Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Goodbye America’ Category

Yesterday, the 9th Circuit of Hell ruled that the stay of Trump’s travel ban from seven Muslim countries (a stay for which a migrant-adopting cucked Judge Robarts in WA state literally made up the basis for out of whole cloth and feelz) was legal and would continue.

The traitors who sit on the 9th Circuit of Hell (headquarters: San Francisco, CA) essentially ruled that the President and the Executive Branch have no discretion to set the nation’s immigration policies. This is the unavoidable precedence that is established by their decision.

Allow me to cut to the quick with this leetle shiv I have at the ready:

The judiciary is corrupt. The shitlib-infested courts are black robed enforcers and propagandists of Democreep legislation and Democreep executive orders, and act as a “check” only on conservative legislation or Republican President EOs.

The courts, iow, are completely biased and partial adjudicators of the law, which they now define into existence as whatever meets the anti-White shitlib standard of excellence.

Checks and balances apply to the judiciary too, and we’re well past the time when the courts need to be brought to heel. Trump was elected by the people; judges are appointed. Trump has more legitimacy than the 9th circuit court because he is a more direct conduit to the American people’s voice.

I see three post-9th Circuit of Hell options for Trump:

  1. Follow his ban with more Trump EOs that shitlibs have to endlessly parry. (flood the zone)
  2. Wait for Gorsuch confirmation, and bring the refugee ban to SCOTUS where that court will HAVE to weigh in its favor, or lose legitimacy
  3. Crush the judiciary

Point 3 will require a GOP Congress that Trump can rely on to strip the judiciary of power, which is far from a given. There is also the quasi-military option; aka a show of force. Trump just goes ahead and commands LEO and other border authorities to follow his EOs and ignore the judges. And finally there’s the FDR nuclear option: threaten to pack SCOTUS and reduce the power of each individual justice.

Point 2 also requires faith in the sanity and loyalty of Judge Gorsuch to the American people. (we’ve been burned before by noms turned libshit….). Frustratingly, evidence has emerged that Gorsuch may be a crypto-liberal in the mold of David Souter.

Point 1 is the easiest for Trump to succeed with in the short term, but also the least damaging to the anti-White Left in the long term, for it leaves their stranglehold on the judiciary in place, and cauterizes the Left’s framing of the citizenship and border issues.

I’m partial to number three. Blow this mother up. Pat Buchanan and Daniel Horowitz agree: It is time to dismantle the 9th Circuit of Hell. And that is only the first step to get this activist globohomo judicial tyranny to bend the knee to Heritage America.

Immigration, borders, and the National Question are the Gom Jabbar/Pain Box and the Voight-Kampff tests of humanity rolled into one. Will the nation find its core humanness, or will it withdraw to nation-wrecking instinct and embrace a lack of empathy for fellow Americans?

Demography is the Left’s source of power. If they lose on the National Question, they lose on all the other globalist initiatives they want to visit on ordinary Americans, because no amount of miseries heaped on Heritage America is too much to the anti-White Left. This is why the Left will fight to the brink of Civil War II for their “right” to spread the Constitution thin enough to cover the entire world’s ingrate indigents.

Like Love, if you indiscriminately extend US Rights to everyone in the world, then Rights mean nothing.

Pathological altruism will kill us, or we will kill it. And killing an idea has historically all too often required….well, you fill in the blank.

Read Full Post »

Readers Moses exposes a tentacle of the mighty underworld octopus of Jewish censorship and consent manufacture.

OT re: censorship. I didn’t know it was this bad.

Yesterday I posted 2 comments on a story in “The Hill” about the 9th Circuit Court’s ruling striking down Trump’s temporary immigration ban.

Guess which comment was removed?

First comment:

People who voted for Trump deserved to get beaten with metal rods by masked blackshirts at Berkeley.

Second comment:

“The plaintiffs in the case, Washington and Minnesota, maintain that the order violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, which prohibits the government from favoring one religion over another.”

If that’s the case, then the Jackson-Vanik Amendment to the Trade Act of 1974 is unconstitutional as well. That amendment favored Jews from the Soviet Union for immigration to the USA. It did NOT favor people of other religions for immigration which was effective negative discrimination against other religions and positive discrimination in favor of Jews.

The second comment was simply a statement of fact and connecting the dots on consistency of Constitutional principles. Yet it was deemed verboten and removed.

The first comment expressed [sarcastic] glee at political violence against Trump supporters. Yet it was left unmolested.

