Leaving White Nationalism

From the Southern Poverty Law Center:
In recent months, two former racist activists, one of them well known, have quit the movement. Their stories are instructive.
Even as the white nationalist movement continues to grow, a steady trickle of disillusioned former racist activists departs. These men and women have a multitude of reasons for rejecting the racist philosophy they once embraced, not to mention the reasons they joined in the first place. The Intelligence Report has chronicled the tales of many of them in past issues. Below, we present two very different stories. The first is that of Derek Black, the 24-year-old son of Don Black, a former Alabama Klan leader who founded and still heads Stormfront, the largest racist Web forum in the world. The younger Black, after going away to college and seeing the wider world, wrote a lengthy E-mail to the editor of this magazine in July, detailing his thinking about white nationalism and its many problems. (Publication of the E-mail on the Southern Poverty Law Center’s blog that month prompted a flood of attacks on Derek Black from still-active white nationalists.) For reasons of space, the E-mail is slightly abridged here. The second is an interview with Corinna Burt, a 34-year-old mother of two, bodybuilder and former porn star who until recently was involved with the neo-Nazi National Socialist Movement and, later, the Northwest Front.


Derek Black

A ‘GRADUAL AWAKENING’

I’m writing this letter partly in response to the SPLC’s recent article discussing my [November 2012] message to fellow students and also out of a desire to articulate my thoughts. I have decided to write now after thinking about the implications extensively, and I am requesting that this letter be published and available to the public in full… .

A few months ago, the SPLC wrote an exposé about a letter of mine only intended for fellow students. I was not ready for it to go public. A large section of the community I grew up in believes strongly in white nationalism, and members of my family whom I respect greatly, particularly my father, have long been resolute advocates for that cause. From a young age I observed my dad sacrifice dearly for his commitment — a conviction stemming from nowhere else than ardent resolve in the rightness of the cause. I was not prepared to risk driving any wedge in those relationships and I did not believe that was necessary. The number of changes in my beliefs during the past few years, however, has amounted to a shift that I think needs to be addressed. When the SPLC exposed a letter meant only to discourage misconceptions about me among fellow students, I was not prepared then to remark more. I commented and labeled myself as someone who still believed in white nationalism. After a great deal of thought since then, I have resolved that it is in the best interests of everyone involved, directly or indirectly, to be honest about my slow but steady disaffiliation from white nationalism.

Over the past few years, I have been disentangling myself from white nationalism. While the radio show I founded ended in January of 2013, over the course of the prior year I only appeared rarely and typically only when emergency required that someone fill in for the other hosts. I haven’t posted on Stormfront in 2013, and I only posted once in all of 2012 — then to give a report on my dad’s media appearance. I am closing my Stormfront account. Also, in the last article written about me, the SPLC reported that I attended a “European American Leadership Seminar” in 2012, when in fact I did not. And while I did speak at last year’s Stormfront conference, I am not involved this year at all and will not be attending.

I acknowledge that things I have said as well as my actions have been harmful to people of color, people of Jewish descent, activists striving for opportunity and fairness for all, and others affected. It was not my intention then, and I will not contribute to any cause that perpetuates this harm in the future. Advocating for redress of the supposed oppression of whites in the West is by its nature damaging to all others because of the privileged position of white people in these societies. Promoting a victim complex for whites does not recognize the oppressed experiences of others not in the position of a white person in society, and that’s what my efforts have done. For those to whom the white nationalist perspective is alien, I think it’s worth summarizing here:

White nationalism supports the premise that multiculturalism is a failure, and that politicians trapped in a multicultural status quo are oppressing white people in “their own country.” They typically blame the West’s movement toward inclusion on a conspiracy of Jewish power to promote multiculturalism at the expense of whites. White nationalists cite black-on-white crime statistics and the increasing prevalence of “nonwhite” cultures and values in western society, as well as the growing number of legal protections and employment opportunities that a “minority” status now affords. On the other hand, white nationalists consider white people in the US to be ostensibly the victims of an ongoing genocide brought about by immigration and miscegenation, and feel that when they try to speak up about it, they are subjected to a vicious double standard. They observe that Black Nationalism and Zionism are recognized as tolerable, but whites with a similar declaration are vilified as racists. When they attempt to claim an accomplishment or cultural production for the white race that produced it, they are called racists. If they produced their own Malcolm X, the nation as a whole would regurgitate. Thus their own white leaders are victimizing white people — the system has turned its formidable weapons against a white identity. Therefore they think that whites must oppose resistance to racism in order to guarantee the future of white people as a people.

I now consider this belief system principally flawed. Most arguments that racial equity programs disadvantage whites who would otherwise be hired or accepted to academic programs mask underlying anxieties about the growth of non-white social status. It is impossible to argue rationally that in our society, with its overwhelming disparity between white power and that of everyone else, racial equity programs intended to affect the deep-rooted situation represent oppression of whites. More importantly, white nationalism’s staunch opposition to the gains in numbers and in influence of non-whites makes it a movement by nature committed to suppressing these people. The advancement of minorities in the US is not insignificant, but has not ended (let alone reversed) their circumstances. Particularly bizarre to me is the determination of Jewish social domination. Though there are plenty of powerful Jewish activist groups pursuing their chosen agendas, it is inaccurate and outrageous to talk about people of Jewish descent as “the enemy” of anyone, as it is essentializing a large group into a fairy tale antagonist. It has become clear to me that white nationalism is not a movement of positive identity or of asserting cultural values, but of constant antagonism at the betterment of other groups.

A white nationalist party can’t function without standing on these disparities between whites and other groups and essentially endorsing them. To say that white people have let the “minority agenda” go too far implies that the relatively insufficient gains they have made are oppressing us. There is no way to advocate for white nationalism but by arguing that minorities pose a threat to our supremacy. It is not enough to say it is opposition to assimilation when the proposed recourse is to expel, suppress, or marginalize these other groups. Advocating for white nationalism means that we are opposed to minority attempts to elevate themselves to a position equal to our own. It is an advocacy that I cannot support, having grown past my bubble, talked to the people I affected, read more widely, and realized the necessary impact my actions had on people I never wanted to harm.

I believe that a healthy sense of identity and belonging are necessary, and I think being proud of where you came from is important regardless of race or class. I do not believe advocacy against “oppression of whites” exists in any form but an entrenched desire to preserve white power at the expense of others. I am sorry for the damage done by my actions and my past endorsement of white nationalism.

