Namely, a new, highly heterogeneous force in right-wing politics is taking hold, and they have their sights set firmly on the Republican “establishment.” Known collectively as the “alternative right,” this amalgam includes neo-reactionaries, monarchists, nativists, populists, and even a few self-declared fascists. They mostly congregate online, with a large swath of blogs and websites dedicated to their concerns. As an example of how truly diverse the alt right is, major and proverbial watering holes for them include everything from Breitbart and the libertarian-leaning Taki Mag to Alternative Right—a blog that openly supports white nationalism.
Yet as scattered and ideologically diffuse as it is, the alt right has had real success. “GamerGate,” along with the wildly successful Twitter hashtag #cuckservative, are apt displays of why the alternative right has often proven more effective at fighting progressive dogma than the traditional Republican party. How? The alt right taken the fight to the left in the best way possible—they’ve co-opted its tactics and deployed them against their bully makers. The end result: Trump, the darling of the populist alt right (and its cousin, conservative talk radio), is miles ahead of his challengers, while the right-wing blogosphere is everyday gaining ground against the left and converting plenty of American voters along the way.
The alt right can cause some stomachs to churn: Even though the alt right loves to mix it up with Gawker and Salon types, it (like Trump) may enjoy picking on other conservatives even more. Republican hesitancy to accept the alt right into the fold therefore makes sense for several reasons, especially since it’s becoming increasingly obvious that the alt right couldn’t care less about the Republican party. In fact, many on the alt right believe that the Republican party is in dire need of a purge. If given the chance, the alt right would expel Marco Rubio for supporting the Gang of Eight, while other candidates like John Kasich, George Pataki, Chris Christie, Carly Fiorina, and Jeb Bush would get the axe for various other positions.
What makes the alt right so radical is that it categorically disagrees with even the supposedly “extreme” positions of conservatives. Being against illegal immigration and for deportation isn’t enough; the alt right wants to drastically cut back on legal immigration, as well. As for Syria, most on the alt right support Assad and Putin instead of the so-called “moderate opposition.” Basically, with the alt right, don’t expect any loyalty when it comes to the tried-and-tested Republican platform. They, not the left, are the real threat to the Republican party as it is currently constituted.
This is of course the very reason why the alt right has been in the ascendant. Rather than concede the moral high ground to the left, the alt right turns the left’s moralism on its head and makes it a badge of honor to be called “racist,” “homophobic,” and “sexist.” Instead of the GOP establishment’s soup of globalism, free markets, and foreign interventions, the alt right has resurrected some ghosts from the conservative past in pushing for protectionism, national capitalism, and an emphasis on protecting American lives at home, not abroad. Sound familiar? Get out your pitchforks.
Posted inAlt Right|Comments Off on What, Exactly, is the ‘Alternative Right?’
* The black crime rate is over 6 times greater than the average American rate.
The black on white crime is 55 times greater than the white on black crime rate.
The black on white murder is only 13 to 17 times greater than the white on black rate.
* Not so much a number to keep in mind, but a pair of shapes: The bell curve, and an S curve of exponential growth/diminishing returns.
Those two shapes are so important to understanding so many of the problems of the modern world.
* If only our innumerate society could somehow learn to think about adverse social trends in numeric terms, such as: the ratio of yearly third world immigrants (1-2 million) to newborns (about 4 million) portends a country gradually becoming a stranger to itself. Sadly, we will never embrace this mode of thinking (a hallmark of this blog). Instead, we just continue to feed our crops Gatorade because, “it’s what plants crave.
* Roughly speaking:
Land area of US = area of Canada = area of Europe [with Brazil a little behind these three]
area of US*3 = area of Africa
area of Brazil*2 = area of Russia = area of South America
* I think it’s useful to think about hypocrisy in percentage terms. As in, how often does a person fail to live up to their stated principles?
The left has gotten lots of mileage out of calling Christian conservatives hypocrits, especially in regard to sexual morality.
Lets suppose a Christian man tries to be faithful to his wife, but fails due to weakness of will on one or two occasions. Let’s say he lives up to his ideals 99.9% of the time. You might say he is 0.1% hypocrite.
Compare that to a leftist who claims to love diversity, yet spends their life avoiding it, living in the most white community they can find, sending their kids to a white private school, and so on. They will almost never live up to their ideals, except maybe for symbolic occasions or photo ops. This makes them 99% hypocrites.
I think it is useful to understand the difference between 1% hypocrisy, driven by weakness of will, and 99% hypocrisy driven by genuine dishonesty or lack of self awareness. A sense of proportion here matters.
And I think the hypocrisy that conservatives are accused of, especially with sexual morality, is of the 1% sort. But the kind liberals engage in, especially regarding diversity, is of the 99% sort.
* Hauser’s Law says that Federal tax revenues fluctuate closely around 19% of GDP, no matter how the marginal tax rates are changed.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hauser%27s_law
If you raise tax rates, Federal tax revenues will be close to 19% of GDP.
If you lower tax rates, Federal tax revenues will be close to 19% of GDP.