Let that sink in for a minute. The Hill management cannot bear even FACTS that might adversely affect Jews or perception of Jews. Yet they condone by non-removal the cheering of political violence.

I was curious, so I checked the management of The Hill. From Wikipedia:

The paper was founded in 1994 and was published by New York businessman Jerry Finkelstein. The paper is currently owned by his son Jimmy Finkelstein, who serves as its chairman.

My takeaways:
1) Every. Single. Time.
2) If you think Skypes are not a threat to America you need to have your head examined.
3) The left hates you. They want you dead. Literally.

I know Mencius Moldbug (né Curtis Yarvin) likes to refer to this octopus of nation-state orchiectomy as “The Cathedral”, but it’s a bit more precise to call it “The Synagogue”. Or, if you’re like me and prefer an inclusive label that captures both disproportionate Jewish anti-Gentilic malignancy and numerically impressive shitlib Gentile anti-BadWhite malignancy, “The Leftoid Equalist Hivemind”.

PS The Establishment Clause applies to citizens of the United States. It doesn’t mean every Juan, Dak, and Habib in the world enjoys the same First Amendment right to plop en masse onto America’s shores. The fact that anti-White shitlibs have twisted the Judiciary to rule in favor of such a lunatic interpretation of the Establishment Clause proves just how far past the date we are for a massive and thorough house-cleaning of the courts. By force, if necessary.

Read Full Post »

“Days Of Rage”

I’ve been meaning to link to this great post at Status 451, which is a review of the Bryan Burrough book “Days of Rage” and a look at the late 60s/early 70s political upheaval and violence in America. The categorical differences in Left/Right revolutionary fervor are also examined, with a special consideration for the now largely memory-holed murderous violence committed by radical black activist groups.

In short, the near-term prognosis for our nation is not good.

This is the difference between the hard Left & hard Right: you can be a violent leftist radical and go on to live a pretty kickass life. This is especially true if you’re a leftist of the credentialed class: Ph.D. or J.D.

The big three takeaways for me about Weatherman, when it comes to political violence in America as we might see it in 2016:

  1. Radicalism can come from anywhere. The Weathermen weren’t oppressed, or poor, or anything like that. They were hard leftists. That’s it.
  2. Sustained political violence is dependent on the willing cooperation of admirers and accomplices. The Left has these. The Right does not.
  3. Not a violent issue, but a political one: ethnic issues involving access to power can both empower and derail radical movements.

Interestingly, a lot of the 60s/70s political violence originated with revolutionary groups based out of California and the West in general. Agnostic would say this fact follows from the basic character of Far West Americans, who are rootless itinerants and radical individualists prone to falling into cults and infiltrating mainstream religions.

What does it mean for us? First, let’s be blunt: most political violence is not going to be as well-trained & highly disciplined as FALN. You’re not going to see that level of skill again, unless the Cubans decide they want to come to play. What you might see, on both sides, is what to me is the most amazing part of the FALN story: its parasitization of the Episcopal Church.

And the important point that Leftist murderers are simply more tolerated, even coddled, by the establishment:

The other takeaway: again, Lefty radicals have more opportunities and more acceptance from their mainstream than Righty ones. I don’t see Eric Rudolph getting clemency, no matter the administration. He shouldn’t. Nor should have FALN.

A new Turchin cycle (a Fourth Turning) is descending upon us:

But it’s the implications of Bryan Burrough’s book that scare the willies out of me.

I am afraid that the United States is in for political violence in 2017. It could be as bad as or worse than the 1970s. I have some ideas as to what some of it may look like. It really isn’t pleasant to think about.

***

I’m going to talk about some nasty things here. I do not want any of it. But some or all of it could happen. Some of it already is. In 2017, I am very pessimistic about America’s future, to the point that I think the country should seriously consider a National Divorce.

Everyone feeling nice and at ease now? Good, let’s get started.

Let’s not mince words: the United States of America is currently engaged in a cold Civil War.

***

So maybe we can hope that political violence in the US, ’70s-style, won’t go all-out for massive numbers of deaths? Well… maybe. The way I see it, domestic conflict in the United States could operate in basically four stages:

  1. cold Civil War
  2. targeted political violence, mostly short of murder
  3. political violence with murder as the default
  4. Civil War II

The United States should start seriously talking about National Divorce before we get to stage 3.

