Delenda est National Review

"The divine wrath is slow indeed in vengeance, but it makes up for its tardiness by the severity of the punishment."
- Valerius Maximus

Marcus Porcius Cato, also known as Cato the Elder, was a Roman senator and consul. He was noted for his advocacy of “Old Roman” conservative positions, preserving the mos majorum (ancestral custom), and combating all Greek influences, which he believed were degenerate and damaging the traditional Roman standards of morality. Cato is probably best remembered for routinely ending his speeches with “Delenda est Carthago”--Carthage must be destroyed.

And indeed it was destroyed and in savage fashion. After the Third Battle of Carthage in 146 BC, the city was sacked and systematically burned for 17 days--its buildings and walls reduced to charred rubble and its entire remaining population was sold into lasting bondage. To ensure that Carthage never again posed as a threat, legend has it that the remains of the city were sown with salt, a ritual on conquered cities to symbolize a curse on their re-inhabitation. The Romans knew how to end a conflict.

This must be the fate of the late Willian F. Buckley’s crowning achievement, the National Review (NR). It must be destroyed without impunity for its habitual transgressions, perpetual failures and the fiends that have infected it. It’s time has come. As the symbol of the Old Right’s impotence and incompetence at halting the Left’s conquest of our nation and its heritage, National Review must be purged out of existence. It must have no voice nor provide guidance. Their adoption of the Fabian strategy has allowed the Left to hollow them; they are brittle and will break easily. Their futile “Never Trump” will be their epitaph.

Their sins are many, especially, when one considers how many victims they purged and/or ruined. These victims, a collection of some of the Right’s best intellectual individuals and steadfast organizations, believed (still do) in full measures and identified the communist Left’s strategy: be it immigration, race relations or general decay in our moral values. And they weren’t just purged from the pages of National Review, Buckley and his current successor, the effeminate Rich Lowery, have (sometimes successfully) tried to totally erase them from the Right. Not “erase” in the Latin American dictatorship sense, but completely discredit and banish them.

Look at Ann Coulter, for instance. After 9/11, Ann wrote, “We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity.” At the time, this seemed fairly reasonable for the rank and file of the Right, but in hindsight, I would have preferred turning the Middle East into a sea of glass. Regardless, she was fired a month later, in October 2001--with (((Jonah Goldberg))) writing a catty justification for the firing. Interestingly enough, the neoconservatives did the first two, invading and killing, but skimped out on the last one--converting the kebab to Christianity--I wonder why?

As cucks are wont to do, National Review folded to the demands of the White-hating Left and fired John Derbyshire for his “offensive,” but clearly accurate and sensible, take on race relations. Submitting to the Left is actually a national pastime for the National Review. After removing Derbyshire, and pressured by either Leftists or the cucks within, they purged Robert Weissberg for speaking at an American Renaissance conference. Rich Lowry, ever the Left’s harmless heel hound, was quick to remove Weissberg as a contributor and posted “Thanks to those who brought it to our attention.” Of course, there’s also the expulsion of the esteemed Peter Brimelow, whose mission has been to warn us the simple and accurate truth that voters are tied to ethnic loyalties, which is why our post-1965 immigration policy is a death sentence. On the degradation of National Review, Brimelow wrote, “This was a just minor part of the process by which NR's Washington bureau converted the magazine into a neocon-dominated, Beltway Republican bulletin board--then subservient, of course, to the senile Bill Buckley's insatiable vanity.”

And for organizations, NR and Buckley discredited and ruined the John Birch Society (JBS). By 1961, the JBS had a membership of 60,000 to 100,000 people and fought against the globalism we see today. Buckley had them destroyed, likely due to jealousy. The JBS continues to limp along, but is a mere shadow of its former self. The JBS rightly believes that the neocons subverted National Review. Can you imagine the leverage the Right would have had, had Buckley not fatally damaged the JBS? Meanwhile, the Left marched through our institutions.

In all, Radix Journal provides an exhausting and thoroughly researched review on the great conservative purges--a fratricide that didn’t make the Right stronger, but severely weakened it.

The purges aren’t the only reason National Review must be destroyed; its policy positions are scarcely superior to The Huffington Post. What makes National Review dangerous is that it is the self-styled leader in American conservatism. Its writers and editorial staff blanket television from Fox News to HBO’s Real Time with Bill Maher. Buckley had long said that a conservative is a fellow standing athwart history, yelling “Stop!” Add “Wait for Me!” at the end and you have today’s National Review--center-left positions from a decade ago penned by fainthearted paper tigers.

How can anyone forget National Review’s brave surrender to the Left’s attempt (for now) at mainstreaming pedophilia? Limey, and creepy-looking, Charles C. W. Cooke wrote in September last year, in response to a Salon pedophile confession article, “I’ve seen a good number of conservatives slamming this confession, often on the presumption that it represents an attempt to “mainstream” pedophilia. Respectfully, I have to disagree with this assessment.” Instead of advocating for pedophiles to be subjected to a welcoming and inclusive pogrom (hopefully, it’s part of Trump’s platform), Cooke attempted to temper the Right’s reaction--as if mainstreaming degeneracy hasn’t been the go-to move for the Left. No wonder Conservative, Inc. loses constantly; they’re completely asleep at the wheel.

