Home The Two Empires We Must Defeat
Home The Two Empires We Must Defeat

The Two Empires We Must Defeat

There is a thread that connects many of our conflicts, whether it's the one against terrorism or the one between the Republican establishment and its conservative insurgency. To win a war, we have to understand the nature of the conflict and how we got there. And that's often the missing piece.

The left blames imperialism for our conflict with terrorists. And it's right. Just not in the way that it thinks.

Empires may be expansionist, but they're also tolerant and multicultural. They have to be, since out of their initial phase they have to enlist the cooperation and services of subjects from a variety of cultures and religions. An empire may initially be fueled by the talents and skills of a core nation, but as it reaches its next phase, it begins sacrificing their interests to the larger structure of empire.

The argument between the establishments of the right and the left is over two different kinds of empires. The Republican establishment in America and its various center-right counterparts abroad have attached themselves to the liberal vision of a transnational empire of international law so much that they have forgotten that this vision came from the left, rather than from the right.

This Empire of International Law proved to have some uses for global trade and security, particularly during the Cold War. These practical arrangements however are overshadowed by the fact that it, like every empire, sacrifices the interests of its peoples to its own structure. This is true of the structure at every level, from the EU to the Federal structure of the United States. The system has displaced the people. And the system runs on principles that require cheap labor leading to policies like amnesty.

The Empire of International Law needs Muslim immigrants even if its people don't, because it envisions integrating them and their countries into this arrangement and rejects national interests as narrow-minded and nativist.

This formerly liberal vision now embraced largely by centrists is the left's vision, which includes today's liberals, is of a completely transnational ideological empire in which there are no borders, but there are countless activists, in which everything and everyone are controlled by the state.

Like the more conventional imperial vision, the left's red Empire of Ideology depends on enlisting Muslims and Muslim countries into its ranks. This is the basis of the Red-Green alliance.

These two types of imperialists are incapable of representing native workers or communities because they are transnationalists. Their vision is cosmopolitan, rather than representative. They are entranced with a byzantine international arrangement and uninterested in the lives of the people they are ruining.

This Imperial blindness is why the West is falling so swiftly to Islam. It's why the pockets of resistance are coming from nations outside the imperial sphere.

Countries like Israel, India or Burma are dependent on specific groups and are not truly part of either empire. They are not transnational. They are national. And it's why they are still holding out.

The empires have made their inroads into them. Israel has its tycoon class that would love nothing more than to join the transnational empire. It has its radical left that would destroy Israel for the world revolution. But it also has millions of people that understand that their lives are on the line.

The resistance to Islam has come from outside the empire. It has come from countries that are neither part of Islam nor the Empire. Those countries may be large, like India or China, or precariously small, like Israel, but they have a dominant ethnic and/or religious identity and are not truly part of the Empire, though they have extensive interconnections with it.

These countries have minority groups, including sizable Muslim minorities, but they also have a national interest that is tethered to its majority.

The United States used to be that way, until not long ago. And then it lost touch with itself. It became diseased with empire and the disease of empire has nothing to do with pith helmets or planting flags. It's what happens when the structure of the system becomes more important than the people. When that happens the old principles that are based on the people are set aside and replaced with principles that are based on the system.

That is how globalism came to trump American workers. It's how accommodating Islam came to matter more than anything else.

An empire may begin by conquering other countries, but it invariably ends by conquering and consuming its own. The empire we are part of isn't, despite the left's rhetoric, a conquering empire. American territorial expansionism ended long before we became part of an empire. Instead we are part of an empire of systems, an empire of principles, an empire of internationalism, of trade and of pieces of papers, legal and financial, being moved through the bowels of our endless systems.

This is the thing that we call international law. And it has to die for us to live.

This is the empire that feeds armies of foreign immigrants through our countries. It's also the empire that pays allegiance to Islam because empires have to diversify to expand. Diversity isn't the source of our strength. It is the source of imperial expansionism which has to absorb many more peoples.

To empires, people are interchangeable. If the natives have a low birth rate and a long lifespan, then workers with high birth rates and lower lifespans are brought in to replace them. If the natives are reluctant to pay higher taxes, immigrants from countries that are fine with voting for high taxation are imported. That is how empires, not nations, do business.