* A country can be conquered 100% at a time, this is traditional warfare.
But a country can also be conquered 1% at a time, and this is what immigration does. Those 1%s add up over time, they add up to dispossession.
Even just in terms of voting, when you let in 10% more voters, it means the voting power of the native population has been diluted by 10%.
If you have a two party system, it is even worse. You can also think in terms of a seesaw, if you have 47 pounds on one side, and 53 pounds on the other, the addition of 10 pounds to the lighter side can tilt the beam.
* It’s important to remember that 5.5% of Black men, 0.1% of Caucasian men, and 0.00067% of Asian men carried the 2R allele for the MAO-A gene. A 2 R allele makes the carrier not only more violent, but more susceptible to becoming antisocial if raised in a toxic environment involving physical abuse.
This number is important to have in mind when estimating the percentage of violent criminals within, and the proportion between groups.
* One study concluded that black men with the 2R variant have an estimated lifetime risk of shooting or stabbing someone of 50%, black men with a normal variant have a 7% risk.
Another study of black men showed the 5.5% of the who have the 2R variant are 3.85 times more likely to have been arrested and 3.05 times more likely to have ever been incarcerated.
A third study of teenagers and self-reported acts of violent and non-violence delinquency showed the 2R variant holders to have about twice the level of both types of delinquency.
* The number of digits of pi that a person remembers by heart could serve as a very rough measure of nerdiness. I remember it as 3.1415926535. If you typed the above from memory, you’re probably nerdier than I am.
* Dunbar’s number = approx. 150. The maximum number of strong social ties a person can sustain. Basis for tribal organization and the riposte to anyone claiming thousands of Facebook friends or Twitter followers.
* The 68–95–99.7 rule — One standard deviation from the mean of what’s being measured encompasses about 68% of the group in question, two standard deviations 95%, and three standard deviations 99.7%.
Roughly, a standard deviation is an ordinary difference, two standard deviations are a big difference, and three standard deviations are a really big difference.
* The value of a random American life is $10 million (that is the Value of a Statistical Life number calculated very expertly and publically by the USDOT).
That means it would have been worth $140 million to prevent the San Berdoo shooters from killing their victims, and (I suggest) it would have been worth at least another $110 million to prevent the additional 22 sublethal casualties they caused.
The average earnings of a working immigrant (note that the average is misleading because the distribution of immigrants’ earnings is bi- or tri-modal, with a few earning a lot, a lot earning a little, and some more earning close to nil) may be generously-estimated about $30,000/year. The average labor share of income is about 60%, so the average surplus per working immigrant should be $20,000. However, the average government subsidy to $30,000/year workers (above what they pay in taxes) is about $7,000. So the average surplus per immigrant worker is no more than $13,000/year. (Most of that surplus accrues to the employer, not other workers– even leaving aside the fact that the modal immigrant earns less and costs more in subsidies than the mean working immigrant.)
So it takes about 10,000 non-terrorist immigrants working for a whole year to generate enough surplus– for plutocrats, not actual terror victims– to equal the weregild owed by one terrorist immigrant (or first-generation child like Major Hassan). If we didn’t average immigrant Chinese scientists in with the Pakistani truck drivers, that number would be rather larger. If we added the costs of so-called anti-terrorist programs to the bill, the number of immigrants required to pay it would be very much larger. The budget of the Department of Homeland Security (which is just a fraction of the US Government spending attributed to terrorism) is $40 billion/year. Suppose that as little as 1/4 of it is spent on “anti-terror:” $10 billion/year. That would consume the total surplus of 400,000 average immigrant workers– except that the government does not collect that surplus– it just taxes the people who do at an average rate of about 20%. So in fact it takes roughly 2,000,000 average immigrant workers to pay for just the anti-terror portion of the Homeland Security budget. That is roughly all of the moslem immigrants in the US. In other words, under the most pro-immigration calculations I can offer with a straight face, assuming Pakistani truck drivers are every bit as valuable to the country as Chinese scientists, all the moslem immigrants in the USA are worth zero (or less; negative value) to the modal native American. (And we haven’t even discussed the cost of non-terrorist immigrant crime, the cost to everyone else of the immigrants’ children, the cost of native workers displaced into unemployment, etc.)
The average cost of American healthcare per hour worked in the US is about $12 (I learned that one from Peter Shaeffer and verified it from DHHS publications myself). That means people earning less than, say, $20/hour are flat-out incapable of paying for their own healthcare in America (even counting taxes paid by their employers on the surplus they generate). So every immigrant who commands wages less than that is a drain on the public purse even before we consider any other costs at all.
About 1/8 of America’s population is (what Americans call) black. Roughly 1/6 of America’s black population is smarter than the less-smart half of the white population– so it is a grievous error to assume every black American you meet is not smart. Sadly, though, about 5/6 of the black population is less smart than the more-smart half of the white population. Only a tiny fraction of the black population is as smart as the top 1/6 of the white (or east asian) population. Because of this, it is generally impossible to fill US school or job openings with the smartest applicants and end up with proportional (1/8) representation of black Americans. The more selective the school or job, the less likely racial balance will fall out of any performance-oriented selection process.
