Predicting Trump

Posted on December 18, 2016 by Luke Ford

Jack* writes: Trump has done much to confound his critics since election. Now that he is President Elect, it is more difficult for the main stream media to quote him out of context. Trump’s thank you tour rallies also provides him with a way to bypass the mainstream media and get his message transmitted unfiltered. Trump’s aides and spokespersons also know how to push back when questioned in a hostile way and Trump’s interview last week with Matt Lauer highlights Trump’s facility with the interview process.

For many years, the attitude of high ranking and aspiring politicians was to speak guardedly since anything they would say could and would be used against them. Trump can be criticized for speaking in platitudes but he is remarkably effective. It is a truism that even when insincere, flattery works, and Trump is a master at this. This is revealed by the fact that so many persons who opposed Trump who met with him have good things to say about him. Trump must be masterful in one-on-one conversations in terms of relating in a “winning” way.

Trump is also self aggrandizing in a way which is so at odds with the false humility politicians assume when speaking, yet it doesn’t come off as offensive. It seems more honest than “humble bragging.” Trump’s way of answering questions when interviewed show that he is every bit as good a listener as Obama but then one who answers in what appears to be an unscripted way and a genuine response. This cannot help but be appealing to Americans who have heard so much blather to this date.

What comes across from Trump is that he is either a pathological liar and con-man without principles or a patriot and an economic nationalist. I was not sure whether he was a genuine patriot or whether that was a public relations position, but I am now persuaded that he loves the United States (and in particular the pre Vietnam war United States) and wants to make sure that America, while continuing to trade in the world, is never dependent upon any foreign power whether for raw materials, finished goods or technology. I think much of his appeal to the persons who agreed to join his cabinet, or just meet with him including Kanye West, Jim Brown, and the technology sector heads, is based on making a pitch to their patriotism.

This in itself is refreshing. Obama may love the United States, but he doesn’t have the same sort of unquestioning patriotism inculcated in him that is the case for Trump. Obama spent his younger years in Indonesia and when he returned to high school in Hawaii, he spent his time with his maternal grandfather and with Frank Marshall, both either fellow travelers or members of the Communist Party. He didn’t grow up in culture that had been involved in the Civil War since Hawaii was annexed by the United States after that war had ended. The history he was probably taught concerned U.S. imperialism taking Hawaii away from its rightful native monarchy. He didn’t grow up as Trump did during the 1950’s when the U.S. was the most powerful nation in the world, the leading manufacturer and a place where most people went to church on Sundays and where many states enforced blue laws. Trump came of age before the war in Vietnam showed the limits of U.S. military power. (If anyone had looked closely Korea would have shown that, but it really wasn’t widely accepted at the time. Instead WWII was the model.) The
second wave of decolonialization began when Trump was in his teens. Obama grew up after Vietnam had defeated the United States and when there were virtually no colonies left in the world. This is not to say that Trump’s world view is more accurate than Obama’s, only that his
world view and America’s place in it, is a better one for an optimistic leader to hold. Obama wanted to manage what he perceived as the inevitable decline of American influence. Trump wants to reassert American power it to the greatest extent possible.

And Trump and Obama have differing views on what are the most important problems facing us. Trump is a global warming skeptic and Obama’s rhetoric (but not his personal actions) promotes it as the greatest and most immediate problem facing humanity.

Trump believes in taking care of American citizens first and Obama believes that American’s have a duty to assist and encourage persons who come here both legally and illegally from other countries. Obama believes in a bureaucratic state administered by lawyers, public policy
graduates, professors, and activists and organizers. Trump doesn’t have much faith in this managerial state and has selected cabinet officers from business, the military and elected and appointed government officials sometimes at odds with the agencies they are hired to run.
It is hard to believe that Trump is President Elect. Obama seems to have dropped off the screen, and Trump is in fact doing things that are changing policies even though it is over a month until he is inaugurated. I read something that John Boehner said that I thought about before which was that Trump reminded him of Theodore Roosevelt who upon assuming power with the assasination of William McKinley, brought with him a great gush of energy powered by both the progressive and populist movements. Trump has been rightly identified by many as an economic populist and that view is certainly aligned with the public statements of his advisor Steve Bannon. He is also a progressive in that he wants to institute many measures that will have us move toward good governance, including his restrictions on administration employees becoming lobbyists and especially lobbyists for foreign governments.

He still has a few cabinet and other positions to fill, but some of who he has elected give us a pretty good idea of how he plans to govern. The care to which is putting his selection, can lead to one of two conclusions: He will be a pretty hands off chief executive and rely on his competent cabinet appointments to shape their own policy, or he is selecting them and will work with them carefully to implement his intended policies.

Concerning immigration which was in my view, the main thing that distinguished him from the Republican pack and from Hillary Clinton, his appointment of Sessions strongly signaled that he would enforce (rather than as has been the case on a bipartisan level) ignore enforcing existing immigration laws. His selection of General Kelly, although not as good a choice from the immigration hawk’s perspective as Kris Kobach, was probably made because the director of Homeland Security is more concerned about terrorism than about illegal immigration. It is not clear if Kobach will be his chief deputy, but if he does serve in that capacity, there really is nothing more that immigration restrictionist could hope for. Trump has made noise about doing something to accommodate the dreamers. My suspicion is that for them the path to legalization and then citizenship will require some committment to public service, not necessarily military service. There is also a real issue as to the cut off age for dreamers. It is one thing if someone was brought to the country as an infant, another if brought as an older teenager. If Trump does give the dreamers a pass, then it rewards the illegal activity of their parents in bringing them
across. Trump has been lobbied by all the big city mayors, and in particular DeBlasio, Garcetti and Emmanuel, not to enforce the immigration laws.

