Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘The Big City Life’ Category

That is funny as hell. But again I cannot tell if a shitlib protestor is man, woman, or xir-beast. The modern Left is a Rorschach test. What sex and/or species do you see?

Leftoid protestors used to have a veneer of coolness (way back), until the internet thunderdome exposed them all as androgynous fatty crybaby loser fugs. They’re like a mass catfish operation on normie society; you think you’re reading about scary revolutionaries and then a phone camera catches them blubbering in the middle of the street as cheetos tumble out of their chin folds and you’re not sure if they pee sitting or standing.

***

Pudendum: I’ve always had a fondness for Bill Clinton, and this is why:

I don’t doubt that Trump and Bill Clinton were good friends (at one time). Unapologetic alphas who love women tend to “get” each other.

Read Full Post »

Black predisposition to violent criminality well above the rates for other races receives all the focus as evidence of innate racial differences and incompatibility with White culture, but crime rate is only one of the myriad ways — albeit a very sensationalist way — in which the black and white races fundamentally differ.

Culturally, mentally, morally, behaviorally, and temperamentally, the group characteristics of blacks are different than those of Whites. The exceptions to these race-based generalities are uncommon enough to compel people to take special notice of them.

One non-crime related difference springs to mind: Blacks are more demanding than Whites. This black personality quirk expresses itself unmistakably when a black person wants information from a White person. The black will rarely say “Excuse me” before politely asking a question, preferring instead the grill-to-grill direct approach: a loud and abrupt assault, often taken from an angle that maximizes the element of surprise, on the personal ear-space of the White, demanding this or that service rendered. Examples of the genre: “YO YOU GOT THE TIME?”, “WHICH BUS THIS IS?”, “FIVE DOLLAR FOR A HAMBURGER. NO? ALRIGHT THEN, PEACE TO YOU”, “YOU GOT A QUARTER FOR THE METER?”, “WHERE THE BATHROOM AT?”, “GOT A PHONE ON YA? MINE’S BUSTED. I GOTTA CALL SOMEBODY.” (like I’m gonna hand my phone over to a ghetto fabulous rando on the street).

Compared to their love of murder, this specialty of blacks is small potatoes, but the little, annoying, black ways of doing things add up to make their Section 8s and District 9s unlivable shitholes for even White libs who profess a love of Diversity and speaking in a steady stream of euphemisms.

And blacks aren’t the only players in town. All the nonWhite races differ in multitudinous ways from Whites; some of these differences are amusing, some are aggravating, and some are downright menacing. Which is why John Derbyshire was correct when he wrote that Diversity should be a seasoning, never the stew.

Read Full Post »

It seems by casual examination of the 2016 election results that the city-countryside political divide in America is hitting a zenith (or nadir).

whorefinder writes what this could mean for the future of America as a single political entity.

When empires are on the verge of collapse, it occurs when the political divide in the country is between city and country—or, more definitely, when the city folks don’t care about the country folks and vice versa. Happened in the Roman Empire, happened in the Ottomon Empire, happened in Persian Empire.

I don’t know the cause of such divides, but it becomes strikingly obvious when you read history: when city and country are the dominant political divides, the country is doomed.

City mouse and country mouse rape!

The geographic divide in 2016 has shifted from where it had been for decades — North vs South — to East vs West. That is significant. (Agnostic has lots of posts explaining why this shift was predictable.)

But as significant as that geographic shift is, it pales in comparison with the stunning bifurcation in voting behavior we now have between America’s dense urban Diversitopias and her rural and suburban provinces that blithely cling to a slim White majority population profile. I’ve seen analysis that showed this election had the largest divide between city and countryside of any election in US history.

whorefinder is right; the city-countryside divide — or SCALE-COMMUNITY divide — is an ominous portent of American collapse.

Scanman reminds us that our current city-countryside divide is not unique in American history. (But perhaps its Trump-era intensity is unique.)

The divide has been there since before Jefferson and Hamilton but I don’t know if it has ever been so stark and raw. Rural nationalists vs (diverse) urban globalists.

My money will always be on the guys who can change their own oil and know how to hang a door.

whorefinder replies,

The divide was there at that time–it was why the union was so tenuous during and after the Revolution. Southern agrarians and citified Northerners were at odds, and the South was very hard to convince to rebel against Britain compared with commercial centers in the North. But during later periods the divide waned—midwestern farmers became allied with eastern banking interests, etc. In the 20th century the divide all but disappeared after FDR’s realignment. But it has reemerged in the last few decades with a vengeance.

The Trump phenomenon has been compared favorably to the rises of Andrew Jackson, Teddy Roosevelt, and Reagan, but I’ve been telling friends that Trump is most like FDR; a re-aligner who will, if he’s true to his word and character, usher forth the next era of classical egalitarianism of the kind the US had mid-20th Century during the “great compression”.