* More than 80% of lawsuits are accounted for by less than 4% of the population
* The most effective way to evaluate the quality of a neighborhood is to find out the percentage of children who reside in 2-parent family households (Sailer has also recommended counting the number of attractive females as an index of neighborhood quality).
* Demographic percentages (USA);
62 % White
13% Black
17% Latino
5% Asian
2% Jewish
2% Gay
* In any given year, around 60,000 recorded rapes are perpetrated by black men in white women in the USA. In an given year, ‘statistical zero’ rapes are perpetrated by white American men against black American women.
Posted inBlacks, Crime|Comments Off on Steve Sailer: What Are the Most Useful Data Points to Memorize?
* Life becomes immeasurably simpler for Republicans if they come to terms with the fact that they’re the White People’s Party, or as Steve puts it, the Party of the Core. Trump is leading the party to this promised land. Once they accept who they are representing, then sensible policies can flow like water because there would be a connection between party purpose and party policy.
* I recall a few incidents where I’ve had real-life conversations with Bernie Sanders fans and they’re going on and on about his plan to bring Danish socialism to America and I ask them to clarify a few things that I don’t understand. I ask them why I’ve never heard them, or Sanders, talk about how they’re going to ethnically cleanse America to bring about the racial homogeneity which is a necessary precondition to having a sharing society. Then I keep a blank expression on my face and await an answer, looking as though I’m genuinely curious. Suffice to say that after a few rounds they can’t point to a diverse society that makes their desired socialism work and they’re frustrated that reality is kicking them in the nads.
* That’s the thing about mass immigration: It turns the country into a giant commons. And “grab what you can” is the inevitable response to a commons. See Garret Hardin’s original formulation (The Tragedy of the Commons or Matt Ridley’s discussion in The Origins of Virtue: Human Instincts aned the Evolution of Cooperation).
One fundamental difference between Republican voters and Democrat voters is that Democrats generally view the country as a commons, while Republican voters are committed to the perpetuation of the country as a going concern. This ties in with Steve’s views on affordable family formation, as those who live where family formation is affordable are more likely to view the country as a going concern, although the arrow of causation can also point in the other direction as those predisposed to the going-concern viewpoint will re-locate to where the environment is more suitable for their productive (and reproductive) project.
* From an HDB point of view, what should be done with sociopaths/psychopaths? Forcible sterilization?
* While Frum seems to “understand” the concerns of middle/working class Republicans, he doesn’t really seem to feel himself to be a part of them, or very sympathetic to them. Instead he seems to be treating them as just one more group whose wishes need to be considered, and gives their concerns – concerns about rewarding indolence, graft, and illegality – no moral weight whatsoever. The white middle class is only important because of their share of the voting base, not because their ideals are any better than those of Wall Street banksters, champagne socialists, or welfare queens.
Just as bad, and just plain damn naive, is how Frum seems to think that Wall Street support for open borders is just some minor policy point which they’d be willing to discard if “GOLLY GEE, THEY ONLY JUST UNDERSTOOD THE CONCERNS OF REGULAR AMERICANS A LITTLE BIT BETTER.”
That’s laughable. Wall Street has been committed to open borders since at least the George H. W. Bush Administration. Since the early 2000s that support has gone into overdrive. They are obsessed with driving down American wages, obsessed with increasing their customer base, and obsessed with disenfranchising the middle class Americans who have stymied them in the past. It is a central tenet of their ideology. It is non-negotiable. Does Frum really think that all the lies and betrayals on immigration by the elite, and the open, decade-long push by them to eliminate our borders, even in the face of extreme national security concerns, are just the result of some simple misunderstandings? He’s got to be high.
* Singapore does just this for the legions of guest workers from the Philippines, Indonesia and so on who work there on employment visas. Employers are required to put up a security bond for $5,000 to the government to ensure good conduct by the domestic worker (i.e. going to ground as an illegal, moonlighting and so on).
Note that the idea holds both the employer, who sponsors the visa, and the foreign worker, to account. The idea is easily extended to other classes of immigrants, if necessary with tweaks to the monetary penalties and rules to be followed.
The free market has stepped in and insurance companies provide the bond for an annual insurance premium. It’s a well developed market.
Here are the conditions laid down by the government of Singapore. They are worth a look.
* TB was almost non-existent in the USA until we started letting illegals in by the millions.
* Does current immigration-logic (invite the identical refugees you’re invading) maybe have an unspoken component where discrimination-against-Muslims is seen as an unspeakably dangerous step towards possible eventual discrimination-against-Jews?
I’m otherwise frankly baffled why we’re fine with reducing Iraq, Libya, Syria and Iran to smoking rubble, but not with treating their refugees as suspect.