We’re in Stage 1 now. Stages 2 and 3 are what we’re concerned with: the public getting mobilized. What would that look like, on Left and Right?

People tend to think that the Right will be an awesome, horrific force in political violence. The SPLC’s donations depend on that idea. Righties tell themselves that *of course* they’d win a war against Lefties. Tactical Deathbeast vs. Pajama Boy? No contest. Why, Righties have thought about what an effective domestic insurrection would look like. Righties have written books and manifestos!

It’s horseshit.

The truth: the Left is a lot more organized & prepared for violence than the Right is, and has the advantage of a mainstream more supportive of it.

What about the pro-Trump military?

Righties might go, “Yeah, but the military!” Yes, the military runs very heavily Righty. As do the cops. To which my answer is: if we get Civil War II, how many Americans do you think the U.S. military is willing to run over with tanks?

And that’s all the author says about it. A pat assertion, with which I disagree. If the situation heats up enough, like it did just before the first Civil War, then the military (red state through and through) will be more than willing to crush leftist Americans in the streets. Or turn their guns on Leftist institutions like academia, federal buildings, and media headquarters.

The Chateau Civil War II Doomsday Clock now calculates that the chances of bloody internecine war within the next ten years is more likely than not.

Read Full Post »

The two most virulent and mentally handicapping strains (perhaps the only two strains worth noting) of feminism in America are Nordic Feminism (NF) and Jewish Feminism (JF). Those BitterBitchMarch protest photos of screeching SJW fish-mouthed feminists? Odds are those lovely ladies have a dollop of Nord DNA. And all the feminist bilge pouring out of the anti-White Krull machine known as Hollywood and academia? That’s created by Jewish women (and their astoundingly cucked men).

Commenter PA explores the two feminism camps and how they may differ.

There is a strain of feminism native to Nordics that’s driven to break boys. It comes from a fear of strong or dissolute men. What makes it different from Jewish feminism is that it doesn’t seek to corrupt the famiIy, only to subordinate the famiIy to the woman’s authority. Those kinds of women aren’t inclined toward hypergamy — they despise alphas, marry betas whom they might henpeck but to whom they’ll stay faithful, and they will castrate their sons.

I think that’s basically right, except that NFs only superficially despise alpha men; I’ve known too many NFs with sexual histories that could read like instruction manuals for how to fall into bed with alpha badboys and bitch about the inevitable pump and dump for months afterward.

Same for JFs; they’re very adept at rationalizing a vocal hatred for masculine alphas, but when push comes to love, they can’t resist the crow of the cocksure cock.

I also have noticed, to buttress PA’s insight, that NFs do often settle down into egalitarian anhedonia with the wimpiest honey-do betaboy male feminists. JFs are more ethnocentric in their settling calculus, preferring the betas of their own tribe, male feminist or not, or when they out-marry, preferring to engage in long-term subterfuge to mold their goy toys into affiliative Jews. The NFs tend to choose born-cucked hubbies who come pre-equipped with the whole suite of insipid feminist fantasy beliefs.

Another difference (besides the relatively greater ethnocentricity of the JF and the more sincere universalism of the NF) is the anger that fuels their man-hatred. Give or take the expected slate of exceptions, in my observation NFs are ANGRIER about their feminism than are JFs, who wield their feminist ideology more like a lawyerly brief to undermine goyciety than like an emotional call to arms against the patriarchy which will never go anywhere but in the battlefield of their fevered imaginations.

It’s all a bit odd when one considers that

  1. Judaism is traditionally a patriarchal religion and
  2. the Nordic countries are among the most sexually dichotomous in practice, according to research, where men take man jobs and woman take woman jobs and physically their women are among the most beautiful on earth.

I’ll open the floor to more discussion of this topic, since it’s a fascinating one that potentially can reveal a lot about the female-driven leftoid hysteria and demand for open borders to the swarth world that is currently gripping America and fated to destroy the nation as we’ve known her.

Read Full Post »

A beautiful, tragicomic shiv that exposes the diseased vitals of White Western woman. She spreads her…love…for any ingrate who will have it while fighting for the death of her posterity.

We’ve left Clown World behind for a more thrilling attraction: the Culling Fields.

Read Full Post »

Audi released a Super Bowl ad that is more devious than it looks at first glance. Superficially a feminist boilerplate hack job, its real message is that Audi is a car for the GoodWhite victors in their eternal war against the BadWhite losers.