I think this is all to no avail and that cities (and universities) that provide sanctuary status will see their federal funds shut off. Assuming that Trump does not back down to the political pressure,
the cities and universities will have to cave, since their own constituents will not pony up the additional revenues to allow the cities to break the law. I don’t know how long this will take, but
it will be dependent upon how quickly the money can be shut off. If it is in the pipeline and can’t be interrupted for six months that is one thing.

However, if the administration actually begins to construct a wall, and institutes e-verify, and begins to prosecute employers who hire illegal aliens, you will see a significant number of persons here illegally self deport. The ones that brought dreamers with them on the way in, may take them out as well.

Assuming Trump appoints a very conservative justice to the Supreme court, they may see a case testing citizenship of anchor babies.
Trump sees himself as a deal maker and in one sense he doesn’t really care whether the deal is all that favorable as long as he can paint himself the winner. So any deals involving illegal immigration should be carefully scrutinized to see if they deliver what there are claimed to deliver.

Trump’s main interest to this point appears to be business. The Obama administration apologists are trying to show that the Ford and Carrier deals didn’t really save any jobs and that the Carrier deal is an inappropriate interference in the free market. Obama spokerspersons have shown his state of the union address in which asked for legislation approving many of the policies Trump wants to pursue (although not a reduction in the corporate income tax.) This just
shows how inept Obama was. These policies should be the bedrock of the Democratic party policies, but Obama wasted his executive orders and actions on immigration, social justice and environmental issues, instead of using them to keep business in the United States. Even Trump’s taking on Boing, perhaps the preeminent aerospace firm for the cost overruns on Air Force One is a huge public relations win. Obama pointed out he nixed the Marine Helicopter deal for the presidential fleet on similar grounds but I don’t remember any P.R. around that one. This looks like Trump is looking out for the little guy against unreasonable government pork even if it benefits Trump personally. Trump has criticized the cost of the F-35 program. Progressives
should applaud him for this, but they have ignored him. It is not clear whether Trump can take credit for it, but Softbank now plans to invest $50 billion in the U.S. and both U.S. Steel and IBM are talking about opening new facilities employing thousands.

So many financial pundits have pointed out the U.S. economy is weak and both the Federal Government and States have huge unfunded liabilities, primarily for pensions. It came out that the official government figures on the economy have been cooked so there has been essentially no growth. Since some areas of the country are booming, you can imagine how badly the rest of the country must be doing for it to average out to zero. Trump’s getting foreign countries to invest in U.S. factories is a big plus. However, this weakness on a worldwide basis may lead to a crash and subsequent major recession and possible depression in the United States. If Trump can avoid this and keep the economy going he certainly puts himself in strong position to be reelected in 2020. If he can’t then it really doesn’t matter how good a job he does I don’t know whether this is a ploy on the part of the foreign manufacturers to curry favor while they continue to try to steal American business in other ways, or because there are advantages to manufacturing here. As long as the U.S. is the largest consumer market, manufacturing here,
with the exception of labor costs and environmental compliance, holds many advantages.

There are often existing facilities that can be repurposed at a minimal cost. Energy costs and raw materials (especially for petroleum based products including plastics) are cheap, and the cost of moving those materials to a manufacturing plant and the completed product from the
manufacturing plant to the consumers is much cheaper than when located overseas. It’s pretty clear that he intends to leverage this economic advantage with foreign companies to get them to relocate here.

Appointing Tillerson give us a good idea that Trump will not take the neo-con line, but will instead seek a raproachment with Russia.
There is incredible fear of a Trump presidency coming from the liberal/progressive/Democrat Hillary supporters who literally think Trump will destroy records kept by the department of energy and/.or the EPA, that he will stage a major false flag event within a few months of taking office in order to seize dictatorial powers, that he is a racist and/or tool of Putin, etc.

To these persons Trump is such a risk to be president that we cannot even allow him to become president in order to evaluate whether what he wants to do is good or bad. Both Republican and Democrats have very sound reasons to fear Trump. Trump stands to make inroads with African American voters. Those inroads don’t have to go very far since Democrats have counted on a monolithic Black vote. A stronger immigration policy will drive up wages and in areas with many illegal immigrants, drive down both consumer spending and the housing
market. Many teachers will face layoffs as funding for schools is based on average daily attendance. If 20% of your students are here illegally and are deported along with their families or self deport as work dries up, employment of teachers should drastically decline.

Trump’s infrastructure plan will encroach on Democrat’s traditional territory, spending money on infrastructure to prime the pump for more jobs. Trump also is the peace candidate, cautioning against foreign interventions, and cutting military spending.

This will leave the Democrats with two issues that will self marginalize them. Increasing emphasis on environmental issues and on social justice issues based on identity politics. The Republicans don’t like him because he rejects the chamber of commerce, business round
table and country club shibolliths that have become the Republican mantra: Lower taxes, socially conservative policies, fewer regulations, and cutting entitlements.