Posted inImmigration|Comments Off on Requiring Immigrants To Buy Insurance
Dan Sanchez writes: As US-driven wars plummet the Muslim world ever deeper into jihadi-ridden failed state chaos, events seem to be careening toward a tipping point. Eventually, the region will become so profuse a font of terrorists and refugees, that Western popular resistance to “boots on the ground” will be overwhelmed by terror and rage. Then, the US-led empire will finally have the public mandate it needs to thoroughly and permanently colonize the Greater Middle East.
It is easy to see how the Military Industrial Complex and crony energy industry would profit from such an outcome. But what about America’s “best friend” in the region? How does Israel stand to benefit from being surrounded by such chaos?
Tel Aviv has long pursued a strategy of “divide and conquer”: both directly, and indirectly through the tremendous influence of the Israel lobby and neocons over US foreign policy.
A famous article from the early 1980s by Israeli diplomat and journalist Oded Yinon is most explicit in this regard. The “Yinon Plan” calls for the “dissolution” of “the entire Arab world including Egypt, Syria, Iraq and the Arabian peninsula.” Each country was to be made to “fall apart along sectarian and ethnic lines,” after which each resulting fragment would be “hostile” to its neighbors.” Yinon incredibly claimed that:
“This state of affairs will be the guarantee for peace and security in the area in the long run”
According to Yinon, this Balkanization should be realized by fomenting discord and war among the Arabs:
“Every kind of inter-Arab confrontation will assist us in the short run and will shorten the way to the more important aim of breaking up Iraq into denominations as in Syria and in Lebanon.”
Sowing discord among Arabs had already been part of Israeli policy years before Yinon’s paper.
To counter the secular-Arab nationalist Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), Israel supported an Islamist movement in the Occupied Territories, beginning in the late 70s (around the same time that the US began directly supporting the Islamic fundamentalist Mujahideen in Afghanistan). The Israel-sponsored Palestinian Islamist movement eventually resulted in the creation of Hamas, which Israel also supported and helped to rise.
Also in the late 70s, Israel began fomenting inter-Arab strife in Lebanon. Beginning in 1976, Israel militarily supported Maronite Christian Arabs, aggravating the Lebanese Civil War that had recently begun. In 1978, Israel invaded Lebanon, and recruited locals to create a proxy force called the “South Lebanon Army.”
Israel invaded Lebanon again in 1982, and tried to install a Christian Fascist organization called the Phalange in power. This was foiled when the new Phalangist ruler was assassinated. In reprisal, the Phalange perpetrated, with Israeli connivance, the Sabra and Shatila massacre, butchering hundreds (perhaps thousands) of Palestinian refugees and Lebanese Shiites. (See Murray Rothbard’s moving contemporary coverage of the atrocity.)
The civil war that Israel helped foster fractured Lebanon for a decade and a half. It was Lebanon’s chaotic fragmentation that Yinon cited as the “precedent” and model for the rest of the Arab world.
The US has also long pit Muslim nations, sects, and ethnic groups against each other. Throughout the 80s, in addition to sponsoring the Afghan jihad and civil war, the US armed Iraq (including with chemical weapons) in its invasion of and war against Iran. At the very same time, the US was also secretly selling arms to the Iranian side of that same conflict. It is worth noting that two officials involved in the Iran-Contra Affair were Israel-first neocons Elliot Abrams and Michael Ledeen. Abrams was convicted (though later pardoned) on criminal charges.
This theme can also be seen in “A Clean Break”: a strategy document written in 1996 for the Israeli government by a neocon “study group” led by future Bush administration officials and Iraq War architects. In that document, “divide and conquer” went under the euphemism of “a strategy based on balance of power.” This strategy involved allying with some Muslim powers (Turkey and Jordan) to roll back and eventually overthrow others. Particularly it called for regime change in Iraq in order to destabilize Syria. And destabilizing both Syria and Iran was chiefly for the sake of countering the “challenges” those countries posed to Israel’s interests in Lebanon.
The primary author of “A Clean Break,” David Wurmser, also wrote another strategy document in 1996, this one for American audiences, called “Coping with Crumbling States.” Wurmser argued that “tribalism, sectarianism, and gang/clan-like competition” were what truly defined Arab politics. He claimed that secular-Arab nationalist regimes like Iraq’s and Syria’s tried to defy that reality, but would ultimately fail and be torn apart by it. Wurmser therefore called for “expediting” and controlling that inevitable “chaotic collapse” through regime change in Iraq.
Especially thanks to the incredibly effective efforts of the neocon Project for a New American Century (PNAC), regime change in Iraq became official US policy in 1998. Iraq’s fate was sealed when 9/11 struck while the US Presidency was dominated by neocons (including many Clean Break signatories and PNAC members) and their close allies.
Beginning with the ensuing Iraq War, the Yinon/Wurmser “divide and conquer” strategy went into permanent overdrive.
Following the overthrow of secular-Arab nationalist ruler Saddam Hussein, the policies of the American invaders could hardly have been better designed to instigate a civil war between Iraqi Sunnis and Shias.
The “de-Baathification” of the Iraqi government sent countless secular Sunnis into unemployed desperation. This was compounded with total disenfranchisement when the US-orchestrated first election handed total power over to the Shias. And it was further compounded with persecution when the US-armed (and Iran-backed) Shiite militias began ethnically cleansing Baghdad and other cities of Sunnis.