I realize not all will instantly believe me, or may perceive this as a seemingly abrupt change when it has been instead a gradual awakening process. I understand that my words don’t suddenly heal all wounds caused by my actions or my encouragement of others. Time, however, will demonstrate my full lack of involvement. To white nationalists, I have remarked that most people face a huge hurdle before they embrace an unpopular opinion, referring to those unwilling to risk being called racist for what I had believed was a just cause. Now I look at it from a new vantage point: I should be the one who calls out what I disagree with. I can’t support a movement that tells me I can’t be a friend to whomever I wish or that other people’s races require me to think about them in a certain way or be suspicious at their advancements. One revelation for me was when I grasped I would be much more likely to help an individual through our legal system towards citizenship than to work towards his or her expulsion. Minorities must have the ability to rise to positions of power, and many supposed “race” issues are in fact issues of structural oppression, poor educational prospects, and limited opportunity. The differences I thought I observed didn’t go nearly as deeply as I imagined. I believe we can move beyond the sort of mind-boggling emphasis white nationalism puts on maintaining an oppressive, exclusive sense of identity — oppressive for others and stifling for our society.

Corinna Burt

‘THIS IS THE REAL ENEMY’

What were your parents and your upbringing like, Corinna?

My parents both are very liberal. My father is an electrician and my mother is a bookkeeper and a teacher’s aide. I grew up with my mother in the liberal university town of Eugene, Ore.

I considered myself pretty liberal, but I had little exposure to anyone of another race. It was an almost all-white school district. I really didn’t have exposure to other races until I moved to Portland for school when I was in my late 20s.

Was it a happy childhood?

I think I was always really bored, just restless, and also very sad and angry. I was bouncing back and forth between two parents. They split up when I was like 3 years old, and my dad moved up to Alaska. I would go back and forth between the two of them. Sometimes, it was a summer visit. A lot of times, my parents were just saying, “Okay, I don’t know what to do with you, you’re going back to your mom.” Or, “This isn’t working. You’re going to live with your dad for a while.”

Do you think their split affected you in a serious way?

I don’t know. I was just real angry and antagonistic and always in trouble for real stupid, petty things. I’m sure it must have, though I was only 3. I don’t ever remember living with both parents together. I guess I always had this feeling, you know, that I’m looking for the family I’m really going to stay with.

You married while you were still in Eugene, right?

We got married in 2000, when I was 22, and split up in 2004. We had two daughters.

When was it that you started to star in pornographic movies? Was that before college?

Kind of in between. I dragged college out for a long time. I think it was between 2006 and 2008.

What attracted you to that?

What first drew me into it was morbid curiosity. I wanted to see if I could possibly do something like that. Maybe I was just an exhibitionist. Then, later, it was just for financial reasons. I had no idea how expensive it would be to live in Portland.

When was that? You moved there for college, right?

Yes, around 2007. I was going to Mount Hood [Community College] and OSU [Oregon State University] concurrently. I went to OSU for psychology and Mount Hood for mortuary science. I had job at a funeral home.

When did you become attracted to the racist movement?

I didn’t have any personal incident. But I was in the funeral industry and I was seeing a lot of victims of violence, and it stood out for me that the perpetrators were so often black or Mexican. I saw a lot of black homicide victims, usually shot by other blacks. It seemed to me that this was a race of people who were out to destroy each other and they hurt white people along the way. I saw a lot of children who were killed by their mothers’ boyfriends or their stepfathers. I have seen just about everything that there is and every horrible action one person can do to another.

What was your interest in mortuary science to begin with?

I got into that because I had an interest in restoring accident victims or suicides and making them look viewable for their families.I had a younger brother who died in a drowning accident and he was not viewable. He was 20 years old and I was close to him. I think that if I had had that chance for viewing him, it would have brought me a lot of closure.

So how do you come into contact with organized racism?

I began poking around online and discovered [the racist Web forum] Stormfront. That’s what really drew me in. I started reading about anti-immigrant policies, immigrant crime, black crime, and just generally white pride. I started to think, “Well, nothing wrong with being proud of your race. Other races do it all the time, why can’t white people?”

I found a link on Stormfront to the NSM [National Socialist Movement, an explicitly neo-Nazi group]. I was always interested in Adolf Hitler and the Third Reich, so that interest, coupled with finding that link, led me to sign up. The NSM was really pushing the immigration issue, which is what drew me in. The Klan pushes a more religious angle, which didn’t appeal to me.

Eventually, I grew to hate Jews as well. Just reading about the Holocaust from their side and thinking, “Well, Jews, they’re liars. They made up the whole thing.”

How long did you stay with NSM, and what did you do next?

I think I officially resigned in 2011. I was really embarrassed about the behavior of the NSM at rallies and I didn’t want to be associated with them. I expected dignified marches, you know, against all the horrible things being done to white people. And they were really just shouting matches.

Instead, I got deeply involved with the Northwest Front [an online group run by longtime neo-Nazi Harold Covington]. I felt they were a better use of my time. They really appealed to me because there were no skinheads and drunk, stupid people. And I liked Harold. He was a good writer. And he seemed to be educated, although not formally.

At the time, I didn’t think that maybe white supremacy in general was wrong. I just thought that I had joined the wrong group.

How much of a real organization is the Northwest Front?

They have units in every state like the NSM. But I guess it depends on what you consider a member. Some people just send money or read the literature. Some actually go to meetings. I’d say the number of people who actually get together from time to time are maybe 200 or 300 nationwide.

They say, “We’re not really an organization. We don’t have membership cards or an application.” But there was a list made available only to Harold and myself, because I was working for him as an assistant. I moved up there, to his home in Port Orchard, Wash., and was there from 2011 to mid-2012. It amounted to a 40-hour-a-week job.

What did you think of Covington?

I was hooked immediately, although I now think he was pretty much the most horrible person ever. He seemed very much like this poor church mouse who wanted to do nothing but save white people in his remaining years. He was always going on about how he’s going to die any day now.

What did he have to say about the movement?

His idea is that he needs to get a thousand alpha Aryan males to move to his neighborhood and then basically just start shooting everyone who isn’t white.

Was he interested in you, sexually?

I don’t think so. But he did tell me that destiny said I was to be a central part of the revolution. He said that when he was a teenager, he had this vision and some angel told him I would be the one to kick-start the revolution. I guess he left then, because the angel was about to say that I was going to end up liking black guys.

Any insight into why Covington is always accusing fellow activists of being gay?

I don’t know. But I do know that he’s called nearly everyone in the movement a homosexual and he has accused various men of having sexual thoughts about him. That’s common in the movement, but Harold does it a lot more than anyone else. He goes on and on about how all the black guys secretly want to rape him. If he ends up in prison, that probably is the first thing that will happen. Although he probably secretly wants to end up in prison so he can be the biggest man in the trailer park, so he can whine about how he has this perfect plan, that the revolution was going so well, but then the Jews took him away for his thoughts.

What was Covington’s place like?

He was filthy. There were layers of grime all over his apartment, piles of trash in the corners. He would be eating a bowl of oatmeal and it would be spilling out all over his shirt. He would walk around like that all day.

At one point you moved in with April Gaede, the well-known neo-Nazi activist who lives in Kalispell, Mont.?