If Trump succeeds it will be because he has imposed a fairer tax structure, spent money on things that benefit the ordinary American rather than on expensive foreign interventions. Just as Obama assumed office with so many in the public fantasizing about what he could
accomplish and projecting clearly unattainable expectations, Trump has certainly encouraged the same sort of faith among his most fervent supporters. Unlike Obama, Trump will take office with a hard core of Democratic voters opposed to him and demanding that Democratic office
holders impose the same sort of obstructionist tactics against him as they perceive the Republicans as having used against Obama. Trump also takes office with the avowed hostility of any social justice groups and the Central Intelligence Agency. Some sophisticated observers
believe that the CIA is planning a coup to prevent Trump from ever being sworn in as President – hence the unverified rumors of Russian involvement in the election with the inference that somehow or other Trump is a “ Manchurian Candidate” under the control of Vladimir Putin. Of course this is seconded by the neo-cons who want nothing less than a President who will “stand up to Putin.”

If Trump is actually inaugurated, look for him to purge the CIA of its political elements allied with the Democrats. In particular William Brennan will be the first to be fired and those who were brought in by Brennan and Mike Morrell will likewise be removed from positions of power and influence. In this sense Trump’s choice of General Mattis and General Flynn may be a way to keep the military on Trump’s side in the event of a post inauguration show down with the CIA. The things to watch for with the EPA, Department of Education, Department of Labor,
Department of Energy and the Justice Department are whether the Trump appointees will seek to depoliticize the departments or whether they will actively try to repoliticize them. It is inevitable that as liberal/progressive/ Democratic, appointees are removed this will be played up in the mainstream media as politicizing the departments when in fact it is a depoliticizing them. However, the temptation may be too great to prevent these departments from being politicized in a way
favoring traditional republican base including business and religious groups, to name two.

There are those who want to continue to fight culture wars, something Trump does not appear to care about at all, and those who think those wars have been lost and there is no point in fighting them. We shall see how the more religious members of Trump’s cabinet, Ben Carson at HUD and Betsy DuVos at Education shape their departments.

Regarding the EPA and Energy and Interior, only the most fearful environmentalists really believe that a Trump administration would roll back clear air and water regulations. What will happen is that much of the authority asserted by these agencies, is without legal support in the legislation creating the department. However, “true believers” working within the department have greatly expanded their jurisdiction. Often courts slap them down, but under Trump these sorts of efforts to regulate beyond the explicit authority will not be done.

Trump clearly believes that there is an effect that greater environmental regulation has on industry. To the extent that Trump wants to increase the private sector and especially manufacturing and mineral extractive industries in the U.S. he will favor industry.
Trump understands something that most environmentalists do not. The key to a first world country is inexpensive energy. This is the reason that Trump supports more drilling for oil, clean coal, more fracking and more nuclear energy. Renewable energy is currently economically
unsustainable without large government subsidies. Storage of energy generated by solar and wind is necessary because both provide only intermittent supplies. The storage problem has not been solved and current methods carry with them their own negative impact on the environment.

Posted in Donald Trump | Comments Off on Predicting Trump

Are Jews White?

Posted on December 16, 2016 by Luke Ford

Comments:

* There is a growing movement to have Jews classified as something other than White. Why? Because then people can continue to expand anti-white laws and rhetoric without fear of any Jewish backlash.

Liberal and a majority of Neocon Jews seem happy to have the PC/Cultural Marxist system of hating whitey run its course. The end game would be that many Gentile whites would be serfs in everything but name and the specifics of, say, Russia in the 18th and 19th centuries. What they do not see that someone like David Horowitz does is that the percentage of non=white Moslems that would love to exterminate all Jews that do not submit to Mohammad is at least double what it was 50 years ago and likely to double again over the next half century or less.

The only people in the world who have a ‘reason’ to defend Jews, even when Jews themselves cause much of the trouble they face, are Christians. That is because of the flesh of Jesus. Quite simply, the more that Leftists destroy the white Gentile middle class and strip them of political power and cultural expression, the more that islam rises vis a vis what used to be Christendom. which means making imminent the major Islamic thrust to punish worldwide Jewry for everything back to Abraham and Ishmael.

* In the real world, race is rooted in genetics but always means more than that. Not only biology, –genetic links, physical structure and appearance–but identity and affiliation and history.

Part of the problem comes from fuzzy thinking about Whiteness and Caucasianity. Caucasians come in two basic forms: NorthAfrican/WestAsian Caucasians and European Caucasians. Only Europeans are White. The others are what I call Bronze.

Europeans are the native peoples of what was European Christendom: the peoples of Europe who were also Catholic, Orthodox and Protestant. (Hence, I would exclude Jews and Gypsies, as well as Balkan Muslims, but included Georgians and Armenians.) Present religious belief/practice is not at issue; history and identity formation is. It is through Christianity that all these peoples share the common Hellenic roots which lie at the base of White culture and civilization. Even non-Christian EuroRight thinker Roman Barnard admits that it was Christianity which created a common European identity for these peoples.

The NorthAfrican/West Asian Caucasians include the Copts, the Semites (Jews and Arabs, etc), the Turkic and Iranic peoples and the North Indians. The Copts, though Christian, are not European; all the rest are historically non-Christian.

Jews in particular: their homeland –reiterated each year at Passover with “Next Year In Jerusalem”– is in western Asia, not Europe. And throughout their 2000 year sojourn among the host peoples of Europe, they have always defined themselves as Other. They can and do speak and write of “how Europe has treated us.” No European could think or speak that way.

So while Ashkenazi Jews are informally White (in a race riot, they’d get beat up along with the Swedes), in terms of both biological origin and, most importantly, self-identity and affiliation, they are non-White Caucasians.

* As late as 1982, Margaret Thatcher described the British as an “island race.”

(And the Falkland Islanders, too).

The term “race” was a remarkably flexible one until recently.