This is what the political establishment in most countries believes. This is what tearing them apart.

The only way for the nations to survive is for the empire, in all its forms, the ideological revolutionary empire of the left and the centrist empire of international law, to to be cast off.

Every political revolution that fails to take into account the power of these two empires on our national politics is doomed to fail. To win a conflict, you have to understand what you are fighting.

We are fighting against two variations on the same set of ideas about the importance of transnational institutions over national ones. We are fighting against the entrenched loyalty to systems and ideology over people. We are fighting empires that have displaced people for ideas.

The only possible revolution that can succeed against these two empires is populist. It must emerge from the needs of the people of a country to be free, to be prosperous and to manage its own affairs. It must proceed by showing the people how they have been victimized and how they are being victimized. And it must show them that they reclaim what their grandparents had if they take back controls over their own countries and destinies.

The rhetoric of empire is seductive. Our educational systems implant it at an early age. It is not the empire of explorers and conquerors, but of lawyers and social justice activists. Against it we must raise the flag of national interests.

The left and the right establishments pretend that they have two very different sets of ideas about the world. They have the same set of ideas, one is a more extreme version of the other. The left fights its own heresies much more fiercely than it does the right. Its rhetoric about imperialism is a rejection of its former ideas about empire for its more radical empire. And we do not want either empire.

What we must have is an end to empires and the rise of nations. Only nations that answer to the national interests of their people can stand against the savage barbarian migrating tide.


  1. Anonymous30/12/14

    Brillant. More than any article I have read this sums up the central globalist ideal that is dissolving the once utterly unique nation state "America"

  2. Anonymous30/12/14

    Brilliant, Daniel, just brilliant. You are able to put seemingly unrelated phenomena together into a coherent, well-written idea.

    -- Lightbringer

  3. You have outdone yourself, Daniel. Now I just have to figure out how to incorporate these new, important insights into the mess inside my brain :)

  4. Anonymous31/12/14

    Can we now change the name of the US Chamber of Commerce to the
    International Chamber of Corruption? What about the "Global Hide, Bribe and Lie"?

  5. Anonymous31/12/14

    It sounds to me like you are talking about a 3d Party. The Revolution must this time come from the right. What the MSM would call the "Extreme Right Wing". People keep saying that the Conservative base must "take over the Party".without an inkling as to how that might actually happen. Yes, the grassroots must rise up,....and then walk away and form something new, sans Boehner, Barbour, and the Bushies, because any party that those guys are a part of they will control. I'll watch to see if Boehner is reelected as speaker. If that happens I'm off to the Constitutional Freedom Party. http://constfreparty.blogspot.com/2012/12/motto-constitution-is-not-instrument.html. Steve Brennan

  6. Anonymous31/12/14

    The best analysis of our current situation that I have ever read - bar none...



  7. It is not the empire of explorers and conquerors, but of lawyers and social justice activists.

    The words "social justice" must be put in quotes.

  8. Anonymous31/12/14

    So sick of people thinking R or D are about being free,independent or equal. Obama is bad but over the course of my life ,Not one president or congress has enforced laws equally on all or preserved our constitution.We are being divided slowly but surely. The wars we fight do nothing to spread Guaranteed regardless justice and natural rights of freedom .If they protected,supported and defended our constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic with every able bodied person 18-45 .=Wars would not last so long and be so wrong? and what other country would mess with the USA. ?The word democracy is not even in our constitution .Since US history and civics classes were replaced with socialist studies in 1978.= dumbed down is more like never taught .Article 4 section 4 guarantees republican govt = everyone is govt and has a responsibility to secure blessings of liberty for our future..That is why every public servant and soldier swear an oath.Not to pit one against the other with law after law some enforced some ignored.Not for entitlements.Common laws for all or broke,,bitter and divided we will fall.

  9. Anonymous31/12/14

    Another brilliant assessment of reality Daniel.

    The intelligentsia thought that the only way to end wars was to create an international body capable of resolving disputes among the nations of the world and end nationalism altogether. The failures of the League of Nations, the United Nations and the EU , to control the diverse populations of the world and force them into agreements about how they are to live, think and act that reflect the desires of the elitists, hasn't tempered their desires at all but simply forced them to find other ways to try to succeed in gaining the absolute power and control they really want.

