[x]

1) Your emphasis on race makes you look like a liberal troll or provocateur to many old Buchananite paleo-cons. Immigration is clearly a concern, but the battleground between neo-cons and many of those who had defined themselves as paleo-cons is on the question of what is American culture. Those who want to put things on a more biological basis are viewed as disruptive by the rank and file. There is common cause on many issues, but such thinkers are seen more as a minus than a plus.

2) Years of lewrockwell.com and Chronicles Magazine and other paleoconservative or paleolibertarian publications unfurling the old Confederate banner have worn many people's patience to a frazzle. One either accepts that sort of thing and wants more or rejects it and loses interest or rejects it and turns violently against that vein of rebel nostalgia.

There's a contradiction between wanting to get back to the "Old Republic" and wanting to carve up the country. It can be reconciled by people in their own minds, but the contradiction is never wholly resolved.

3) It's similar with talk of the American empire in paleoconservative media. One can be very much against unthinking interventionism and attempts to reconstruct the world, but things look differently after 9/11. We've found out that we are much more a part of modern America than we might have thought a decade ago, and Gore Vidal doesn't look like any sort of a model.

Paleoconservatism looked new and interesting a decade ago. I can't imagine it has much appeal now.

[rdb3]

Those are some interesting concepts, x.