* We need to get back to Officially Approved Conspiracy Theories, like the Obama Administration’s denunciation of America’s public school teachers as racists punishing little black boys more than little Asian girls for no reason at all. That’s Science.

Posted in Jews | Comments Off on Are Jews White?

Pistachio Girl Fired For Alt-Right Views

Posted on December 16, 2016 by Luke Ford

REPORT: Pistachio Girl has been fired from her job as a food vendor at Citizens Bank Park.

In an interview with Red Ice TV, an internet outlet that promotes white identity politics, Emily Youcis, 26, said she was terminated by Aramark after being told her social media activities supporting white nationalist ideas do not reflect her employer’s values.

She later posted on Twitter she had been let go a week ago.

Aramark, which operates the food concessions at the Phillies’ ballpark, released a statement confirming her dismissal.

“A core Aramark value is treating everyone with integrity and respect always. That includes respecting our associates’ right to privacy and dealing with personnel matters confidentially. We can only confirm that the individual asked about is no longer employed after publicly connecting our company to views that contradict our values.”

Last month, Youcis gained attention when she became involved in a fracas outside a conference of the National Policy Institute, where she had been interviewing protesters who accused the group of supporting anti-Semitism, white supremacy and fascism.

“We want to stand up for white America — we’re the backbone of this country, the white working-class people,” she said at the time.

Youcis said she had been a supporter of the white nationalist “alt-right” movement for about 10 months.

Asked by PhillyClout if it was an act, she said: “People have asked me this repeatedly, and I keep telling them I’m being serious. I don’t understand why they can’t get it through their skull.”

She said in the Red Ice TV interview she never advocated for violence nor used racial slurs. She admitted to retweeting David Duke, a politician and former Imperial Wizard for the Ku Klux Klan.

Youcis told the Red Ice TV host “Lana” she had expected to be fired from her job of seven years. She is thinking about getting a lawyer, Youcis said.

Youcis described herself in the interview as a “well-known cult personality figure for the Philadelphia Phillies” who is loved by all the baseball players.

“I was like a god there,” she said. “I owned that stadium.”

Posted in Alt Right | Comments Off on Pistachio Girl Fired For Alt-Right Views

Anglo-Saxons vs Europeans

Posted on December 16, 2016 by Luke Ford

Comments:

* You have to remember that concepts like the English common law, habeas corpus, trial by jury, the idea that you’re innocent until proven guilty, freedom of speech, and political freedom in general, are essentially Anglo-Saxon concepts.

Continental Europe has no such traditions. People from the Continent are accustomed to fairly authoritarian government. Having lived in the US or Australia for a couple of generations they may have absorbed these concepts to some extent. May have. Continental Europeans are also, to a degree, more used to very intrusive bureaucracies and even a certain tolerance for corruption and nepotism. There’s a reason why Britain is the only country so far to have rebelled against the EU.

The other problem is that whites no longer have a common religion. For the most part they have no religion at all. That’s an important ingredient of a common identity that has been lost.

* One usually feels, when walking or driving through a predominantly non-white area, a vibe so overwhelmingly “low class” it is threatening . One college student writing a review of a good Indian restaurant that happened to be in little El Salvador outside D.C. (used to be a lot east Indians there), remarked that he thought he had been brought to the parking lot to be killed. He was sort of joking, but that’s the vibe. Whatever nonsense they blather about safe spaces, non-whites don’t feel threatened in most white areas. Usually, as the terrain becomes whiter, the tone rises. A friend’s Mexican husband thought the grass was literally greener even in lower income white neighborhoods (compared to blacks ones.) He thought it was because blacks had too many kids and they were always running on the lawns. His Colombian friend was relieved to be living in a predominantly white neighborhood after being in a black neighborhood. There are of course, the truly indigent, impoverished Appalachians, drug addicts, unemployed, and general down and outs; but their behavior is similar to that of blacks and browns, only less extreme, and they just make up a smaller percentage of their race. When people talk of rights for whites, they automatically think you are referring to those whites whose behavior resembles a large percentage of blacks. What whites really mean when they refer to that, is the respectable working class that built and maintains the infrastructure of the modern world, and keeps it all running. Hispanics are good workers generally, but they are not perfectionists, to put it mildly, so no one should herald the decline of the white worker considering what they are trying to replace them with. Very, very foolish.

* The vast majority of half-blacks cannot pass as white.

Half-Jews on the other hand are almost impossible to tell apart from other whites. The only consistent “tell” I’ve found among halfies is very high frequencies of neotany, and in some cases a Jewfro as Sam Harris has.

The fact half-Jews are very difficult to tell apart from fully gentile whites is proof Ashkenazi are white because what other non-white group can consistently produce entirely white looking offspring with whites?

* What Spencer did years ago is moot. I too have dipped my brush in Oriental paint back when I was less woke. I currently believe that mixing between vastly different ethnic groups is generally bad, but I cannot take back the past and I have no regrets. A lot of huwyte men go for oriental women out of an atavistic desire for femininity and traditionalism that are generally perceived to be more common among oriental women. We must get our own women in line before we blame men for “straying.”

Posted in WASPs | Comments Off on Anglo-Saxons vs Europeans

CBS Finds a Jewish Man Who Likes Trump and Putin

Posted on December 16, 2016 by Luke Ford

Comments at Steve Sailer:

* It’s interesting to think of this election as a fight between diaspora Jews and Israeli Jews.

Diaspora Jews benefit from multikult, globalism and open societies. They don’t mind allying with Muslims in Western countries to promote liberalism.