The invasion also unleashed Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, a terrorist who had previously been holed up hiding from Saddam’s security forces. The Sunni extremist’s shootings and suicide bombings of Shia and Shiite shrines, and the anti-Sunni reprisals they engendered, further divided Iraq along sectarian lines. Zarqawi’s gang became Al Qaeda in Iraq. After many of his extremist followers were thrust by the Americans into close prison quarters with ex-Baathists, many of the latter were recruited. The military expertise thus acquired was crucial for the group’s later rise to conquest as ISIS.
All this was the perfect recipe for civil war. And when that civil war did break out, the US armed forces made reconciliation impossible by completely taking the Shiite side.
Now in neighboring Syria, the US has been fueling a civil war for the past four years by sponsoring international Sunni jihadis fighting alongside ISIS and Syrian Al Qaeda in their war to overthrow the secular-Arab nationalist ruler Bashar al-Assad, and to “purify” the land of Shias, Druze, Christians, and other non-Salafist “apostates.” Key co-sponsors of this jihad include the Muslim regimes of Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates. And key allies and defenders of Assad include such Muslim forces as Hezbollah, Iranian troops, and Iraqi militias. In some battles in Syria, Iraqi soldiers and Syrian rebels may each be shooting at the other with American weapons.
Many of the weapons and recruits that were poured into Syria by the US and its allies ended up going over to ISIS or Al Qaeda. So strengthened, ISIS then burst into Iraq (where it first emerged during the chaotic US occupation) and drove the Shiite Iraqi military out of the Sunni-populated northwest of the country.
Today’s “divide and conquer” seems to be the 80s “divide and conquer” in reverse. In the 80s, the US armed a Sunni-led Iraqi invasion of Iran. Now, by arming the Iran-led militias that dominate the new Iraqi military, the US has effectively armed a Shia-led Iranian invasion of Iraq. Moreover, in the 80s, the US covertly armed the Shiite Iranian resistance to the Iraqi invasion. Now the US is covertly arming (through its conduits in the Syrian insurgency) the Sunni Iraqi resistance to the Iranian invasion.
Jihadi-ridden civil wars have also been fomented in Afghanistan, Somalia, Yemen, and Libya, the latter following the American overthrow of yet another secular-Arab nationalist ruler.
I post this gif clip with the knowledge that there’s a strong possibility it was staged. (h/t IHTG for passing it along) But, assuming for the sake of Game proficiency inculcation that it’s an authentic capture of a moment in time when an alpha move goes wrong, it’s a decent learning tool to educate aspiring womanizers in the fine art of saving face.
Explain how, if you were in an identical scenario, you would recover from this unexpected flirtation backfire.
This is serviceable Game, (until the busted finale). The “beta provider lure and alpha jokester takeaway” is a staple of fun&sexy flirty pickup. But, ya know, sometimes the actress goes off-script. When that happens, you’ve got to adjust on the fly. Alpha males are good at adjusting on the fly. Beta males aren’t; they mostly react with butthurt stupefaction when girls throw them a blue ball.
Expert level recovery from a failed prank on a girl usually takes one of two forms:
A naughty, ZFG chuckle (you win even when not winning, because you amuse yourself so much)
A deadpan “I was expecting that” expression
In this instance, it would have been a good recovery (fit for Jumbotron viewing by the general public) if this guy had grinned post-slap, shrugged his shoulders, and then slowly moved the juicy morsel to his mouth, making exaggerated contortions of delight as if he was fully enjoying the deliciousness of his snack. Even funnier if he then looks at the girl and says, “So good”.
Briefly, what NOT to do when your alpha move goes wrong:
Act insulted
Cry
Ask why she was such a bitch
Try the same prank again, harder and clumsier
Sulk, brood, or retreat into a betaboy wound-licking bubble of silence
Chastise her, “You will not slap your way to the Presidency”
If you react in any of those ways, it can be fairly said you “Jebbed” yourself. A good, old-fashioned Jebbing will deep-six your chances with a girl faster than a John Scalzied nip slip.
So, stay calm and carry on as if nothing disturbed your inner jerkboy peace. Because it didn’t. A slap from a girl who was “in a mood”? Please. That’s practically foreplay.
ps yeah i know there are wiseguys in the studio audience who will say “rule 1: don’t be a nowag”, but this asian dude appears to be decently put-together, and the girl might be his girlfriend. plus, she’s cute, so he’s doing something right.
Posted inDating|Comments Off on What Do You Do When An Alpha Move Goes Wrong?
From the Chateau: It’s fun pointing out the abject hypocrisy of leftoids and provoking them to ragequit their “””arguments””” mid-brain fart. Not that it does any good — leftoids are invulnerable to appeals to reason or accountability (just like women) — but personal sadistic thrills don’t require that your softcore targets hew to established grounds for reasonable discourse.