    You explained why this has not worked. People would necessarily have to abandon their beliefs, their traditions, and themselves and adopt the desires of the globalists as their own even if those desires ended up impoverishing them or exterminating them. This is the fight Israel has faced and the Jewish people have faced forever. This is the fight Islamists understand and are rejecting altogether because they refuse to give up their false god, their traditions and although they happily exterminate themselves in some cases, refuse to capitulate to the globalist elites who simply want their land and resources to redistribute to others and to have absolute control over all of human life.


  10. This is what the "Climate Change" movement is all about.

    This is why we see U.S. Supreme Court Justices citing the laws of other countries in their opinions.

    This is why we gave China most favored nation trading status, despite their authoritarian barbarity.

    This is why we put an Internet video producer in jail after Benghazi.

    This is why Major Hassan was "workplace violence."

    This is why we have to pass bills so we can find out what's in them... because it's important to be just like every other parliamentary social democracy where winner takes all. Yet every proposed spending "cut" is an affront to some constituency, and therefore impossible.

    People are expendable, because it's fun to design Rube Goldberg systems. As Mr. Gruber showed us, there's a lot of money in it -- ample justification for deceit and obfuscation.

    This is why college sports perpetuate the myth of the "student athlete," while college football coaches get multi-million dollar deals to facilitate collegiate amateurism. ESPN loves it... they get bundled cable subscription revenue and sell trillions in advertising.

    It's why illegal immigrants get in-state tuition at state universities, while out-of-state American citizens pay full freight.

    The moral certainty of the dictatorship of the proletariat means the end justifies the means... always. And the corporate desire for profIt -- without the consideration of sacrifice of people, culture and national interest -- is an end to itself. Just because.

    Makes for odd bedfellows, eh? Brilliant analysis, Daniel.

  11. Anonymous31/12/14

    Sorry for posting this comment again here after doing so in your last post, but I would like to make the point, especially my citation of the article below:

    I don't think you should use the picture of "Santa Captured by ISIS". It is a fake; used as a parody by the Left to show how ridiculous the Right is in their fear of ISIS. And what is more, it might fool some into thinking it is a real story.

    Here, on the other hand, is a real story that is worth noting:


    King Western Man

  12. Anonymous31/12/14

    How do you divide "national interests of their people" from the "its all about destroying the European white" crowd?

    It is a double problem. Finding a conservative base within what are called minorities and acknowledging that there is plenty of screwed up socialist tendencies within the Europeans. There are too many conservatives that simply want to pretend that it is some kind of magical minority/Jewish power that has made Europe and white American progressives into progressives.

    In the meantime it were Chinese and Hispanic policemen who died and black small businessmen whose businesses were destroyed. In the meantime it was a lot of white protestors doing the dirty work.

  13. Anonymous31/12/14

    Well said Daniel.

    If you haven't already you may want to do a search for Sir John Glubb's "The Fate of Empires".


  14. Anonymous31/12/14

    Quite nearly PULP. To paint with such broad strokes takes effort... but in the end? I will quote the author, "Only nations that answer to the national interests of their people can stand against the savage barbarian migrating tide." Well? What if the national interests of, the people, are skewed? Or, barbaric in general? Barbarian MIGRATING TIDE? PFFFT... this piece is tabloid, sensationalistic, reactionary goop. Look at the paradigm of management, for a clue to international interface potentials. The SUN KING WANNABES fear social progressives. Period. THERE is the battle.

  15. Anonymous31/12/14

    Absolutely spot on Daniel. Here in the U.K. our pro E.U. political and media elite tell us that we wouldn't survive outside the E.U.; to even seriously suggest leaving carries us near to the edge of the economic abyss that we would surely be flung into were we to extricate ourselves from its ranks and that it is simply not feasible for Britain to leave the E.U.
    As Enoch Powell said -
    "Too often today people are ready to tell us: "This is not possible, that is not possible." I say, whatever the true interest of our country calls for is always possible. We have nothing to fear but our own doubts."

  16. Thank you for all your beautiful columns Daniel, may 2015 bring even more of them. Stay healthy.

  17. Anonymous31/12/14

    We "extreme right-wingers" and our elected officials must officially leave the Republican party to jump start a nationalist party to save America. The two transnational parties that are obviously going in the same direction need to merge to avoid unnecessary confusion of the electorate.

    Andy Texan

  18. I strongly disagree with the proposed solution "The only possible revolution that can succeed against these two empires is populist."
    - We just had massive populist uprising in the US (the Tea Party), and it was shut down by both empires.

    You can't win a war without an Army / leadership. Here in the US, the Republican establishment stiff-armed / attacked the Tea Party, and the government organizations (i.e., the IRS) actively targeted and successfully suppressed the uprising, with active support by the media.

    The media controls the message, and this also squelched the uprising, following by discouragement and apathy and continued "leadership" of Mitch McConnell and John Boehner.

    In addition to the Muslims / low wage, uneducated workers being forced on the nation, the nation schools churn out liberal ideologues / useful idiots who also vote for government handouts, at the expense of individual responsibility and innovation / prosperity.

    Basically, the US is done. Read the old Testament to see what happened to Israel (defeat and disintegration), and why (they turned their backs on God, starting with leadership, judges, and the priests). The people simply followed their leadership down the tubes.

    The actual only solution is a revival and the repentance of a nation. It could start with a populist uprising, but it must flow into / emanate from the leadership.

    The nationalism focus must jettison any connection to the two empires. The experience with "working within the party structure" has proven its futility.

    Let's be honest - the US is done, but God is not. In the words of a famous author, "We have now sunk to a depth at which restatement of the obvious is the first duty of intelligent men."

    So, Mr. Greenberg, this includes you.

  19. Anonymous2/1/15

    Daniel says that the only way to over throw these empires is for a " populist " movement to surface in which the people take control again. For the people to take control in this society at this time will have to be done by methods other than the ballot box. In November, the people spoke overwhelmingly at the ballot box saying they wanted out of Obamacare and the illegal immigration mandate and were ignored by the Republican empire leaders passing the 2015 budget that fully funded both. How then can a populist movement surface when the people are totally ignored? The answer is in our American roots. What did the people do during those times of freedom suppression and too much government power when the will of the people was ignored. How did they overcome the threats we are facing now. True, the times and situations are different but the basic human ingredient is still there and will never change - man's basic desire to be free. That will never change. Go back into history and use it to get the " populist " movement started and to make it the leading empire in America again.

  20. Anonymous2/1/15

    Brilliant. And Bill Peck 1958 cited a great quote: "We have now sunk to a depth at which restatement of the obvious is the first duty of intelligent men."

  21. Anonymous2/1/15

    Many product planning characters look for ways to grow their product, to capture more market share, by expanding what the product is; a lot of these fail.

    I became aware of the left's drive for evermore monolithic concepts of government during the Clintons' rein. The idea of a world government seems to go back to the roots of progressivism. I suppose that the cultural dilution (or more accurately - rot) is the internal derivative of the globalism.

    Anyway, when it comes to the fed, it's like some mist formation of a beast. It will consume any one of us in every aspect of life, but there is no way for any one of us to touch it. djr

  22. Fine post, thank you, have gone through my blog and linked this post to the words Globalist and Globalism.

    This of mine may be of correlative interest, commenting on recent DNI/NIC Trends of 2015 Report, which is of course Globalist: http://theological-geography.net/?p=15325

  23. This essay is the coda to David Goldman's book, "How Civilizations Die"


    Of course you've painted in "broad strokes" here. This is an essay after all.

    As for the elitist rejection of the populists in the U.S., good luck with that. It will look successful as long as those making such pronouncements never leave Double Bubble D.C.

    What a shame they're forced to run for office. Hmm...I wonder what plans they have -really have- for our future. Do they want to get rid of us as badly as we want to be rid of them??

  24. US and UK are too far gone. France contains a lot of anti-PC aka cultural marxist resistance movements, but already 35% of newborns in France are of African stock. That's too much to assimilate.