Israeli Jews benefit from homogenous nation states in Europe and America, with Islamophobic populations, because that usually translates into support for Israel.

Wonder if the underlying explanation for most world events is that Soros and Karl Popper are on the diaspora side, while Netanyahu et al are on the Zionist side.

* It’s not really a fight “between” them. Rather, they are fighting on different fronts.

* Whatever “hacking” may or may not have happened during the election campaign to help Trump may have actually been done by the Mossad using Russian aliases.

* Trump has been compared to Mussolini, Putin and Hitler.. but I think the relevant comparison is to Peter the Great, a figure of titanic energy. Like Peter, he can arrange for his wife and then daughter to succeed him. This would be wrong if Bill Clinton did it, but when the God Emperor does it, it is exemplary.

As befits a construction ultra-magnate, why stop at measly skyscrapers? The Donald should and will build entire cities ennobled with his name. So we will have St. Donaldsburg in Western Russia, Donaldabad in Pakistan; Volgograd will be renamed Donaldgrad, Washington will be renamed TrumpCity; why stick to the narrow world which he doth bestride like a colossus? The Trump Luna will be the go-to (and only) resort of choice in the Solar System.

And that wall.. that big, beautiful WALL… Will make Shih-Huang-Ti look like Hadrian in comparison. You will be able to see it from the moon, preferably with those 25-cent telescopes in the Trump Luna.

An age of Immeasurable Peace and Prosperity is upon us!

* I know ‘I and my brother against my cousin’ and so on, but the countervailing force is the long history of conflicts most countries have with their neighbors. The Brits hate the French, the French hate the Brits and the Germans, the Poles hate the Germans and the Russians, the Chinese and the Japanese hate each other, and so on. India is friends with Israel despite the lack of any kind of a civilizational commonality because they both hate Islam.

* *Back when the Shah was still in charge the Iranians and the Israelis had good relations.*

Yes because the Shah was much like a Polish king: surrounded by Jewish secret police, Jewish political advisors, Jewish merchant class.

Most of these Jews magically emigrated to California after the Shah was deposed (with the loot).

* Perhaps Trump is seen as dangerous to American Jews in part because he threatens to combine foreign policy support for Israel with nationalist resistance to globalism, immigration and pc, which is basically saying resistance to American Jewry.

Considering a Trump Administration represents an immediate and dramatic improvement in ties with Israel and a hawkish stance toward its avowed enemy Iran, the uniform Jewish opposition to Trump either means Jews really, really hate us or really, really love globalism, immigration and pc. But then, I’m not sure that isn’t just two ways of saying the same thing.

* Reminds me of Apartheid-era South Africa. Diaspora Jews in SA were greatly over-represented amongst those who wanted to create a multikult/open society there while the Jews of Israel stood by SA through thick and thin even when most other countries had abandoned them.

* Bibi threw Trump under the bus during the campaign. Israeli Jewry does nothing to counter their BFFs (despite its humorous connotations, that is not a throwaway word; it describes the relationship literally) in diaspora Jewry, who are the #1 adversary of European ethnopatriots. You need a slide rule, or something? If someone comes by your house and sets it on fire every day, and his best friend watches him do it every time, his best friend is certainly no friend of yours.

Okay, let me extend my analogy: the guy who burns your house every day does it because you are an aspiring ethnopatriot, and he hates your sort of ethnopatriot. But his best friend is the most prominent ethnopatriot in the neighborhood; he’s just the right sort of ethnopatriot.

It’s like if you were trying to start a union, and the world’s biggest union-buster was kicking your ass every day for trying to start a union, but there’s his best friend, head of the world’s biggest union, right beside him. Yeah, best friend guy is making it pretty clear you’re chopped liver.

All of the counter-arguments to this consist of stuff like “yeah but the best friend has a hairy chest, just like you do!”

* Desert peoples often have long noses for humidifying air on the way in. People from the humid tropics tend to have flat nose because they don’t need to do that.

Posted in Israel, Jews | Comments Off on CBS Finds a Jewish Man Who Likes Trump and Putin

White Nationalist Richard Spencer

Posted on December 16, 2016 by Luke Ford

Comments:

* David Cole on taki, and Greg Johnson on counter currents have hashed this out ad infinitum from either side of Richard ideologically. Both argue he is playing his cards badly.

RS had the chance to combine his youth with the wisdom of his ideological forebears. Standing on the shoulders of 90s Paleocons may seem too tentative for your taste, but one of the biggest reasons that 90s paleoconservatism faded away is that it was de-platformed in an age before social media, and not because its policies were considered lame. It might have helped if they’d had a celebrity leader but the LibMedia was so dominant then, it would have been career suicide for anyone (though Ross Perot should have at least helped & didn’t). If RS had asked Brimelow, Taylor or Devlin to review his speech (including the theatrical flourishes), would they have concurred? Not likely. They could have helped him avoid the media trap. But he was probably too vain to take feedback.

RS sees himself as the badass mischief maker of the Alt Right, a white version of Baron Samedi. Whether that works out for him in the long run is another matter, but it seems clear he will be going it alone for the most part

Posted in Alt Right | Comments Off on White Nationalist Richard Spencer

The Radical Jewish Mind

Posted on December 16, 2016 by Luke Ford

Most Jews in the West vote for left-wing parties, but most Orthodox Jews in the West vote for conservative parties. Orthodox Judaism is the opposite of radical.