The Internet is in the proverbial tizzy about Audi’s “feminist” Super Bowl advertisement, in which the automaker comes out in favor of equal pay for women.

***

After watching the one-minute advertisement carefully, however, I understood feminism, or equal pay, is the last thing Audi wants you to take away from it. The message is far subtler, and more powerful, than the dull recitation of the pseudo-progressive catechism droning on in the background. This spot is visual — and as you’ll see below, you can’t understand it until you watch it and see what it’s really telling you.

Advertising — especially advertising of the anti-White male and anti-BadWhite varieties — is a psy ops of bone-chillingly manipulative complexity and influence. The GloboHomoBezos Ministry of Propaganda did not get to where it is by playing softball. And for quite a long time, American advertising has had as its mission statement the demoralization and demonization of White people who aren’t sufficiently eager to be absorbed into the mudworld and feminist man-hating borg.

Well, if you’ve been reading along, I think you’ve figured out what the real message of this Audi advertisement is, but just in case you’ve been napping I will spell it out for you: Money and breeding always beat poor white trash. Those other kids in the race, from the overweight boys to the hick who actually had an American flag helmet to the stripper-glitter girl? They never had a chance. They’re losers and they always will be, just like their loser parents. Audi is the choice of the winners in today’s economy, the smooth talkers who say all the right things in all the right meetings and are promoted up the chain because they are tall (yes, that makes a difference) and handsome without being overly masculine or threatening-looking.

At the end of this race, it’s left to the Morlocks to clean the place up and pack the derby cars into their trashy pickup trucks, while the beautiful people stride off into the California sun, the natural and carefree winners of life’s lottery.

The White War is heating up. Instead of finding common ground, White factions are squaring off and preparing in every way but firing actual shots for a coming Civil War II. Advertisers that sell to upscale GoodWhite (or, what they should be called, FoolWhite) markets have chosen sides and all firepower is now directed without remorse or mercy on the enemy BoldWhites.

It’s getting hot in here. The nearer shitlibs approach their reckoning and destruction of their equalism worldview, the louder and more insistent will be their calls for violence. America will hit a breaking point, a threshold of discarded empathy, when the sputtering vituperation will boil over into manifest vengeance. This reality is becoming less avoidable by the day. And, as I have cautioned shitlibs who strayed into this happy hunting ground before, their side won’t win this time around.

Read Full Post »

Why are mass protests usually the domain of crazy-eyed leftoids? I’ve mentioned it before — and parisian privilege mentions it here — that geographic distribution plays a role in the Right-Left mass protest disparity. It’s simply a fact that densely populated coastal cities loaded up with shitlibs provide a large, quickly mobilized base from which to efficiently scale up a mass protest.

Conservatives number in the single percentiles in most of the blue megalopolises that host these mass protests; they live in the suburbs and towns, so getting into the city for them means a minimum one hour trek by car and then finding street parking or paying through the nose for it at a garage. Shitlibs living in the city can roll out of bed, and if they skip the shower (they often do), they can be downtown with their paper mache puppets in fifteen minutes flat. Geographic centralization and density without a doubt amplifies shitlib protest formation.

And it’s far easier to get the word out about a protest inside of shitlibistans. One poster advertising a march stapled to a kiosk on one city block will reach a thousand eyeballs. Where would one tape up a poster in the suburbs? A street light pole. Ok, that’ll be seen by the fifteen people who live on that leafy suburban street.

Pleasureman unnecessarily and superciliously objects to this theory, which is a habit I’ve noticed of him. PugnaciousMan is a natural contrarian — it’s the trait that probably drew him to the maul-right and against the reigning equalism orthodoxy — but he carries his contrarian banner into too many battlefields, frequently winding up contradicting himself out of stubborn resistance to conforming to a majority view. No need for the perpetual pissiness, Pman, you can curb your obstinacy without losing e-dad cred. Geography plays a role in the relative paucity of conservative mass protests; so do other factors, which you and others in your thread wrote about; the factors aren’t mutually exclusive.

Pman prefers to blame character or personality failings of conservatives for their aversion to political activism. He belittles conservatives for this, but it’s unfair to call conservative “inactivism” a failing; rather, conservatives have inherited a unique suite of personality traits and moral feelings that predispose them to methods of registering their disagreement and of seeking social belonging that aren’t mass protests.