  25. Islam, the perfect religion for the globalist, now I get it.

  26. Anonymous3/1/15

    this vision is clearly erroneous in the root.

    the mater is simple - there is West, and there is the rest.
    protecting the first from the second - is unavoidable, it is our destiny.

    that protection is to be organized and sustained hierarchically - and, at the highest levels of hierarchy, that includes national as well as global institutions.

    but we all fight for the West when we refuse tu buy halal, ignore lefti movies, books and newspapers, refuse mosque biulding permits, and vote for reasonable candidates on municipal elections.

    overall structure might be loosely imperial, but it isn't an empire of "inernational law", - rather the empire of intenational reason, where all associations are free and adjustable through widely accesisible and viable alternatives.
    system might be more conservative or progressive, community or individual oriented, nationalist or cosmopolitain, command-like or democratic - this is up to people to decide what suites them most.

    the emphasis should be made on human flourishing, meritocracy, cooperation, based on primacy of individual rights - everything else is well.. chimera.

    wheels and blast furnaces of history have such property.. they sometimes become obsolete.

  27. Anonymous3/1/15

    Yours is a plausible description of the nature of Codevilla's Ruling Class--both Republican and Democrat. He described the Ruling Class as being united by common tastes, education and goals without delving deeply into what those common things where.

    You have done (some) of that work here.

    Well done and thank you.

  28. Anonymous3/1/15

    Bill Peck 1958, got any specific books to the Old Testament that point this out? Great analysis, Daniel. Glad I was redirected to this post.

  29. Anonymous3/1/15

    Running in tandem with this is the strategy of 'Multi-Faith' - the idea that several different and conflicting worship-systems can live comfortably cheek-by-jowl ... of course this hardly ever works; one or another faith will inevitably predominate ... but in the thought sphere of the New Liberal establishment who hate see any issue in the cold clear light of day ...

  30. Anonymous3/1/15

    I am sure that you have covered this idea elsewhere.

    There is no way to get rid of an international governing body. It is sticky and adheres to all systems. The key reason not to permit its inception is as follows: Such a government must fail, simply because all systems fail due to multifarious causes not apparent at the outset of the adventure. Failure is fine as long as the streets can be swept clean of the failure's remnants, but international governments are trickier than burying a bank or corporation. We can and should oppose "world government" because ridding ourselves of it would yield the same results as seen in Somalia, Libya, Iraq, Syria, or Afghanistan - only ten times worse.

  31. "The only possible revolution that can succeed against these two empires is populist. It must emerge from the needs of the people of a country to be free, to be prosperous and to manage its own affairs. It must proceed by showing the people how they have been victimized and how they are being victimized."

    There is (was?) a group EXACTLY like that called "Occupy Wall Street". People who are aware that what is good for the 1% is bad for everyone else. YOU conservatives made it a point to crap all over them, mock them, and refute their legitimacy, while simultaneously promoting the useful idiots / 100% astroturfed "Tea Party", aka the "Teapublicans".

    With your populism and 'whats good for the workers' rhetoric you almost sound like a liberal. Careful; If you actually start caring for anybody but yourself (even in a nationalistic way) the Conservacrats will revoke your official membership. :P

  32. I don't know about you, Porkistan, but a bunch of clueless kids wearing Guy Fawkes masks didn't strike me as particularly serious people. The whole exercise was an orchestrated one. A quarter mile wide and an inch deep.

    The "useful idiots"as you call us, are alive and active and everywhere. Where are the Occupy groups? I got an email from my local Tea Party group two weeks ago.

    I only care about myself, it's true. Not like beautiful people like you who care deeply about others. It's an inspiration. Yes, it is.

  33. aandrews6/1/15

    Anonymous said...
    "What if the national interests of, the people, are skewed? Or, barbaric in general?"

    Can you expand on that and give an example of skewed that doesn't warrant a So what?

    With regard to the US and the rest of the West, I don't think "barbaric" is very likely.

  34. "It's what happens when the structure of the system becomes more important than the people."

    The "structure of the system" is more important to an elite that is hostile to the interests of the people.

    The State is at war with the Nation.

    How can a nation that has been convinced that merely believing it exists is wrong assert itself enough to prevent its cultural and territorial dispossession by the State?

  35. to Mr. Anonymous:
    >>Bill Peck 1958, got any specific books to the Old Testament that point this out?

    Sure: Nehemiah, Joel, Amos, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel


Post a Comment

You May Also Like