Comments:

* This interview is interesting in the glimpses it offers into the ‘radical’ mind and ‘Jewish’ mindset.
Sometimes, it’s hard to tell which is which, and it was a mystery even to those who held them. Their Jewishness had been decisive in the radical path they took, but the path was a way out of Jewishness and toward a new humanity without labels and borders. A kind of paradox where being something leads to something that negates that very being.

* My theory is Jewish hatred for American oil tycoons has to do with the fact that it’s one of the few industries in The U.S where Gentile billionaires & millionaires outnumber Jewish billionaires & millionaires. It’s a jealousy factor. Jews get jealous when they see Goys dominate an industry and outperform them. The oil industry is the Goy’s version of Wall Street.

* It is not so much what Rex Tillerson has said or done, but that he will be in a Trump cabinet. If he were in a Bush cabinet, the Forward wouldn’t care, cause they know they could sway Tillerson thru Bush. They can’t sway Trump like Presidents of the past 30 years, so they are extra nervous.
Trump is apt to be amenable to win-win scenarios with a strand of Likud thinking. But, he won’t be guilt-tripped by Jewish leftists into manipulating refugee policy to make the US a dumping ground, or setting foreign aid budgets at reckless levels.

* Trump’s policies are in opposition to the Jewish establishment across the board.

That is not to say he is anti-semitic. He is simply free to follow his natural impulses as a guy who loves his country. Which is, of course, anathema, to the powers that be.

Trump is not puppeteered by Jewish money and therefore he is pursuing a straight ahead patriotic goy platform. Oy vey!

* “I made a startling discovery: his [David Horowitz] eyes were those of literally a madman.”

I believe it.. but it takes a ‘madman’ to understand what is really up with the radicals and hipsters of his generation.

I think a lot of normal people don’t really get power. People usually project their own personalities and mentalities onto others. So, normal people don’t really get the real darkness of the obsessed. Nice dorks like Rich Lowry just don’t get it. Lowry is gooey enough to think that if he treats Al Sharpton nice, the good decent Negro will come out of that dude.

Horowitz gets it. He has a bit of madness in him, and he can imagine the same darkness in others, especially those in power. It’s like Mamet movies, always a bit paranoid of the darkest motives of the other fella or gal. Sometimes, the darkness could be of skill & power, like in HOUSE OF GAMES. Sometimes, the darkness could be radical stupidity, like the girl in OLEANNA. The nice liberal professor just doesn’t get it cuz he projects his rationality onto that moron creature driven by resentment and anger.

Politics has several kinds of people. The drivers who are always a bit mad, obsessive, and extreme in personality, even if well-hidden. And then, there are the opportunists who just want a piece of the pie. Romney is a classic opportunist, and most politicos are like him.
Most people would rather follow and get a piece of the pie that forge ahead. Trump is a driver, and his kind of madness may have stirred something in Horowitz.

It’s like John Wayne as the obsessive driver of events in RED RIVER and THE SEARCHERS.
He’s a bit mad — trying to kill his ‘son’ figure in RIVER and ‘daughter’ figure in SEARCHERS —, but he never relents and always forges ahead.

* Seems like Ken Cohen, the longtime Exxon VP of government & public affairs who retired last year, might be worth calling if you’re writing a story like this for The Forward.

* Steve Sailer: There have been Jews who were very successful in the oil biz, like Armand Hammer who did well in Libya. Shell was founded by a Jewish Brit. The Rothschilds funded the Russian oil biz way back around the beginning of the 20th Century.

The top writer on oil industry history is Daniel Yergin from Beverly Hills (I think he’s doing something with Trump’s transition team). His book “The Prize” is very good.

But in general it’s just not that Jewish of a business.

* [“There’s some real causes of concern,” said Ron Halber, executive director of the Jewish Community Relations Council of Greater Washington, and an influential voice on Jewish communal policy.]

Tillerson must have been raised by George Lincoln Rockwell. Or blood brother to Louis Farrakhan…

[A lifelong Exxon Mobil executive, Tillerson has no public service background, and no public track record on Israel-related issues.]

So becoming Sec of State is like becoming Pope, but for Jews. It’s not acceptable just to never have had a problem with Catholics. You have to have devoted your life to the cause.

* I know from the book that Americans from every walk of life had a hand in this surge of energy production. What role have you seen people from a Jewish background playing in the early stages of this fracking revolution?

I was struck and surprised by the impact of various Jews on energy in general, on the evolution of the industry. George Mitchell, the father or grandfather of modern-day drilling and fracking, got his early boost by courting local Jewish investors in the Houston and Galveston area. I interviewed Mr. Mitchell before his recent death and he regaled me with stories of how — and this is something only a 90-something-year-old entrepreneur from Texas can maybe get away with — stories of how the Jews were both good backers and investors and supporters but also gave him a really hard time when he couldn’t find any oil and gas, but he had fond memories of going back and forth with his various Jewish backers, and frankly they kept him going when things were tough, when he was getting his start and even afterwards.

* James Baker was sui generis. I imagine, like Kevin Macdonald and, I think, Steve Sailer, he had negative experiences with Jews during his early adulthood. His anti-Israel obsession had nothing to do with his broader politics. The broader theme is that the elite wants to use *anti-semitism!* as a way of protecting itself. The problem is that Trump has too man Jewish connections and supporters. The idea seems to be to throw around anything that might make Jews’ Anne-Frank-Movie-Flashbacks kick in so that these connections/supporters fall away. It’s of a piece with the various other increasingly pathetic and desperate response the Left/elite is making to this election.