For instance, Frank Joyce, a Leftoid Prime who shat out this antiWhite excrescence for status whoring gelt among his cocktail party butt buddies lives in Grosse Pointe Park, MI. His Chosen neighborhood is 85% White, boasts a $104K median income, and is protected from Detroit Dindus by a LITERAL WALL.
I say it’s time to take leftoids at their word. Listen to what they say, don’t watch what they do (they prefer it that way, again just like women). In that spirit, here’s commenter Hugo Stiglitz’s suggestion for a peace accord with leftoids.
Left this comment [at Joyce’s Salon article]:
“As a White man, I agree with the author – we must be stopped. I think we should be segregated in our own land. An area entirely composed of just White people, so we cannot hurt anyone else.
I am absolutely sure non – Whites would not want to have anything to do with us, just like the historical record of immigration shows.
So, a huge (yuuuuuge) wall should be erected around this new White nation. This way, no dangerous Whites could escape, and no innocent POC could accidently (not through any fault of their own, but of course due to White tricknology) find themselves in the hellish, failed state an all White country would invariably become.”
Agree&Amplify the antiracism Left: Yes, White people are horrible. So bad, in fact, that they need to be removed from the presence of nonWhites and exiled to their own lands, far away from the wonders and blessings of Diversitopias. Perhaps in time these horrible, no good, very bad White people will even give their new land a name… America… and call it a nation.
***
Reader -A comments,
What if the liberal disagrees and amplifies? At this point in the degeneracy cycle, do they even have to hide their genocidal urges anymore? Would there be a healthy response of “fuck you” from the people they claim to want to destroy or will there just be intellectual insecurity and approval seeking from the status signalers?
That’s the beauty (and the purpose) of running Tight Game on leftoids and cucks (as Our Glorious Trumpening is doing); Game clarifies, cuts through, and captures the genocidal essence of the leftoid spirit. Game wonderfully focuses the mind of shitlibs, just as it focuses the vaginal tingles of temptresses. As you Agree & Amplify leftoids to heights of rage and freakboy impotence, they begin to reveal in technicolor dazzle the depths of their degeneracy and their true aim of genociding away the normal Whites who aren’t on board with the plan to summon from the Cucken lair the leftoids’ r-selection dystopian beast.
When you have GAMED them to basically admitting they find joy in the thought of killing off millions of BadWhites, you no longer need rhetorical devices to win back and occupy the moral/social/political high ground. The mediocre masses will have slowly edged into your camp, ready to listen to your pitch and, if the leftoids don’t back down from their civilization-destroying insanity, ready to aid you in pushing them off their thrones by force.
Posted inWhites|Comments Off on White People Are Horrible. It’s Time For Them To Be Exiled To Their Own Country
Psychometrician Linda Gottfredson wrote in 2004: “IQ was the best predictor of the major cause of death, motor vehicle accidents. Vehicular death rates doubled and then tripled at successively lower IQ ranges (100–115, 85–100, 80–85; O’Toole, 1990).”
Perhaps no drivers licenses for people with IQs under 100?
Chaim Amalek writes: “A dangerous slippery slope. What else would you deny us under-100 IQ folk? The right to keep and bear arms? The right to vote? The right to procreate? The right to immigrate? WHERE DOES IT END? What about the right to blog? Or to comment on someone else’s blog? The only way to stop them from driving in America is to hire cleverer foreigners to drive them around at taxpayer expense until such time as Google perfects driverless cars.”
Posted inCars, Health, IQ|Comments Off on How can we stop dumb people from driving?
On June 16, 2015, when Donald Trump announced he was running for president, a friend of mine listened to his speech on the radio. When we met up that morning, he told that I would love Donald Trump. He was saying all the things I was saying about problems such as illegal immigration.
That morning, I had no enthusiasm for the Donald. I didn’t take him seriously. I thought he was a joke. I dismissed my friend’s comments.
On June 28, 2015, my friend Khunrum emailed my email Advisory Committee:
Robert: “Sorry. My vote belongs to Larry Flynt.”
Fred: “There was an interesting item in the news–apparently, Trump hired a bunch of actors (extras) to show up and cheer at his announcement that he was running for president. This guy is a real piece of work.”
Robert: “I thought I saw Ron Jeremy in the back waving a sign… Shameless!”
Khunrum: “This must be a celebrity thing…I swear I saw Caitlyn Jenner.”
Robert: “It was a cross promotion for Trump’s new show Lady Boy Apprentis.”
Chaim Amalek: “He’s the only man running who understands our immigration problem and is willing to talk about it. Deep in your heart you know he’s right.”
Khunrum: “If the Don comes in second in a primary or two or even wins one they won’t able to keep him out of the debates. Donald debating the other is something I’d love to see.”
Fred: “Oh, the debates will certainly be interesting to watch.”
Robert: “They should show the debate on Comedy Central.”
Khunrum: “We’re doing our part to keep the laughs rolling here in Texas…We have our former dumbbell governor Rick Perry running (for your entertainment pleasure) and the “intellectual” in the Bush family, brother Jeb. Then there’s Rick Santorum who brought a dead baby home…plus The Donald and others….it’s going to be a gas! gas! gas!”