I met April and we became friends immediately. She invited me that day to move in with her. She had a kind of Aryan dating service and set me up with a skinhead guy. We went out for a couple of months.

She was the one who had major problems with my porno past. She said I obviously had no idea what white nationalism was all about.

At one point, I remember getting into an argument with her. She wanted to have some white power rally in town, and I just didn’t want to have my name out there any more. She started going off, saying, “I’d be willing to give up anything to get our message out. I would give up my own children if I had to. I don’t care what happens.” Her younger daughter was standing right there listening to this.

Eventually, you left Covington and the movement. Why?

I started realizing that Harold wasn’t the great white answer to anything. His whole group is just a scam. It’s just Harold basically begging for money from his supporters — he gets in about $40,000 in donations a year. And he just lives off the money. He doesn’t spend it on the revolution like he claims.

I guess I just got disillusioned with white nationalism in general. I realized, okay, no, people of other races have never done anything to me or my children in the way white nationalists have. This is the real enemy.

I realized much too late that this entire movement is a huge waste of life, and people who dedicate their lives to such a cause end up with nothing to show for it but their ruined families, destroyed careers and often a loss of personal freedom. I’m glad I got out when I did and I know there are others who want out. Look at the stories of people who have left and who have renounced their beliefs; consider that maybe they had compelling reasons for doing so, when to do so often means putting yourself at great personal risk. I decided that risk was worth it if it meant escape from a life of absolute blind hatred with no end in sight. s

Interview conducted by Mark Potok and Laurie Wood.

Brett Stevens writes:

Derek Black makes some interesting points in the midst of groveling and logical fallacies:

Promoting a victim complex for whites does not recognize the oppressed experiences of others not in the position of a white person in society

He may have taken another bad direction into liberalism, but he has a good point about victim complexes. We do not need a victim complex; we need a can-do “let’s fix this” culture. The two are opposites.

White nationalism supports the premise that multiculturalism is a failure, and that politicians trapped in a multicultural status quo are oppressing white people in “their own country.”

Here he is correct, but he misses the underlying point: white people voted for this. Voting transforms individuals into a scared, pretentious herd that always votes for easy lies instead of honest solutions. The solution is to end democracy.

On the other hand, white nationalists consider white people in the US to be ostensibly the victims of an ongoing genocide brought about by immigration and miscegenation, and feel that when they try to speak up about it, they are subjected to a vicious double standard.

No one sensible could argue that this is not true. But: who is enforcing the double standard? White governments, at the behest of white voters.

Most arguments that racial equity programs disadvantage whites who would otherwise be hired or accepted to academic programs mask underlying anxieties about the growth of non-white social status.

Here he is off-base. The problem is that our society is being destroyed, and the only healthy societies are homogeneous ones not heterogeneous ones. This is not about our personal inconvenience, except in that having a society collapse into Brazil 2.0 is highly inconvenient and fatal.

More importantly, white nationalism’s staunch opposition to the gains in numbers and in influence of non-whites makes it a movement by nature committed to suppressing these people.

I think he misses the point here, too. The goal is to have zero non-whites and in fact, zero non-Western Europeans. Western Europeans are the only group on earth that is truly a persecuted minority because of our small numbers and relative wealth. Everyone loves to beat up on the successful nerdy kid, and that’s us.

Though there are plenty of powerful Jewish activist groups pursuing their chosen agendas, it is inaccurate and outrageous to talk about people of Jewish descent as “the enemy” of anyone, as it is essentializing a large group into a fairy tale antagonist.

I agree with him here. Jews are another group under attack, as we can see daily when 90% of the world’s liberals are keen to blame Palestinian terrorism on Israeli “oppression” despite nothing of the sort occurring.

The small, smart and successful groups (3S) like Western Europeans, Jews and North Chinese are always under assault by the rest because we have achieved what others cannot and they resent us for that.

There is no way to advocate for white nationalism but by arguing that minorities pose a threat to our supremacy.

Spot the sleight of hand: is it “supremacy” to ask that we have our own countries? Of course not. He has shiftily conflated world domination with wanting, say, Germany for Germans or Israel for Jews.

Advocating for white nationalism means that we are opposed to minority attempts to elevate themselves to a position equal to our own.

Again he is wrong. We want them to do it in their own countries and to leave us alone. We have our own destiny to plan and work toward.

I believe that a healthy sense of identity and belonging are necessary, and I think being proud of where you came from is important regardless of race or class.

He’s right here. Every group should be nationalist and work in its own self-interest. That is Darwinian, moral and common sense.

I do not believe advocacy against “oppression of whites” exists in any form but an entrenched desire to preserve white power at the expense of others.

Here he is off-base again. We want our own countries and our own destiny, the same as anyone else. Why is this denied? It is white genocide by the resentful herd that gnashes its teeth at the fact that it has not made a successful life for itself as we did for ourselves, before liberalism at least.

The point that White Nationalists miss is that we are not fighting for the current system minus minorities. We are fighting to restore our civilization to a point of sanity, and while race is part of that, it is not the whole. Our society is existentially miserable as it is now and would still be without the presence of minorities. Nationalism is a means to an end, which is allowing ourselves to be ruled by our culture instead of an ideological government and its “proposition nation” united by politics, television, economics and a team identity of a jingoistic variety.

Conservatives “conserves” the behaviors of humanity that produce the best results. Those are four:

  1. Aristocracy: A hierarchy of our best people ruling as kings, instead of having a “System” of rules and laws to take the place of clear thinking. This includes a caste system so that people make decisions only at the level for which they are competent.
  2. Nationalism: Germany for Germans, Israel for Jews. This allows the group to have a shared culture which regulates behavior through reward and shame, instead of punishment and law enforcement.
  3. Free markets: Free markets require Nationalism and Aristocracy, but are the only way to do business that rewards performance instead of conformity.
  4. Transcendence: We need goals beyond the immediate material convenience of our society. We need purpose and to aspire to greatness, not merely react to “issues.”

There are no substitutes. Either you want the above, or you are happy with the status quo… if it would only favor you a bit more. That approach will land us back in the current position in no time because it is built on the same illusions.

Our society is dying. We are near the drop-off point. Our solution is to stop using methods that do not work, and to start using methods that do. These time-honored methods work. Democracy, diversity, equality, pluralism, tolerance and altruism do not. It is that simple.

Posted in America | Comments Off on Leaving White Nationalism

In Brazil, They Are Protesting Themselves

Brett Stevens writes: In Brazil right now the third world cycle is playing out: We The People, having demanded government reform, have gotten a more liberal government, but now some years later, they are protesting it.

Liberals do not understand the difference between cause and effect. They are perfect consumers in this respect: they believe that whatever the label promises is what the product will actually do. Thus they come back time and time again with complaints, but without exiting the cycle.