* Could Trump be thinking about pacifying our relationship with Russia before he starts to really put the squeeze on China? Is he capable of thinking that strategically?

* Openly admiring National Socialism makes a lot more sense than openly admiring communism. National Socialism failed, once. Communism has failed over and over and over.

* It is of course possible that Horowitz kicked Auster off his magazine because he (Auster) was difficult to work with. Auster was widely considered to be a difficult man. Although it is probably true that Horowitz did not want to acknowledge race-realism. Perhaps Horowitz believes it, but he still might not want to talk about it.

I liked both Horowitz and Auster. They both had valuable things to say, and said them well. Horowitz’ books – especially Radical Son – were quite influential in the formation of my thinking. And I liked how he turned the rhetorical tactics of the left against them. Learning from the left is something that the right must do to win.

* There were no Jews in Bush’s first cabinet. On the other hand, it contained three Arabs.

* Horowitz takes the Breitbartian implicitly-pro-white-but-not-anti-Zionist middle ground. It’s actually not that crazy. Really, you can go after George Soros and support Binyamin Netanyahu. The Israelis aren’t obsessed with increasing illegal immigration, that’s liberal diaspora Jews.

* Oil industry execs have to make deals with Muslims because they have lots of oil. That means being nice to Israel is bad for them.

* The muslims who have a lot of the oil don’t seem very hostile to Israel nowadays. There seems to be some sort of secret understanding between Israel, Saudi Arabia, and some of the Gulf States, that goes beyond a mere temporary alliance of convenience.

* Israel and all the Gulf States are allies now, united by their common fear of Iran. But the Saudis and all the others still need to pay lip service to the Palestinian cause, and that typically means pushing Israel to make various dangerous strategic concessions.

* Orthodox Jews are plenty Zionist, except for a few isolated sects. What they’re not is particularly anti-white, since they lack any liberal guilt.

People on the alt-right use ‘Zionist’ to mean ‘supporting the global, universalist elite’ because lots of liberal Jews do, but it really just means ‘supporting the state of Israel’.

* 99% of orthodox Jews are not only pro-Israel, they’re the most pro-Israel Jews you’ll ever meet.

* With the exception of Satmar and a few aligned sects even “anti-Zionist” Haredim are what most people would consider to be pro-Israel. If you ask the typical Hassid what he thinks should be done about rockets from Gaza his response will range from “burn it to the ground”, to “burn it to the ground”. Their anti-Zionism consists of being against army-service and hatred of abstract symbols like the Magen David (once common as a decoration in religious books, now totally absent) and dead people kike Ben Gurion. One of the largest Haredi population centres, Beitar Illit, is a settlement, they’re not keen to see its population evacuated.

Posted in Jews | Comments Off on The Radical Jewish Mind

What Is The Alt-Right?

Posted on December 15, 2016 by Luke Ford

Comment: It’s been my opinion that the alt-right basically started gaining traction as a thing as the progressive Social Justice Warriors began seeking to expand their influence into new areas, such as science fiction (see: the circumstances leading up to Sad/Rabid Puppies), video games (see: Gamergate), open-source software development (see: this post by Our Host), and even heavy-metal music (see: this description of “Metalgate”). Clearly, they’d like to see their brand of political correctness spread everywhere.

“Always leave your opponent a line of retreat–unless you want a fight to the death.” The SJWs don’t want to leave any lines of retreat. Consequently, it seems inevitable that a group of people, drawing from some of the same groups reacting to the above developments, would decide to band together and proclaim, “If it’s war they want, then war they shall have!”

Posted in Alt Right | Comments Off on What Is The Alt-Right?

Men View Women As Sex Objects, So What?

Posted on December 13, 2016 by Luke Ford

Dennis Prager writes: 1. It is completely normal for heterosexual men to see women they are sexually attracted to as sex objects.
2. That such sexual objectification is normal and has nothing to do with misogyny is proved, among other things, by the fact that homosexual men see men to whom they are sexually attracted as sex objects. If heterosexual men are misogynists, homosexual men are man haters.
3. One reason for this is the almost-unique power of a visual to sexually arouse men. Men are aroused just by glancing at a woman’s arm, ankle, calf, thigh or stomach, even without ever seeing her face. Those legs, calves, arms, etc. are sexual objects. That’s why there are innumerable websites featuring them.
4. Every normal heterosexual man who sees a woman as a sexual object can also completely respect her mind, her character and everything else nonsexual about her. Men do this all the time.
5. Most heterosexual women also see sexy women as sex objects, and they are hardly misogynists. Ask your wife or girlfriend which would turn her on more: watching a male strip show in front of a female audience, or a female strip show in front of a male audience.
6. Lucky is a couple if the man can sexually objectify his partner. The longer a husband can at least occasionally regard his wife as a sex object, the better their marriage. It is not always easy to see the woman you see every day, the mother of your children, as a sex object.
7. The whole purpose of lingerie and other sexual attire is to render the woman a sex object in her partner’s eyes. Are all the women who wear lingerie, bikinis, cheerleading outfits or whatever else turns their partner on — and hopefully them as well — haters of women?
8. If your husband denies these assertions, he is lying to you because he is afraid that you will react angrily or that he will hurt your feelings. He may also be lying to himself — after all, he, too, went to college and reads liberal opinion pieces on misogyny; and he wants to be an “enlightened” male.

Posted in Dating, Dennis Prager, Sex | Comments Off on Men View Women As Sex Objects, So What?