I happen to think the moral dimension of DISGUST has a lot to tell us about leftoid protest organizational skill and affinity for mass protesting. A big moral chasm between conservatives and liberals is the feeling of disgust; cons have low disgust thresholds (they are acutely sensitive to disgusting things or disgusting people) and libs have high disgust thresholds (they can tolerate, even enjoy wallowing in, disgusting things). Gathering tit-to-tit and fagface-to-fagface by the thousands, hoisting obscene placards and wearing obscene costumes, and cursing for hours at the top of one’s lungs feels disgusting to cons. Libs, otoh, practically live for the degenerate slop life.

Keep in mind, too, that atomized city living requires a different way of looking at friendships. SWPL city libs have fewer means of building social connections than do cons. The urban shitlib has lost the social glue of his family and the neighborhood he grew up in. He has to befriend people through his job…or through similar political outlook. And the multiracial, low trust blue cities lean heavily on politics as a friendship glue, at least for Whites. So you’ve got a dense population of extremely politicized shitlibs yearning for social belonging who are within walking distance of mass protest sites and are bombarded on every street corner with posters screaming for “resistance”.

Now, I happen to agree with Pman and others that cons need to get better at mass protesting, or whatever the optical equivalent of mass protesting is, because as long as the media acts as a leftoid propaganda mill framing all lib vice as virtue and con virtue as vice, cons can’t afford to cede the protest arena to shitlib shenanigans. Cons may not like it, but when Civil War II is looming it’s time to tear away from the college football and hit the streets, real or metaphorical, to do your part reframing the media anti-White message machine. If there was ever a time for acting and not just reacting, this is it.

But the adage “maximum your strengths, minimize your weaknesses” applies here; maybe cons shouldn’t bother getting in the street theater mud with shitlibs where the latter are strongest. I don’t know what the optimal counter-attack will be for cons, but it has to include defusing the leftoid legacy media normie-destruction protocol. Which Trump is doing, PBUH.

I also don’t buy the argument that leftoids are better at organizing protests because they’re SMRTer or more conscientious than conservatives.

And contrary to the self-serving pablum pushed by conservatives, almost all of these high-involvement liberal activists have jobs and a healthy majority have at least some sort of family commitment. They’re just way more willing to make personal sacrifices for the sake of political action than conservatives are, and the squalid direction of American society over the last half century bears witness to this tragic fact.

Maybe the top of the shitlib protest organizational chart is staffed with UMC mcmansion strivers, but the rank and file — you know the hundreds of thousands down on the field capturing media attention — really are disproportionately filled with bitter aging spinsters, childless shrikes with libtart degrees working as baristas, and their weak chinless male hangers-on thinking of post-protest pity blowies.

The sexual market is, like with most big picture issues, the best lens for viewing the phenomenon of mass protesting. Conservatives find fulfillment checking off in a timely manner the traditional milestones of a good life. Liberals below the UMC level enjoy more chaotic, novelty-seeking lives, and part of that can mean enduring stretches of sexual and romantic dissatisfaction or loneliness. And in fact we see this behavioral preference of liberals reflected in the fertility of their women, who average fewer kids than do conservative women. Mass protests are the shitlib sublimation of their reduced fertility. They hope their slogans will seed the future they aren’t conceiving.

Conservatives may numerically outnumber liberals nationally, but it doesn’t matter because in the political protest arena that anyone is showing up to, liberals vastly outnumber cons. So cons should focus on fighting an asymmetric war against the louder voices of the Left. This could mean hidden camera type stuff, like James O’Keefe does, or prank videos, like Sam Hyde does. On a larger scale, it means trust-busting the tech and media oligarchies. Guerrilla tactics are how the geographically distributed Right will take down the densely urbanized Left. Small, thematically targeted protests by cons in their suburbs and towns, multiplied a thousand-fold across the nation and coordinated to exploit the transmission power of the net, WILL have an impact on the media narrative, even if the media tries to negatively spin it.

And it needs to be said, conservatives steeled themselves for the fight when they unburdened themselves of the demoralizing dead weight of their cowardly cuckservative opinion “leaders”. Trump’s greatest blow, imo, was his utter annihilation of any coherent or effective controlled opposition of cuck saboteurs. Once he did that, he could turn his gatlings on the Left and the media with much greater force than if he had to fire while weaselly cucks were pushing the safety back on. Trump opened a way forward for local conservatives to fight back against the poz; his greatest gift to them has been to show that victory can be had without betraying one’s principles.

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »

%d bloggers like this: