in the fact he is almost certainly in the vanguard of a major wave of bottom-up violence and rage against the political machine that would crush us all.

Not quite Epic Bear Man but for a small town GOP hack in a business suit, all he lacked as a loud, “FREEEEEDOOOOMMM!”

Joe of the Mountain
Not near as smart as everyone else but I like to watch and learn

Posted by Drifter on September 10, 2010, 11:01 PM | #

I was unaware that a manic episode was in the persuasive speech toolkit. But, except for a couple of redundancies and cliches, the speech itself was quite good.

Posted by Leon Haller on September 11, 2010, 07:15 AM | #

One must work within (and against) the constraints of one’s era. I mostly agree with Fred, esp re his disenfranchisement recommendations (“The Political Constitution of the Racial State” - I haven’t thought too much about this, though I’ve often thought of the need to think about it! - it would be a good topic for an MR thread), but don’t wholly agree with the “we have lots of great people, but ...” argument.

However hysterically pro-immigration the Jewish media may be, most ordinary whites do not perceive opposition to legal immigration, including that rooted in honest appraisals of demographic change, as racist and therefore objectionable. I’m pretty sure of this, despite being based on anecdotal evidence: I’ve lived in liberal areas for much of my life, cornered a lot of moderately liberal types over the years and calmly discussed demographic issues, and yet have experienced very little “that’s racist!” blowback; surprisingly little. By “calmly discussing demographics” I mean I’ve pointed out how the country (USA) is changing racially, and what non-racial problems immigrants are bringing to our country (fact: threats of contagious disease are, for moderate to liberal persons, BY FAR THE BEST arguments in our arsenal, followed by overpopulation concerns, then budgetary costs, then crime and especially organized gangs - race-replacement concerns work, but ONLY with conservatives, and not always with them).

I’ve encountered less resistance than I would have expected. Put another way, there are still a lot of liberals who think about race in terms of their own personal tolerance levels, and are not, per se, automatic supporters of RR - many have never thought in RR terms (mind you, this is not an argument designed to suggest that liberals should be our target audience ... FAR FROM IT! ... we first need to make the “conservatives” racially conservative). My point about presentability is that (to reiterate from many assertions I’ve offered at different times) stopping the Third World invasion is the sine qua non of our movement, but discussing reducing or eliminating immigration does not, among our people anyway (forget talking to a Mexican-“American” about it), automatically generate negative feelings - but behaving unprofessionally does, however much the seriousness of the RR problem seems to us like it should generate a whole lot of outraged radicalism, in style as in word.

Excuse my verbosity. Let me try to simplify. Contra Fred, I believe it possible to discuss ending, if not the whole RR agenda, at least immigration, without alienating electorates in predominantly conservative districts (and even in the nation as a whole at the Presidential level). However much the JMC (Jewish Media Complex) screams, most whites will not be automatically dismissive of this discussion. If that assertion is true, then what does matter is style and authority of presentation - and the willingness actually to make immigration moratorium arguments. So why do so few discuss the first component of the anti-RR agenda, ending immigration? Is it fear of the JMC?

I reiterate my claim: we really don’t have very many presentable people making immigration moratorium arguments. They are not being destroyed by the JMC, and I don’t believe the JMC could destroy them just on the basis of moratorium advocacy. We either have a lot of unnecessary self-censorship, or, my belief, ignorance.

Most conservatives (and whites!) are against immigration, but they don’t know why they should be so passionately, and thus aren’t. Immigration still does not rank nearly as high on people’s lists of concerns as jobs, taxes, spending, abortion, and other issues that our knowledgeable selves recognize to be, in the long view, distinctly secondary. We must change that understanding.

Posted by Baseballhead on September 11, 2010, 12:13 PM | #

Gorboduc: Did he get the nomination?

Sadly, no.

Probably because he presented his speech in the form of a child’s tantrum. I don’t care how passionate you are, or even how much I agree with you, but if you can’t comport yourself like a grown man, you shouldn’t get to do a grown man’s job.

Posted by Lena on September 11, 2010, 08:03 PM | #

More proof American’s are insane!  This is embarrassing. The country is going mad.

Posted by Reginald on September 11, 2010, 08:50 PM | #

More proof American’s are insane!  This is embarrassing. The country is going mad.

Those the gods would destroy…

Posted by Tom on September 11, 2010, 09:47 PM | #

This guy’s a joke, but are we going to pretend the American political system isn’t? I’d vote for him.

Posted by sirrealpolitik on September 11, 2010, 10:24 PM | #

Was I the only one who thought of this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H_YK9wVK6IQ&NR=1

Posted by Tanstaafl on September 14, 2010, 10:02 AM | #

The American psyche is under duress and - like many of us who are connected to the organic nation - Phil Davison feels the tremors, even if he doesn’t understand them.  How much longer will our creaky and increasingly absurd political forms contain this kind of violent intensity is anyone’s guess.

Here’s another sign:

Nancy Pelosi, Wicked Witch of the West

In this spot, all the more absurd because it’s a paid, public announcement, there’s less connection and more ham-handed mimicry of Hollywood and Madison Avenue.