In reality, only that the power which is supposed to make this happen becomes stronger; the task is the justification, just like advertising is designed to give people a reason to buy without making actual hard promises. Like politics, advertising conflates cause and effect.

As a result, this is the form the cycle takes:

Voters demand a certain effect.
Politician promises to make law to demand effect.
Law raises costs, clogs land with red tape, makes society less functional.
Voters notice new problems of old demands.
Repeat (ad infinitum).

What we are seeing in Brazil is that the voters are protesting themselves. They are protesting government so that the voters do not need to face the fact that the failure of government is the result of the demands of voters, because to see that would be to realize that protest, voting and revolution are all useless.

Posted in Brazil | Comments Off on In Brazil, They Are Protesting Themselves

Nationalism Is Rising Because It Works

Brett Stevens writes: Over at Counter Currents — which has banned me for not discussing the infamous “JQ” ideologically correctly — Guillaume Durocher makes several powerful points in favor of universal nationalism, or every state on earth being nationalistic:

It matters not whether the ethnic differences are based on language (Belgium, Canada), religion (Iraq, Syria), or race (the United States, Mexico, Brazil, South Africa . . .). In each case, the lack of a common identity leads to a perpetual tribalization of politics. These problems are sometimes peaceful, and often they lead to otherwise unnecessary ethnic civil wars, but in each case there are intractable problems. People on average are simply not as willing to submit to authority, pay taxes, or give their life in war for another group, as they would for their own group. In a word: There is no solidarity.

To my mind, it makes sense to turn this around from a negative point to a positive one: with nationalism, you have solidarity without needing ideology and government. People, from a place within themselves, want to do right and they use their national culture as a means of assessing what is right and thus, what will be rewarded by others.

Durocher lists a number of other good points, but this seems to be the core of it: instead of forcing people to get along, choose people who are headed in the same direction and have the same interests and values, and they will desire to get along. Their striving will make it happen without requiring a neurotic layer of government, propaganda and “education” to humiliate and compel them to obey.

It is this positive desire to cooperate with others toward a goal — corresponding to what Evola might have called the inner states — that makes nationalism superior. It is simply more efficient. You do not require a strong-arm government, bureaucrats and media; instead, people naturally get along because they are the same sub-group of a sub-species.

Posted in Nationalism | Comments Off on Nationalism Is Rising Because It Works

Altruism As Promiscuity

Brett Stevens writes: Altruism now strikes me as a type of promiscuous behavior. The person advertises their value, and then others take them up on the offer, and then the person validates their sense of self-worth through the interest of others. Like a slut at a bar, they only feel good when some guy has bought them drinks and taken them home.

These people we call altruists are essentially attention whores. For them, life has no beauties except the attention of others. When they are dancing naked on a table in a bar, a spectacle mocked by any sane person, they are compensating for their lack of success with the fact that they are the center of attention. This is what the altruist gets in exchange for their acts of charity.

The same girl who likes to be in the middle of the room while a dozen men line up to have sex with her will instead go on a mission to Africa. She is a degree smarter than the raw whore, and knows that this way, she can not only get her attention fix, but be lauded by democratic, egalitarian society as a hero. The prostitute becomes a savior.

In the same way, our elites are whores. They do whatever is required to gain the attention of the herd. If the herd is foaming at the mouth about sexism that week, that is the topic. They say what is required to get the voters to sign off on more power for the elites. And then they do it again, and the voters fall for it.

Our society has, like a patient with uremic poisoning, become a victim of its inability to recognize toxins. Whores and gigolos are toxins, but when they wear suits and go on missionary trips to Haiti we are blinded to their inner whore. When we become healthy again, the first task will be recognizing the toxicity of promiscuous altruism — and removing it like the parasite it is.

Posted in Ethics | Comments Off on Altruism As Promiscuity

Steve Sailer: Time to Pivot from Individualistic Conservatism to Solidaristic Conservatism for Awhile

Steve Sailer writes: The Tea Party struck me as an implicit solidaristic conservative movement organized around an individualist ideology of libertarianism, but less for reasons of ideology than of patriotic history: America was founded by liberty lovers, so this history was seen (murkily, I admit) as offering a potentially unifying national theme in an increasingly diverse and fractious country. Of course, these citizenist stirrings were contemptuously rejected by the left as the racist twitchings of dying white men etc…

Individualistic Reagan-Kemp conservatism had a good run in its day, but then it hit diminishing marginal returns. So, it’s time for solidaristic conservatism for awhile. Do the low-hanging fruit that have been neglected, like build a border fence, implement E-verify, fire the SJWs from Executive branch sinecures, eliminate the most plutocratic tax loopholes like carried interest for hedge fund guys, encourage the most desirable global manufacturers to set up factories in America (as Reagan reluctantly did with Japanese car companies), etc.

Then when solidaristic conservatism starts to run out of ideas and gas, individualistic conservatism can have another shot, after they’ve been away in the wilderness for awhile and have had time and incentive to come up with some better ideas. First, though, let the solidaristic conservatives have a time to fix the biggest weaknesses in the individualistic model, such as not defending the nation’s borders in an age of ever increasing smartphone-enabled Third World migrations.

* The diminishing marginal returns idea is especially important when you’re dealing with ideas like decreasing tax rates and deregulating industry. How much it makes sense to pursue those policies depends on how high taxes are and how heavily regulated industry is. A world where the CAB is setting airline fares is a lot more ripe for deregulation than one where the top two companies in some space can routinely merge without antitrust worries (like Sirius and XM, say). Something similar works with tough on crime rhetoric–when the crack wars were filling up prisons and graveyards, getting tougher on crime might have been a good direction to take policy, whereas now, with historically low crime rates and a massive prison population, it’s probably a pretty bad direction to take policy.

* Question: What would be an ideal pivot away from individualistic conservatism toward a more solidaristic conservativism on say, foreign policy issues?

In other words, the neo-con mode of “Invade the world” just cause we need to bring democratic institutions to faraway places that never had them in the first place, should that be chucked out the window?

Would a more solidaristic conservatism be along the lines of: For now, let’s bring most of the troops home. Perhaps place many of them on the southern border while the wall/fence is being built to help beef up border security. Also, we’re pulling of Afghanistan and Iraq, period. AND we’re not gonna start any new wars/endeavors in faraway places. If faraway places really want to build a democracy in their own lands, that’s great. We’ll supply the moral encouragement. Let us know when they’ve succeeded. But meanwhile, we’re gonna take care of our own right in the good ol’ USA.

I mean, the logical opposite of the neocon “invade the world, invite the world” results in “the world’s not invited ’cause they first have to wait their turn in line legally, and we’ve called off invasions of the world ’cause we’re more focused on the homeland.”

Regarding foreign policy from a more solidaristic conservatism, that would seem to be the logical conclusion. The complete opposite of invade and invite.