I didn’t bother to join this email discussion.
On July 4, 2015, I made my first mention of “Donald Trump” on Facebook and Twitter by quoting this from a friend: “The outrage over Trump’s comments is interesting to watch; I’ve seen no one actually try to refute his statement on the facts.”
That same night, I posted: “Until Trump came along all the candidates were avoiding the issue including that prancing clown Walker who was caught several times showing his open borders bonafides.”
I was skeptical that Donald Trump was for real, but I started a “Donald Trump” category on my blog July 9, 2015. From that date on, I guess, I was aboard the Trump Express.
On July 14, in a private FB chat, I wrote: “blowhard trump is tapping into WN sentiments.”
On July 19, I posted on FB a comment I read (probably in the comments section of Steve Sailer’s blog):
Trump could say: “Look, I respect everyone who served, captured or not. But back when America was great and we won wars, our heroes were men who did the capturing, like Alvin York. Let’s make America great again!”
On July 21, I posted on FB a comment I read (probably in the comments section of Steve Sailer’s blog):
“John McCain called Donald Trump supporters a bunch of crazy people. Why are Donald Trump supporters crazy? Because they want to see immigration levels in this country reduced and want to secure our border. John McCain is a shill for cheap 3rd world labor. On Fox And Friends last night they reported that the U.S government lets in over 120,000 Muslim immigrants into the U.S every year. And people wonder why homegrown Islamic terrorism on U.S soil is becoming more common. Why do we need that many Muslims entering the U.S every year? What not enough Falafel restaurants in this country? John McCain talks about how he is concerned about radical Islam becoming a growing threat on U.S soil, but yet he never points the blame on our country’s disastrous immigration system that lets in so many immigrants from Muslim countries who hate America.”
On July 23, 2015, I posted on FB a comment I read (probably in the comments section of Steve Sailer’s blog):
“Trump has pushed the Overton Window so wide, its gaping hole resembles Andrew “RawMuscleGlutes” Sullivan’s prolapsing rectum.”
On July 30, 2015, I posted on FB a comment by a friend:
Trump can win the nomination for sure, unless he does a Perot and runs from his possible destiny. He has a shot at winning the election in November against HRC especially if he points out that a rise in Hispanic power = fall in Black prospects. Whites + Blacks can put Trump in the Oval Office. I don’t know of any other Republican I could vote for. Certainly not Bush. I’d much much rather have Bernie Saunders as president than Bush.
That same day, I posted:
“In Trump’s case, he appears to be cornering the market on white voters, the backbone of the current Republican Party, the poll shows. Republicans need as many white votes as possible to offset demographic shifts in the United States that have handed Democrats an electoral advantage in the last two presidential elections.”
That same day, I posted something I read:
“The term’s connotations are racist. By alluding to a genre of porn in which passive white husbands watch their wives have sex with black men, it casts its targets as impotent defenders of white people in America. Prominent “cuckservatives” include Jeb Bush, John McCain, and Marco Rubio, politicians who have, in the imagination of the term’s promulgators, adopted a false — liberal — consciousness to appeal to the shifting opinions of the American electorate. In this narrative, the anti-cuckservative hero is Donald Trump, who is unafraid to speak a racially inconvenient truth about the dire trajectory of white men.”
On July 31, 2015, I posted:
Manly men are for Donald Trump! Girly men are for Jeb Bush. As my rebbe Chaim Amalek says to the sodomites: “You do not understand the yearnings of the Heterosexual Christian American Man, be he White or Black. Thus, you and many others are in for a surprise or two as the election season unfolds.”
That same day, I posted a comment from Steve Sailer’s blog:
“Trump once told Esquire, “You know, it doesn’t really matter what [the media] write as long as you’ve got a young and beautiful piece of ass.” That’s the kind of winning attitude they like in a leader south of the border.”
A couple of minutes later, I posted from Sailer’s blog:
“Countries where the men still dominate the women don’t face the same existential issues of fertility and border control. DUH. Ladies loved Cecil the Lion!!! His masculinity and dominance elevated him to regal status in the feminine mind. Watch Trump (or somebody like Trump) win the woman vote in 2016.”
And this:
“If some confident and unapologetic person like Trump were to announce that kicking out illegals and stopping mass legal immigration is a litmus test of national loyalty, I think we’d be pleasantly surprised by the number of blacks responding to that nativist appeal and the number of viva-la-raza triumphalists who would find it prudent to shut the hell up. (And, of course, the number of whites voting to save their country.)”
On August 3, I did these retweets:
* David Frum: “Immigration is not the sole reason for the Trump surge, but it is the factor GOP leaders most dislike to acknowledge”
* Mickey Kaus: “Note to Team@realDonaldTrump: Study 1st @Schwarzenegger debate. Funny, firm putdowns. Forceful. Won the day for him.”
On August 4, I posted this quote from Sailer’s blog:
“Scott Walker is another example of a top tier Republican candidate who has all the charisma of a Midwestern vacuum cleaner salesman. Unless Trump stumbles and self-destructs over the next six months, this race increasingly looks like it is going to be a blowout.”
