* 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 inWASPs|Comments Off on Anglo-Saxons vs Europeans
* 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 inIsrael, Jews|Comments Off on CBS Finds a Jewish Man Who Likes Trump and Putin
* 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 inAlt Right|Comments Off on White Nationalist Richard Spencer
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.
* 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 inJews|Comments Off on The Radical Jewish Mind
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 inAlt Right|Comments Off on What Is The Alt-Right?
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 inDating, Dennis Prager, Sex|Comments Off on Men View Women As Sex Objects, So What?
* 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 inJews|Comments Off on Forward: “Trump’s Reported Pick of Rex Tillerson as Secretary of State Spooks Jewish Groups”
It is hard to believe, but it has been more than a month since Donald Trump won the presidential election. Since then, the media have developed an obsession with “fake news.” Fake news, they tell us, may have swung the election in favor of Mr. Trump—the implication being that no one who knew what was actually going on could possibly have voted for him.
The latest version of the “fake news” theory is that the Russian government was behind it. The Russians were apparently so keen on a Trump presidency, they set up a network of news outlets to spin things in their—and therefore Trump’s—favor. Anonymous groups of “experts” have complied a list of Kremlin stooges, and mainstream outlets are reporting this as gospel. American Renaissance and Vdare.com have now been unmaksed as outlets for Russian propaganda. Even Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama have now spoken out against the scourge of “fake news.”
The purpose of these smears is obvious. The mainstream is losing its hold on its audience, which is turning to alternative news sources, including American Renaissance. The legacy media seem to think that if they say we are “fake” or “propaganda,” the masses will come back to the New York Times and the Washington Post.
The irony is that it was mainstream outlets that have had their predictions proven chronically wrong for the last 18 months—not us or Breitbart—and no site has been more guilty than Politico. The preferred source of political news for Beltway operatives, for this entire cycle, Politico was not only wrong about most everything, it also did everything possible to denigrate Donald Trump, who they constantly assured us, could never win anyway.
A lot of their stories came from “insiders”—which underlined Politico’s status as privileged reporters, constantly rubbing shoulders with important “insiders.” A typical headline would be, “Insiders: Trump Administration Will Be a Disaster.” Somehow, the insiders were almost always anonymous.
The opening two sentences were typically dismissive:
“Donald Trump launched his quixotic presidential bid Tuesday in a speech at his Trump Tower office building in Manhattan.
The discursive, pugnacious announcement was one of the more bizarre spectacles of the 2016 political season thus far — and one of the most entertaining.”
Mr. Gingrich, who attacked Mitt Romney for being too anti-immigrant in 2012, refused to criticize affirmative action while he was speaker in 1990s, and won Wilmot Robertson’s title of “Majority Renegade of the Year” as far back as 1986. He was obviously a terrible choice.
The vice-presidential debate, which even Politico admitted was uninteresting to most Americans, had fewer viewers than any vice-presidential debate since 2000.
Comments: One of the more depressing things about the current “Trump is a Russian Stooge” craze, and the other lunacies shrieking in the media is their opportunity cost, pushing out all observation of anything true and interesting about our nearly revolutionary times.
What might be the actual economic costs and gains of pulling back from current trade arrangements, and reducing free movement of jobs from our country? Who wins and who loses? Is there any way this can be made to work well for current American workers?
What kind of management style might we expect from someone like Trump, given his unique background as someone who became President without ever being in government in any capacity, but who was successful in his own private business? What might be the upside and downside to such a background?
What does it mean to be looking out strictly for American interests in the current world, from a diplomatic and military point of view? What should be the limits to our obligations to other countries, and to people in other countries?
You see, we can’t have those discussions in the current media environment. In that setting, the only permitted “analyses” are those that show we are heading off to doom, that Trump is the first phase of Hitler, that the Russians are Coming, and that men in white hoods rampage through our lands in bloodthirsty search of the Dark Other.
Posted inAmerica|Comments Off on Trump Is A Putin Stooge?
J.M. Berger, a fellow with the International Centre for Counter-Terrorism in The Hague who wrote the report, says social media give extremists some powerful tools for growth: anonymity and an easy way to seek out people with similar interests.
“That’s the real danger,” he said in a recent interview. “If you were a radical Druid in 1950 living in Peoria, Illinois, you could go your whole life without ever meeting anybody who shared your views. Now if you’re that same person, you get online, and within an hour you can be following a hundred other radical Druids. And in two or three weeks, you can all be getting together to plant trees.”
In an essay titled “The Social Apocalypse: A Forecast,” Berger notes that ISIS, also known as the Islamic State, has become a globally disruptive force even though its members number only in the tens of thousands. He warns that a network of 1 million, a tiny sliver of the world’s population, could “wreak unimaginable havoc.”
“Without meaningful controls,” he adds, “we will see millions of people organize themselves according to racial, class, or religious identity in defiance of a generation of progress toward pluralism.”
It strikes me that people naturally organize themselves according to racial, class or religious identity. The only widespread exception to that was in dominantly Anglo countries. By destroying WASP dominance, Jews and company made organization along racial and religious identity inevitable.
Posted inWASPs|Comments Off on Boston Globe: Should Twitter ban the alt-right? The case for online censorship
"This guy knows all the gossip, the ins and outs, the lashon hara of the Orthodox world. He’s an [expert] in... all the inner workings of the Orthodox world." (Rabbi Aaron Rakeffet-Rothkoff)