Aside from the possibility of a Trump administration, its difficult to see any major candidate in either party implementing even ten percent toward that kind of solidaristic foreign policy, and with Trump, at best one could hope for would be about ten percent of it being implemented.

* The fact of the matter is no people on earth believes in conservative or libertarian economics. Every democracy in the world has universal health care, for example. There is support for cutting government in the abstract, but not for any actually programs.

So why do conservatives win elections? By being the slightly less anti-white, anti-male, anti-Christian party.

Yet the establishment wants to take away the only reason anyone actually votes Republican.

There is no more clueless people on the planet than the Republican establishment. Those on the left have a version of the red pill they’ve taken. They’re blind to the stupidity of their own demographics, but know that conservatives only vote based on identity. Yet GOP establishment types are living in a fantasy world where you win in democracy by having the policy proposals that are best for growth.

* Neoconservatives are constantly telling us what the opposite of their foreign policy is, when it’s not one worldism: isolationism. Because they call almost anything that falls short of starting wars every other year and doesn’t involve U.S. troops wearing blue helmets, that doesn’t tell you much. But, yes, calling troops home to defend our actual borders instead of the borders of our empire, is to them isolationism. This has nothing to do with individualism versus solidarity, though. You can easily be an individualist and an “isolationist.”

* Trump’s statements are all over the place.

One curious statement he made that in the past would have been a litmus test for all candidates is is stance on F-35. He brought it up once, and nobody asked him about it, and none of the other candidates brought it up.

Trump wants to ‘fire’ F-35.

So Trump is the least militaristic candidate running. Hillary is the most militaristic, just like Goldwater. But these are different times.

* Partisan politics gives some evidence, though not alot, to a shift more to the left.

With presidential politics, the Republicans won 5 out of 6 presidential elections between 1968 and 1988, inclusive. In only one of these elections, 1976, a real outlier, did the Democratic candidate carry more than a dozen states, and only in 1976 and 1988 did the Democratic candidate get over 43% of the popular vote.

In the next six presidential elections, between 1992 and 2012, the Democratic candidate got at least a popular vote plurality five out of six times. This included a majority twice, as opposed to once (barely) in the earlier six elections, and winning at least 47% of the popular vote in all these elections except for 1992.

The presidential votes are important because that is what people pay attention to and where they vote their ideology. Most of the electorate doesn’t bother to vote in the down-ballot races. And when they do, ideology places less of a role, almost none in local races. This decreases the importance of the huge wins the Republicans have been racking up in Congressional, state, and local elections since 1994, especially since the Congressional majorities seem to have been due to wiping out what used to be a a considerable caucus of conservative Dems. I suspect that there has been substantial deterioration in the Democratic Party organization that is being masked by the general public starting to prefer them more on the presidential level.

In terms of policy, on economic policy there has been a clear shift to the right, if you define “right” and “left” the way that it has been traditionally defined, more vs less inequality. Median income in real terms has fallen, and the share of wealth going to the top has increased, and this is plainly due directly to policy changes such as the “free trade” agreements. The police have more power, more people are in jail, and there is more surveillance. In foreign policy, the US has taken to invading countries seemingly at random and changing their governments. All these used to be regarded as right wing ideas.

On red state blogs, such as this, I have seen what I wrote about in the above paragraph explained away either through outright denial that these trends are happening, claiming that the traditional definitions of left and right don’t exist and these things are happening and part of a left-wing agenda, or pointing to the fact that the culture doesn’t push the 1950s style nuclear family with clear separation of gender roles much, which is true, but then greatly overemphasizing the importance of this vs the other things going on. The 1950s was something of an outlier, the nuclear family and suburban lifestyle pushed in that time were much less prevalent earlier. Also I question diversity training at the workplace, basically private employers getting their workers together and lecturing them on how they should think about non-workplace issues, is really a left-wing project.

So yes, policy has been shifting to the right, to the point of running into diminishing marginal returns, and the general public is not as supportive of this as in the past. There has also been a deterioration, or lack of precision, or outright inversion in the use of political terms that makes it difficult to describe what is going on. Also more difficult for tradition-minded people who want more equality of income and put alot of value on civil liberties to find a team to root for.

* To your wider point regarding the tension between conservatism and solidarity, this is largely due to the fact that the Republican Party now includes major segments of the old Democratic coalition that favored solidaristic ideas and have migrated over to the GOP since the 60s. “Solidarity” is basically old left, labor liberalism. The GOP was traditionally the party of northeastern business elites and Midwestern and Western independent farmers and small town businessmen. The northern working class and the South switched tot he GOP, which now includes these divergent tendencies. This can be seen in the geographic divide between Cruz and Trump’s electoral successes, and Trump is even extending these trends by bringing in many former Dems and Independents into the GOP.

If I had to guess, I suppose the GOP will move in a more solidaristic direction, and Trump’s success may just be the beginning. The northern WASPs that make up the traditional GOP don’t have the demographic and cultural influence, even within the white population, let alone the wider population.

Posted in America | Comments Off on Steve Sailer: Time to Pivot from Individualistic Conservatism to Solidaristic Conservatism for Awhile

Choose Trump, Choose Life

Some of my Jewish friends tell me that most of the Jewish elites in the media, Wall Street, academia, politics, and law are strongly opposed to Trump. So how has he defeated them? He’s done it by allowing them to expose themselves as hostile to the core of this country. He’s allowed them to expose those elites who push multi-culturalism, homo marriage, trannies, every more civil rights for blacks, latinos and other oppressed minorities, those elites who are always pushing for more rights and privileges for minorities at the expense of the majority.

If we don’t choose Trump now, we’ll choose Hitler later. Trump is offering Jews a great deal — there will be no pogroms against Jews in America under his watch, and he will support Israel but America will fight no wars for Israel, and will not destabilize any more governments for Israel.

Most Jewish elites won’t take this deal. They’d rather die trying to destroy Trump. There is a wish for annihilation, a wish to be thrown into a pit of death in parts of the psyche of some Jews. How else to explain their destructive behavior? All of the major Jewish organizations want to bring more Muslims into the West, and these Muslims tend to hate Jews more than whites do.

Most of America’s elites (about half of them are Jewish) have been strongly opposed to Trump and now it looks like he will defeat them. He has exposed them as enemies of the majority American nation. Trump asks first — what’s good for America? That’s anathema to the globalist elites.

Donald Trump has revealed that when it comes to the globalist agenda, there’s little difference between a David Brooks and a Paul Krugman, between the New York Times editorial page and Commentary magazine. There’s just one party ruling America and that party is ruled by elites promoting globalism rather than American nationalism.