National Review has changed drastically since the early days of its inception, or as any good cuck would explain, “we’ve evolved.” In 1957, Buckley wrote of the American South, “The central question that emerges … is whether the White community in the South is entitled to take such measures as are necessary to prevail, politically and culturally, in areas in which it does not prevail numerically? The sobering answer is Yes--the White community is so entitled because, for the time being, it is the advanced race.” Buckley was right then and his statement is still true to this day--truth is eternal and not relative, something the cucks will never understand, they’re malleable to history. At today’s National Review, Buckley’s statement on the South would never even get past the editors, much less be published. There is little doubt that in the current year, NR thinks race is a social construct in the same vein as the sub-humans at Mother Jones and Salon.

Speaking of the American South, nothing could be more representative of this great region than the Confederate flag. It’s symbolic of the South’s heritage--one of heroism, tradition and honor. For generations the South has had her standard attacked by dindus, Jewish agitators and the communist Left--and now, the cuckservative Right, NR included. After “tactical bowlcut” went on a lunatic shooting spree, the Marxist Left and servile cuckservative Right colluded to have the Confederate flag removed from public viewing. The cucks righteously yelled, “It belongs in a museum!” But, we know what happens when the Left gets even a morsel of what they want, they demand more and more; so now we have cities exhuming the honored dead, removing statutes and renaming streets and schools.

What was National Review’s take on the South’s noble banner? The revolting vermin that is Jason Lee Steorts wrote in 2015, “If your ancestors fought for the Confederacy, I do not respect their “service” or their “sacrifice.”” He might as well have visited Richmond’s Hollywood Cemetery, final resting place of 28 Confederate generals and 18,000 enlisted soldiers, and spit on their graves. (((Charles Krauthammer))), a Jew from New York City and perpetual warmongering neocon, wrote on the lowering of the Confederate flag, “The Confederate flags would ultimately have come down. That is a good thing,”--as if a Yankee Jew has any right to opine on the South or her heritage.

Perhaps one of the leading reasons for NR’s destruction would be due to its wretched roving correspondent, Kevin D. Williamson. Williamson is no proponent of the Right and has a burning hatred for the White race. In fact, one of his favorite historical figures is none other than the traitorous psychopath John Brown. Williamson mentions his affinity for the would-be White genocide terrorist often, such as when he described Brown as, “Or, in the case of John Brown, militant anti-government activists pursuing Second Amendment remedies.” This description is more apt coming from the far Left in describing the Tea Party, not a man who captured unarmed men in the middle of the night and had them brutally butchered with swords at Pottawatomie Creek, Kansas. Let’s also not forget that Brown wanted a mass slave insurrection and the destruction of the South--that means killing White men, women and children. Ironically, during Brown’s miserably failed raid at Harper’s Ferry, the first casualty was a free Black man who was shot by Brown’s men (really hurts the narrative there).

But don’t worry fam, NR’s beloved replacement of Andrew Jackson, Harriet Tubman, an ignorant and illiterate ape, said of Brown, “He done more in dying, than 100 men would in living.” Brown could never be described as anything other than a murderous psychopath, who wanted to wipe out the White race and cause chaos across the land. Yet, Williamson is still employed by National Review. He’s repeated his admiration for this Charles Manson-type figure on more than one occasion. In 2015, the conservative blog Mississippi Conservative Daily reached out to Williamson for clarity on his position:

The worst transgression is Williamson and National Review’s disdain for the White working class. In his infamous article, titled “The Father- Führer,” Williamson described our people as, “If you spend time in hardscrabble, white upstate New York, or eastern Kentucky, or my own native West Texas, and you take an honest look at the welfare dependency, the drug and alcohol addiction, the family anarchy--which is to say, the whelping of human children with all the respect and wisdom of a stray dog--you will come to an awful realization...The truth about these dysfunctional, downscale communities is that they deserve to die.” Williamson received an appropriate backlash for his White hatred, but, as usual, the cucks circled the wagons and doubled down. NR’s Bronze Star recipient and gallant warfighter, David French, who somehow found time to assuage his World of Warcraft addiction while deployed in Iraq, wrote of the White working class, “And that’s where disability or other government programs kicked in. They were there, beckoning, giving men and women alternatives to gainful employment. You don’t have to do any work (your disability lawyer does all the heavy lifting), you make money, and you get drugs.” Real heroes of American conservatism right there.

What has National Review thwarted? Nothing. Not sodomite marriage. Not Obamacare. Not drug legalization. Not higher taxes. Not abortion on-demand. Not Trump! And, when the Left successfully allows men in dresses to urinate next to little girls in public bathrooms, NR will sigh, shrug and continue sipping on their three martini lunch.

My sympathies are more with John Wilkes Booth than (((John Podhoretz)))--and Booth’s description of the traitors from his time period, perfectly illustrates the Alt Right’s attitude on National Review and its denizens, "Men have no right to entertain opinions which endanger the safety of the country. Such men I call traitors and treason should be stamped to death...So deep is my hatred for such men that I could wish I had them in my grasp, and I the power to crush. I'd grind them into the dust!”

Finally, to the National Review lurkers, and to paraphrase the late Henri Ducard: When a forest grows too wild, a purging fire is inevitable and natural. The Alt Right will finish you and the Left. And this time, no misguided idealists will get in the way. Like Buckley, you lack the courage to do all that is necessary. If someone stands in the way of true justice... you simply walk up behind them and stab them in the heart.

Delenda est National Review!

Author image
A scourge to communists, scallywags, hipsters and feminists. He also writes at