Forward: “Trump’s Reported Pick of Rex Tillerson as Secretary of State Spooks Jewish Groups”

Posted on December 12, 2016 by Luke Ford

Comments at Steve Sailer:

* Trump fills his cabinet with Goldman Sachs execs, and idiots still say he’ll be unfavorable to Jewish tribalist causes.

* “In general, people who have led oil companies are not that friendly to Israel,” Klein said. “That concerns me.”

In general Muslim immigrants are not friendly to Jews and Israel, but that hasn’t stopped most Jews from supporting massive Muslim immigration into North America and Europe.

* I’ve got a postage stamp here and a pencil and I’m going to make the definitive list of everything that does not spook jewish groups.

* News flash for Messrs. Halber, Klein, et al.:

The US Secretary of State serve the US, not Israel. Israel has its own government for that.

That’s what different governments are for.

* It’s almost as if Trump is selecting people who he thinks are competent and will do a good job. The benefits of running a tight campaign and not owing a thousand favors tends to scare those the most connected. What country is more connected politically in the U.S. than Isreal?

* One Jewish guy who isn’t spooked.

[David] Horowitz isn’t Alt Right (in no shape or form), but if anyone on the ‘right’ foreshadowed something like the Alt Right, it was Horowitz.

While Alt Right pays homage to Gottfried and Rothbard, neither was the kind of dogged fighter that Horowitz was.

Neocons sought respectability and establishment position. Horowitz, though allied with Neocons on the Israel issue, was far more committed to combating the ‘left’. And he always regarded the ‘left’ as the bigger enemy of the Jews. He knew about the ‘left’ because he’d been part of the 60s Left that made the ‘long march through the institutions’ and became the GLOB. In a way, the GLOB was more dangerous. While 60s radicals had crazy ideas and were delusional, they were driven by some real ideals. But over time, they became cynical, and it was all about the Power. Hillary and those around her were prime examples of this.

Neocons were just happy to gain control of GOP, push Zionist agenda, and even work with Libs and the ‘left’ to suppress White-conscious Conservatism.

Though Horowitz, as Zionist, cannot be a fan of white-centric Alt Right, he is a firm believer that the biggest enemy of the West is the Left and Glob. In this, he was more principled than the Neocons and Cucks who were mainly for position and status.

* There was a National Review gathering in the early 90s when a bunch of respectable luminaries gave nice-sounding speeches. Horowitz then appeared on stage and warned them that they don’t have what it takes to take on the Enemy that is far more dogged, cynical, driven, radical, and ruthless. And given what happened in coming yrs, Horowitz was right.
Where he was wrong was the failure to see that this danger came not only from the ‘left’ but from Neocons who got overly power-hungry and corrupt. Horowitz’s Zionism made him overlook the excesses of the Neocons and Bush II. Still, his attack on NeverTrump Neocons in 2016 indicates his disenchantment with them. Horowitz saw them as careerists than good soldiers.

Now, Horowitz’s reason for supporting Trump is very different from that of Alt Right, but both sides seems to understand that a new vanguard is necessary to move away from old staid and defunct paradigms of power. These are radical times.

Also, Neocons grew out of Trotskyism prior to the 60s. Its heyday was when leftist radicalism was still adult and ‘conservative’ and mature in style. The ideas were radical but the personal style was still respectable, restrained, and even ‘bourgeois’. After all, even Trotsky himself didn’t have a tattoo on his ass or indulge in homomania.

So, former Trotskyites didn’t really get what the 60s were about. They just took flight from the crazy left of the 60s and found a new home in the GOP as the Democrats seemed to cave too much to black demands. (As immigration and globalism made the Democrats increasing the Diversity party and Free Trade party and LESS the black party and white ‘dumb Polack’ labor party, some neocons began to move back. But then, BLM & BDS prolly triggered a good number of Jews even if they mostly stuck with Hillary. If Hillary’s loss leads to Democratic Party being taken over by blacks and anti-Zionist POC, it could spell exodus of Jews.)
In contrast, Horowitz was in the very thick of 60s radicalism that was far more nihilistic, narcissistic, and decadent that ‘leftism’ of an earlier time. Those elements of excesses of 60s culture meant that future politics could be more no-holds-barred, reckless, and insane.
If Neocons didn’t get 60s radicalism and just ran from it, Horowitz was at its center and saw everything. So, he knows the mind-set of the Left. Now, he must know that the hardcore 60s leftist types didn’t gain the most power. After all, it was the middle-of-roaders like Clintons and Obamas and Kerrys that gained power, not the Bill Ayers and Abbie Hoffman’s. But Horowitz is convinced that the entire Left spectrum since the 60s is infected with the same nihilistic spirit. Given the rise of homomania and reckless globalist open borders rhetoric, he may be right. GLOB went capitalist, but its spirit is totally nihilistic and destructive of order, the organic, and the meaningful. What the Right failed to understand is that this destructive spirit could also animate the capitalists. If there is anything that unites Wall Street goons like Jordan Belfort and commies like Bill Ayers, it’s their utter nihilism. Anything goes for the struggle, power, and wealth. No holds barred.

And we’ve seen that with the rise of Progs trained and brainwashed by boomer radical globs. And in a way, Trump is also part of this excessive politics of boomer era. Fewer inhibitions, wilder, more aggressive, shameless, blustering, and etc. But Trump victory suggests that some are waking to the fact that in the new order, fire must be met with fire.

Posted in Jews | Comments Off on Forward: “Trump’s Reported Pick of Rex Tillerson as Secretary of State Spooks Jewish Groups”