The West eventually will either be conquered by Islam, deport Islam or slaughter Islam. I think it is better to stop Muslims coming into the West than to kill them when they become unruly. When Muslim terror exacts a large enough toll, patriots will rise up and burn mosques and slaughter Muslims en masse. It’s better that the West protect itself against Islam. It is better to deport people than to kill them. It is better that we stop bombing Muslims and stop admitting them into our lands and stop interfering in their governments.

From my perspective, Muslims aren’t better or worse than Christians or Jews. There is no master race. There is no people marked out by the will of Heaven to rule the world. It’s just that different groups are better adapted for different countries. Jews and Christians are not a good fit for Saudia Arabia. Most Muslims are not a good fit for first-world countries. Japan does not need more non-Japanese living there. Every people has a right to pursue its self interest, to develop a portion of the globe just for them where they have sovereignty and can develop free of unwanted outside influence. Every people deserves their own Israel — WASPs, Croats, Nigerians, Japanese, Chinese, Australians, etc. As someone said on Steve Sailer’s site: “Different groups of people have very different ideas about the basis of social order. That’s what different countries are for.”

What effect will it have on Trump to be constantly called Hitler? I know that when I am constantly told I am something, I start thinking, well, maybe I am? If I am constantly told I am cruel, I start thinking, well, maybe that’s who I am. When I am constantly told I am a bad guy, I start thinking, maybe I am a bad guy, let me be really bad to these people who tell me I am bad.

FFB: “I’m glad you are able to spew out so many words of wisdom before Shabbat. I was afraid my Shabbat was going to be so empty and non-spiritual.”

Posted in Adolf Hitler, America, Jews | Comments Off on Choose Trump, Choose Life

Gotnews.com On Ben Shapiro

Charles Johnson writes: #GrabGate: It’s about ethics in conservative journalism.

Columnist Ben Shapiro once praised Donald Trump but now with anti-Trump, pro-Cruz money for his venture on the line he’s allowing his judgment and his ethics to be corrupted.

That’s a shame but Shapiro has crossed a legal line that may call into question his law license and undermines his credibility by helping a known fabulist falsely accuse a rival campaign manager.

Shapiro wasn’t always as anti-Trump as he is today.

Shapiro praised the “Magic of Donald Trump” in 2011 writing the following approvingly (and rather presciently) of Trump the politician:

If Republicans were to construct an ideal candidate, he would have to be rich beyond belief… would have significant name recognition with the general public…[and] would have stage presence, an intimidation factor, and a willingness to play dirty.

The moment he declares in earnest and gets on the campaign stump, his numbers will rise dramatically.

Is Donald Trump the best Republican candidate for president out there? It would be tough to argue otherwise. He’s got all the makings of a breakout star; he’s got bravado and the cash to back it up. If he really runs, he won’t have any trouble finding supporters.

Shapiro has subsequently granted that while Trump isn’t a conservative in Shapiro’s eyes, he has mass appeal.

Here’s Shapiro praising Trump as recently as July of last year.

“The real reason why people support Donald Trump, the real reason is because he is capturing the moral narrative in the country right now…” Shapiro said at an Ann Coulter event in July 2015.

“What Republicans need to do is recognize is that what Trump does and what he is so incredibly effective at in his own kind of brusque and rough way is Donald Trump says there is a villain to this story,” Shapiro said.

Posted in Ben Shapiro | Comments Off on Gotnews.com On Ben Shapiro

Meet the Israelis praying for a Trump win

Los Angeles Times: Trump was sent to us by God,” said Michael Yigal Mimon, a former intelligence officer in the Israeli army who proudly counts himself among a growing number of Donald Trump supporters in Israel.

Like the United States, Mimon said, Israel longs for a return to a “purist” conservative politics – one characterized by individualism, strong national defense policies, and the conviction that Israel is a key buffer against a “Muslim takeover” in the West.

“Obama decided to destroy America’s credibility in order to help his Muslim friends, but now we are witnessing a rebellion of the masses, people who feel they are being dominated or shut up by the radical left elite,” said Mimon. And though Trump has not revealed his strategy for the Middle East, he added, he has expressed a “healthy fear of Islam.”

61% of Israelis see Trump as “moderately” or “very” friendly to Israel, according to an Israel Democracy Institute study released this month. 34% said that a Republican candidate would be pro-Israel, as opposed to 28% who said the same about a Democratic candidate.

“People in Israel, given the choice of the wild card Trump or the known quantity of Hillary Clinton, would choose Trump,” said Abe Katsman, an American immigrant to Israel who works with Republicans Abroad Israel. While Bill Clinton had a favorable reputation in Israel, he said, Hillary is seen as responsible for Obama’s unpopular policies.

Israelis have a more negative view of Obama than most people around the world, according to a WIN/Gallup poll conducted last year. Of the 65 countries surveyed, only four had a dimmer view of Obama than Israel. Even Iranians held Obama in slightly higher regard, giving him a net favorability score of -21%, compared to Israel’s -22%.

Israelis who support Trump claim that Obama has turned his back on the war on terror, leaving a power vacuum that has bred an emboldened Iran, a tumultuous Syria and Iraq, and a wave of radicalism throughout Israel’s Arab neighbors. And they decry what they see as America’s lack of support for Israel during the “knife intifada” – the wave of attacks on Israeli civilians and soldiers over the past six months, largely carried out by young Palestinians.

Trump’s campaign coincides with a period of growing political polarization among Jewish Israelis, as the far-right grows in popularity due to the ongoing attacks. His brash colloquial style and “chutzpah” resonate with an Israeli public, said Nimrod Zuta, a 24-year-old security guard and activist with the youth department of Netanyahu’s Likud party who manages a Facebook page for Israeli Trump supporters.

But while Trump has said he would “bomb the hell” out of the Islamic State, he has said little about his foreign policy plans for Israel — only that he would be “neutral” in Israeli-Palestinian negotiations.

Zuta is not worried. “I believe that [Trump] will take a ‘live and let live’ policy in regard to our expansion in Judea and Samaria,” said Zuta, referring to the biblical name for the disputed territory where increasing Jewish presence has been condemned by Obama and the international community — but which 42% of Jewish Israelis believe is crucial to Israel’s security, according to a Pew Research Center poll.

Trump’s Israeli critics fear him for the same reasons his followers love him: he is impulsive and liable to turn the political landscape on its head. Many find his rhetoric unnerving, regardless of the target group. “When we hear him talk about the Syrian refugee crisis, who to the Jews of Israel represent a mirror image to our own grandparents fleeing war, we can’t accept it,” said Tal Schneider, a political commentator.

Some in the Israeli right-wing establishment, too, are unnerved by Trump’s penchant for provocation and “borderline racism,” Likud party member Amir Witeman said. “We do distinguish between his seeing foreigners, like Chinese or Mexicans, as the enemy — which makes us very uncomfortable — and [Trump’s] stance against immigrants from the Middle East, who are potential extremists who can, like in Cologne on New Year’s, bring violence into the countries,” he said, referring to the sexual assaults reported outside Cologne, Germany’s central train station on New Year’s eve. Police initially said the perpetrators were of North African descent, though German newspaper Welt am Sonntag later reported that police had determined many of them were Syrian refugees.

