For generations, the source of conflict in the American political system is that it represents a small slice of the American people. The Yankee elite that rose up in the aftermath of the Civil War, later joined by Jews in the 20th century, represents not only a narrow cultural slice of American society, but a narrow economic slice as well. Since the end of the Cold War this has become acute. In 30 years, there have been three major reformist movements attempting to broaden the ruling coalition.

It seems like a lifetime ago, but Ross Perot was in many respects the prototype for Donald Trump’s 2016 run. Perot ran as an outsider, on the back of his folksy observations about the federal government. Despite being very rich, he was clearly a man of the lower classes. His picaresque presentation was very appealing to a large portion of the population open to populist appeals. If not for his enigmatic personality, he probably would have won the White House in 1992.

Of course, what opened the door for Perot’s 1992 run was the Buchanan challenge to George H. W. Bush in the Republican primary. When asked why he was running against Bush he said, “If the country wants to go in a liberal direction, it doesn’t bother me as long as I’ve made the best case I can. What I can’t stand are the backroom deals. They’re all in on it, the insider game, the establishment game—this is what we’re running against.” That should sound familiar.

Both of those efforts to broaden the establishment coalition to include the majority of white Americans failed, but they set up the 2016 Trump run. While it is clear that the Perot and Buchanan efforts failed in their mission, it is too soon to know if the Trump effort is a failure. The cracking of important institutions like the media and now the voting process will have consequences into the future. Perot and Buchanan focused on the people, while Trump focused on the system itself.

What we have seen thus far in the 30 years since the end of the Cold War is two of the three ways people can attempt to broaden the ruling coalition. Both are reform efforts that start outside with the desire to end up inside. Perot wanted to bring in new people, who would represent the broader public. Buchanan and Trump both wanted to reform the system by reforming one of the parties. Buchanan wanted a genuine right-wing party, while Trump wanted a populist party.

The third way, of course, is the purely outsider movement. This is when the unrepresented create an alternative outside the ruling coalition. They either peacefully compel the ruling elite to acknowledge their interests or they replace the ruling elite, and the system they rule, with a new elite and a new system. This is exactly what happened with the American Revolution. A new elite replaced the old elite and created a system that worked for them to replace the old system.

This is what makes the current moment so dangerous. Within one generation three efforts to broaden the ruling coalition have failed, while the condition of the unrepresented has declined. Just as important, the number of people feeling threatened by the status quo has increased. In the 1990’s, reformers were speaking for the white working class. Today, it is the broader middle-class that is becoming increasingly radicalized by the intransigence of the ruling class.

Another subtle point of comparison between now and that previous revolutionary moment is the divide between the reform from within crowd and the emerging outsiders, rallying around the election fraud. Ann Coulter took a swipe at Nick Fuentes over his criticism of some things she said. Coulter’s Tory instincts got the better of her and she inadvertently confirms the Fuentes criticism. Despite her reformist rhetoric, Queen Ann has always been a loyalist.

Another little glimpse of this divide is in the Ed Dutton interview of Steve Sailer last week, in which the election was a topic. Sailer strangely says that he has seen no evidence of election fraud. This is something you hear from other old paleocons and it reflects that old loyalist instinct. They cannot question the integrity of the system, as their goal has always been to join the system as a reformer. Therefore, their faith in the system is unshakable. It is civic nationalism in a nutshell.

Finally, the other bit of comparison is that the Founders did not view themselves as radicals or revolutionaries. The Declaration itself is a bourgeoise document filled with objectivist rhetoric explaining their actions.  Even at the point of the break, they sounded like men willing to meet the crown halfway. Certainly, many of them knew this was impossible and saw this moment coming for a long time, but the need to show they were forced into this position was important to them.

That same instinct is turning up in the election protests. The young people out on the streets in state capitals are using the language of reform, but are clearly ready to make a break with the system entirely. They are young and enthusiastic, so they may not see it, but the logic of their arguments can only lead to a rejection of the system as being illegitimate. If the voting system is fraudulent, then the results of it are fraudulent, making this government the fruit of a poisoned tree.

It is tempting to dismiss what is happening as heat of the moment rhetoric that will fade as passions fade. There is some truth to it. The establishment will rehabilitate some former Trump supporters like Coulter, putting them back on television. Others will temper their rhetoric in the hope of being rehabilitated. The media will try to surround the remnant in a cone of silence. The ruling class will apply the same ointments they used the last time they suffered a populist outbreak.

The trouble is, the causes of this last populist outbreak have not gone away and they promise to get worse. The fundamental problem that existed at the end of the Cold War exists today. That is, forty percent of Americans have no representation in either political party and as a result have no voice in government. The number is certainly larger, but blacks and most white liberals are so easily deluded with ceremonial tokens they imagine themselves as vital parts of the ruling coalition.

The Declaration of Independence was at the time and is today a very radical document, which is why our rulers don’t mention it much anymore. A couple of generations ago it was the center piece of civics instruction. Today it has been replaced by critical race theory and other nonsense from the multicultural fever swamps. Even so, the message still resonates today. Whenever any form of government ceases to represent the will of the people, it is the right and duty of the people to abolish it.

Promotions: The good folks at Alaska Chaga are offering a ten percent discount to readers of this site. You just click on the this link and they take care of the rest. About a year ago they sent me some of their stuff. Up until that point, I had never heard of chaga, but I gave a try and it is very good. It is a tea, but it has a mild flavor. It’s autumn here in Lagos, so it is my daily beverage now.

Minter & Richter Designs makes high-quality, hand-made by one guy in Boston, titanium wedding rings for men and women and they are now offering readers a fifteen percent discount on purchases if you use this link.   If you are headed to Boston, they are also offering my readers 20% off their 5-star rated Airbnb.  Just email them directly to book at sa@******************ns.com.

For sites like this to exist, it requires people like you chipping in a few bucks a month to keep the lights on and the people fed. It turns out that you can’t live on clicks and compliments. Five bucks a month is not a lot to ask. If you don’t want to commit to a subscription, make a one time donation. Or, you can send money to: Z Media LLC P.O. Box 432 Cockeysville, MD 21030-0432. You can also use PayPal to send a few bucks, rather than have that latte.