“American wife, mother and entrepreneur.” This is how Trump’s HB9 daughter Ivanka describes herself. As a commenter said, note the order. When a daughter happily describes herself first and foremost as an American wife and mother, you know her father is an alpha male. Trump for President. “Make America Alpha Again”
On August 7, I posted a comment from Sailer’s blog:
“It’s pathetic for the party leaders to simultaneously trash the leading, most popular candidate and then question him for his loyalty to them. Trump owes nothing to Reince Preibus and the others, and pledging today to support the eventual winner (who may be ¡Jeb! who comes out for amnesty after securing the nomination) is neither wise nor honest. Trump himself said he doesn’t know his plans–if say a Ted Cruz or Scott Walker secures the nomination and campaigns strongly on illegal immigration and trade (and acts diplomatically toward Trump), I’m sure Donald would bless the nomination and back the GOP candidate. Spinning Trump’s personality traits against him only works if you disregard that he’s also confident, assertive, and patriotic. He gets things done. He knows Mexico is getting the better of us on immigration, China on trade, Japan on imports, etc. His ego is useful in fighting for American jobs and sovereignty issues. It’s hilarious you’d think Trump would waste millions of his own dollars, countless hours, and intense media critique so that he’d be the fall guy for the estranged wife of one of his golfing buddies. Way to read normal human behavior, bro. Yeah that sounds like a typical endeavor for a brash, cocky businessman who even you admit is “self-promoting.””
I then wrote: “The New York Times is an essential read, and the best newspaper in America by a mile. Hilarious article on Trump.”
I then quoted from Sailer’s blog:
“Trump’s best line so far: “If you don’t have a real border, you don’t have a country.” He needs to say it over and over.”
On August 8, 2015, I posted choice comments from Sailer’s blog:
* “They remind me physically and verbally of Rosie O’Donnell. Wish Trump had been there to say, “Shut up you slobs—by the way. Lay off the Cheetos. You’re pretty damned young to be so hefty.” That would have done my heart good.”
* “Donald Trump would have told them to pound sand and laughed. His refusal to back down to Megan Kelly took more balls than 99% of men can muster. The rest of the GOP field would have wilted and then started mumbling about how much they were against breast cancer or some other groveling gesture.”
On August 10, I posted from Sailer:
“Our rulers are dead afraid of any groundswell of popular political sentiment getting focused into a particular candidate and given voice. This is one reason Trump and Ron Paul have been so viciously attacked. Displays of populist passion don’t present a paradox with political assassination; they explain it. It’s always 1933-1945.”
I put Trump’s name in a headline for the first time August 15, 2015, with a post “Trump Has Game” excerpting Chateau Heartiste.
I made my first mention of “Donald Trump” in a personal Facebook chat on August 16, 2015. On August 17, I pronounced on FB and Twitter: “This election is Trump’s to lose. The powers that be will do everything they can to destroy him.”
I’m watching Donald Trump live. He just said he comes from good genes. “Do you believe in genes? I believe in the gene thing.” Nature over nurture!”
On Saturday morning, August 22, 2015, I started telling people at shul that Trump could win and nobody believed me.
On August 23, I posted on FB: “When Donald Trump talks about the people who built this country, is he discussing the goyim or the coalition of the fringe (trannies, homos, blacks, Jews, etc)?”
On August 25, I posted:
* Oh, look, another Jew thinks it’s news that David Duke has an opinion about Trump. Is this a disconnect between Jewish journalism and Americans?
* “Luckily Trump isn’t a deep thinker paralyzed by complicated, or as the faux sophisticates say, complex issues. Mexicans are a lesser breed? Stop importing them! Simple. And more important not suicidal, a la every last position the sophisticates take.” (From Sailer’s blog)
* “Megan Kelly is Ailes/Murdoch PROXY. Wake the hell up. Fox tried to end Trump’s political career that night. There is no bigger opponent for Trump now. Exactly because Trump is an alpha with killer instinct is why he pursues his opponent relentlessly. Trump has the potential to do real damage to the Fox brand and Roger Ailes knows it.” (Sailer’s blog)
A search of my gmail account for “lukeisback” reveals I did not write the words “Donald Trump” in an email until Dec. 17.
Khunrum emails today:
The Donald is still making waves. First he rid us of Jeb Bush, the so called “intellectual” of the family. Actually I think dumb brother Dubya is smarter than Jeb. Then he gave a one two punch to that little weasel Rand Paul. Now he’s going after Hillary. It’s hilarious!
Robert: “It’s only funny until he wins. Then the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse are released. Are you right with God, brothers? The time is at hand.”
Posted inDonald Trump, Personal|Comments Off on When Did I Board The Trump Express?
"This guy knows all the gossip, the ins and outs, the lashon hara of the Orthodox world. He’s an [expert] in... all the inner workings of the Orthodox world." (Rabbi Aaron Rakeffet-Rothkoff)