Israel’s most widely-read newspaper, Israel Hayom, backed by American GOP mega-donor Sheldon Adelson, is already throwing its weight behind Trump. The conservative tabloid ran multiple front page stories this week touting Trump’s victories and presenting him as a friend of Israel.

“My win is great news for Israel,” Trump told Boaz Bismuth, the paper’s foreign editor who is currently covering Trump in Florda. “Your friend is leading the primaries. I’ve always been your friend, even in the most difficult moments, and that’s not about to change.”

It doesn’t hurt that Trump’s daughter Ivanka converted to Orthodox Judaism before marrying real estate mogul Jared Kushner. “Trump is better than a Jew because he doesn’t have any of the complexes of Jewish guilt,” said Andrew Hamilton, an Australian immigrant to Israel and Jewish convert. “Ironically enough, a White Anglo Saxon Protestant with Jewish grandchildren is doing the most to protect the future of the Jewish people.”

Posted in Donald Trump, Israel | Comments Off on Meet the Israelis praying for a Trump win

How the ADL is working to destroy America

Rabbi Nachum Shifren writes in 2009:

It is difficult to write about Jewish traitors, but I have the obligation to do so. My life as an American and a Jew is rooted in one miracle: individual liberty and freedom of speech and conscience. We are living in dangerous times, times when men of good will are afraid to speak out. There are some things you cannot say in America today.

I will say them anyway.

For years, I have noticed something curious about religion in America, Israel, and elsewhere. When I go into an establishment to pray, I notice how thick the carpet is. The gold and silver on doors and paneling’s. The “honorees” abounding with their plaques and pictures adorning walls and halls. I have prayed in many different shuls (synagogues) throughout the world, and I admit a proclivity toward those humbler, more “hamish” (homey) environs, with the simple wood benches and plain floors.

For me, it is in a place surrounded by holy books, next to the Torah, with those dust-coated windows, that I find solace with the Creator of Heaven and Earth. No games here, no power trips — and you are only as good as your cleaving and yearning to be a part of His world. I reckon there’s lots of folks out there who feel the same, regardless of their beliefs.

Our history as a people has been divided, roughly, into two camps.

There is one camp that stood at Mt. Sinai, witnessed great miracles, received an awesome legacy, and despite the most horrific of human travails — pogroms, inquisitions, crusades, and more — decided to hand down that legacy from generation to generation.

It is because of that meritorious Jewish tradition that I am here today and am able to write these words.

There is a second camp — a more sinister group, that has done more damage to the Jews and caused more murder and destruction than all of Israel’s enemies combined. To this troika belong Jews and non-Jews, and our Jewish heritage has been irrevocably altered by this movement.

This second camp is about control of human beings. It holds a vision of a One World Order, together with Marx, Trotsky, and Lenin — an evil that, to date, has claimed nearly two hundred million souls.

With these international bandits and mind-control wizards stands the ADL (Anti-Defamation League). Now, if anyone else would say this, that person would be labeled an anti-Semite. But as anyone that knows me will tell you, I am a Jew who strives always to do good, give to charity, and am diligent in study and prayer. Of my many shortcomings, anti-Semitism is not one of them.

There are things that for a Jew, there is no excuse. One aspect is the unrelenting war waged by radical Islam against the Jewish people (they say they’re not anti-Semitic, just anti-Zionist).

But far worse are those who aid and abet this satanic force. For the leftist control-freaks of the ADL, there cannot be a Land of Israel! That would mean they’d be out of a job! They thirst on dissention and division — anything that will drive up their stock. Their support from the outset of a two-state solution means the destruction of the Jewish homeland.

Period.

No amount of agreements with terror and those who support it, will buy peace. The ADL, in a very real sense, is anathema to the survival of the Jewish people. Moreover, they never cared about the survival of the Jewish People!

The ADL’s agenda is simple: anything that will increase their power and control is good. Anti-Semites could never have destroyed the Jewish people. Only Jews can destroy the Jewish People.

The entire world, including Christians of all faiths, knows and understands that there is only one people in the world that was given the Land of Israel as an eternal inheritance: the Jews. The only people in the world who rebel against this eternal truth is the ADL and their communist comrades and enablers. Why?

In order for there to be a ONE WORLD ORDER, man’s spirit and soul must be brought low, be subjugated to the level of the beasts. This was the communist credo, to claim that we are no better than animals that must be controlled. G-d must be destroyed, faith debauched, and religion — ALL RELIGION — extinguished.

In this camp we find the ADL. Let’s be clear: The ADL has nothing to do with Judaism, Jews, or Jewish Survival. It is a collection of communists, anarchists, Jewish 60’s drop-outs, bitter about their nothing status and eager to spread their venom about a socialist paradise at which they believe only they can succeed. (The earlier Bolsheviks and Trotskyite’s, they assure us, just didn’t get it right.!)

It’s more than interesting how Obama has surrounded himself with these same radical leftist rejects from the 60’s. Interesting also, is how the ADL and the present administration are working hand in glove to make us safer with insane, counter-productive “Hate Crime” legislation.

Now, the ADL is on the warpath again, this time advocating for a federal data bank to be housed (with them?) in Washington, where each American can be monitored and pursued, for ever having said anything “hateful.”

And what is the definition of “hateful,” you ask? Simple, whatever the ADL dictates. And how, you’ll ask can that possibly happen here in the land of the Free, the home of the Brave? Again, simple: just play the anti-Semitic race card, and you will have people tripping all over themselves to acquiesce to your every whim. The facts are:

not one Christian today in America dare read the Bible, with it’s exhortation against bestiality and homosexuality without looking over their collective shoulders to see if the ADL is monitoring.

So why would the ADL, an organization supposedly founded for the purpose of helping Jews in peril, be spending their capital railing and ranting about Christians and what they do in the privacy of their churches. Interesting, how the ADL could care less about groups like ACORN, ISLAMIC JIAHAD, HAMMAS, CAIR — could it be because they’re people of “color?” Or maybe it’s because they are necessary in their scheme of ONE WORLD ORDER, neutralizing the fabric of America, getting it ripe for a takeover in which the ADL can take part.

Why is the ADL, supposedly the “sentinel” of the Jewish people so disposed to the rights and whims of radical gay and lesbian groups? Is this the pervue of the ADL? The answer lies in one simple concept: power and control. What the Soviets could not do in Russia, the ADL will attempt to do to America.

Witness the ADL at work:

1- advocating federal statutes and punishment for just “saying” something negative about Gays, essentially making every Christian a law-breaker in America today.
2- storing thousands of files on suspected “haters,” including names, addresses, and phone numbers to be shared with both local and federal police whenever these “haters” get out of hand by saying what they believe.
3- advocating massive censorship where media and films must pass a litmus test before being called “kosher”
4- proposing legislation for simply expressing “seed ideas” (Biblical in origin), concepts or utterances that “stimulate” or “cause friction” against targeted groups.
5- lobbying Canada to pass hate crime legislation: $5,000 misdemeanor, serving up to 2 years in prison.
6- working 24/7 for their new “messianic” legislation: HR 262, the “Hate Crimes Bill,” where the ADL will be positioned to establish a massive, pervasive and fascist bureaucracy that will monitor every single American and impose in this country Nazi Germany-style control — the ultimate vision of the leftist ADL.

The far-reaching consequences are: no church director will ever be able to utter the word of G-d! Is this not the communist “utopia” coming to fruition? Massive mind control about bias is even now, being established in education — inculcating our youth from kindergarten through college about politically correct speech. Churches that do not hire homosexuals will be closed down. Preachers will be jailed. Here in California, our insane legislature just passed such a bill, a bill that will fire faculty or expel students that make a slip of the tongue.

Isn’t it amazing? We’re not allowed to have the Ten Commandments in our schools. No “minute of prayer” allowed. No mention of G-d allowed. But plenty of mind control about how the White Christians have destroyed the earth and must be neutralized. The Day of the multiculturalists is here, aided and abetted by the ADL, using “hate speech” as the Trojan horse that will destroy our once-great America.

I find a certain peace in getting back to that earlier mention of the plain synagogue, permeated with an aura of stark truth and humility, the sometimes shaky rafters and squeaky doors giving testimony to a simplicity lending itself to truth and the eternal peace.

How this contrasts with the monstrous and ostentatious ADL building in New York! A skyscraper pointing to heaven, symbolically raising its accusing finger at the Master of the Universe. No, the tons of glass and concrete here cannot mask a horrifying lie and evil intent for this country.

I find myself having crossed the political Rubicon. As a conservative, passionate advocate of America’s freedom for individual liberties and speech, I have become a pariah in the Jewish community. Who knows, maybe the ADL is monitoring this very message?! But one thing is clear: I stand on the shoulders of many great Americans who have given their lives for this great land. I will not shirk from my responsibility as an American, as a beneficiary of this grand and blessed legacy. I hope that my urgent words are heeded and that people will wake up about those alien forces threatening our very lives.

To all my friends throughout America: G-d bless you, and G-d bless America

Posted in ADL | Comments Off on How the ADL is working to destroy America

Why Trump?

Rabbi Nachum Shifren writes: I recently took a walk on one of the busiest streets in town frequented by orthodox Jews on one particular Saturday, and was looking for a particular synagogue. Not having been around for many years, I noticed something different: there were security guards manning the entrance of each establishment. These were not unemployed seniors on some make-work project. Here were combat-dressed, kevlar-vested men, each sporting a serious demeanour, matching the 9mm pistols they wore. The perfunctory “shalom, have a great day” greeting seemed designed to distract more than convey friendship.

Yet on that same street are several churches. I visited them the following day, Sunday, as parishioners visited during the morning service. Not satisfied with the nearby churches, I decided to take a drive around the city at that moment. In not one instance did I see a security guard. Why was this? In the context of recent events, what message could be learned?

A friend of mine, a rabbi, recently returned from a trip to Jerusalem to attend a family event. When asked about his experience there, his reply was terse and alarming: “Everybody’s watching their back.” In a rather Orwellian explanation, he detailed the level of panic caused by the dozens of knifings whose victims never saw their attackers. Just as the state of Israel would like to wish these bloody events away, the international media seems complicit about the refusal to expose the level of Jew-hatred actually occurring.

A while before the present Trump hysteria, I visited a synagogue in Hamburg. Here the Germans upped the ante, surrounding the area with armoured personnel carriers and police carrying automatic weapons. An isolated event? No, I was told it’s like that each Saturday. A few miles to the west in neighboring Holland, a friend involved in security matters told me what few outsiders know: synagogues are being closed up and shuttered.

“So where are the Jews disappearing to?” was my obvious response.
“They’re conducting their services underground in private homes”, came my friend’s ominous message.

Everywhere in Europe, Jews who normally wear head covering identifying themselves as orthodox Jews, have been instructed by communal leaders to stop doing so. Whether it be East London, the Paris underground, or any major skandinavian city, Jews are under attack. And while Donald Trump was still making high-end ties, this has been going on for years.

In Londonistan (London, England), I received an invitation by the English Defense League to speak on behalf of English sovereignty and security amid the growing Muslim threat to non-Muslims in townships like Luton (see Youtube video: Rabbi Shifren speaks in Luton). In a background of “grooming” (sexual enslavement of young Christian girls through intimidation and death threats toward family members), “no-go-zones” (exclusive Muslim areas where access to non-Muslims is denied), and general mayhem and harassment, I was greeted by over 5,000 Luton residents. I was asked by a leftist BBC reporter: “How can an orthodox rabbi such as yourself associate with such an ‘extremist’ group?”

I didn’t bat an eyelash: “These are my friends!”

It was important to show solidarity with a group that has always treated me with he utmost of respect, a rare patriotic organization dedicated to saving Britain from itself, despite an incessant miasma of hatred directed at it by the press, pressured by a powerful political mafia, and law enforcement. The most remarkable incident of my visit to London? The left-wing “Jewish Chronicle” proposed that I not be invited to London, lest I incite the otherwise friendly Muslim population! Only Kafka could make sense of such intellectual rubbish.

The world is ablaze. The long-kives are drawn. The entire European continent is drowning in rapes, assaults, and cultural and physical invasion. Nowhere are people allowed to speak freely about a danger that threatens their very existence. Freedom of speech has gone the way of civility. Instead of security and protection of borders, we get more bilge by the politicos in bed with the Muslim Brotherhood, a recognized terrorist organization. While the destruction goes unabated, law-abiding, overtaxed citizens are branded with the race card for suggesting maintaining their culture, language, and borders. In an upside down world, Egypt, the most populous muslim country in the world has outlawed the Muslim Brotherhood, while here at home they are hobnobbing with Obama in the Oval Office

Trump?

…For the first time in recent memory, the US is poised to elect a man that the world may fear and respect. Donald Trump may not be a Reagan, but he will certainly give pause to enemies and haters of America. I have no doubt that the jihadist world will have much re-calculating to do, navigating away from the cozy relationship they’ve enjoyed with Hussein Obama. The rest of the world will look at America differently before the the finest military was purged of its patriots and real fighting leadership. Making America great again requires that our enemies fear us, and our friends can count on us. This, more than anything, is the meaning of the Trump campaign.

Posted in Donald Trump, R. Nachum Shifren | Comments Off on Why Trump?