If Trump doesn’t succeed, and his successor is a Diversity Is Our Strength anti-White retread, then the urban-province divide will find a resolution in a second civil war; though this time the sanctimonious side won’t win. The military bleeds red state values, and the cities by themselves are easy to blockade and starve out.

Read Full Post »

Proof that illegal aliens and assorted non-citizens have changed the outcome of US Presidential and Congressional elections comes from this study, which found

First use of representative sample to measure non-citizen voting in USA.

Some non-citizens cast votes in U.S. elections despite legal bans.

Non-citizens favor Democratic candidates over Republican candidates.

Non-citizen voting likely changed 2008 outcomes including Electoral College votes and the composition of Congress.

Voter photo-identification rules have limited effect on non-citizen participation.

In spite of substantial public controversy, very little reliable data exists concerning the frequency with which non-citizen immigrants participate in United States elections. Although such participation is a violation of election laws in most parts of the United States, enforcement depends principally on disclosure of citizenship status at the time of voter registration. This study examines participation rates by non-citizens using a nationally representative sample that includes non-citizen immigrants. We find that some non-citizens participate in U.S. elections, and that this participation has been large enough to change meaningful election outcomes including Electoral College votes, and Congressional elections. Non-citizen votes likely gave Senate Democrats the pivotal 60th vote needed to overcome filibusters in order to pass health care reform and other Obama administration priorities in the 111th Congress.

WOOMP DERE IT IS

Voter fraud is rampant and widespread in America, it almost entirely benefits Democreeps, and it likely altered the outcome of the 2008 Election, handing Gay Mulatto the Presidency (illegally, it turns out).

Now we can say with assurance that voter fraud affected the 2016 election, and that Trump won a much more decisive victory than his total population count would indicate, because millions of thecunt’s votes were cast by non-citizens. If voter fraud was bad enough in 2008 to change the outcome of the election, then you can bet it’s a lot worse today, eight years later during which time Democreeps and Cuckpublicans have done NOTHING to fix the problem and have, in fact, actively encouraged more non-citizens to vote by failing to pass any bill that would restrict the franchise to American citizens and make it more difficult for migrant squatters to vote a craven multikult-monger into office.

The Trumpening had better take no prisoners, because its opposite — The Cravening — has had no moral compunction disenfranchising heritage America. This is war.

Read Full Post »

I loved this comment by TicklingTimeBomb describing the Life Cycle of the White Urban Shitlib (WUS for short).

I live in the urban educated white demographic being talked about here.

If I had to hazard an anecdotally-informed guess, it’d go something like this:

Urban educated whites start families very late. So they spend a LONG time without kids, often with good or great jobs, enjoying all sorts of DINK goods and services that cities can provide. And their views on government are often, mostly, at the level of abstractions and virtue signalling. And a lot of them are in the weird situation that they have quite a lot of disposable income, which means they feel pretty economically secure from one vantage point… which leads them to having lots of moral outrage about the plight of minorities who are their neighbors (from a few neighborhoods over) and who use the failing schools and suffer all the gang violence. So they feel Privileged. [ed: the source of tikkun olam] And yet on the other hand, they also feel incredibly economically pinched, because of insane housing prices, and student loan debt, and the need (down the road) for paying for private schools, which contributes hugely to them putting off family formation, along with social norms from their peers about it not being a big deal to start families late, and to have few children.

If you’re this person, the idea that government should step in and make it easier for you to start a family is pretty understandable. It sucks to be hitting your mid/late 30′s and thinking your life is just on hold for ever. OF COURSE, you’re actually right in this case. You SHOULD be looking to government to step in… because in the places where people can afford houses, like in major Texas cities, government absolutely does play a huge role in setting zoning, tax, and regulatory regimes that are pro-growing-the-middle-class housing supply. Ironically.

What I have seen, over and over, is that white educated urban dwellers have their first kid, weather a year or two trying to make it work, and then either their kids gets too big for their apartment and starts needing school, or the lack of yards starts grating, or they have a second kid, and they end up giving up, and abandoning the city. And then they move out to the suburbs, have their attitudes change, start seeing the other side of policy discussions because they now have kids and so have skin in the game, and they’re now surrounded by neighbors with a different set of social norms about family and government – hell, maybe they even join the local megachurch because they think the socialization will be good for their kids. They might still be socially liberal in some sort of airy abstract way, but at a nuts-and-bolts level, their tax dollars are segregated to people like themselves. And because they’ve moved, the norms of the cities they’ve had to abandon remain basically static. These people’s attitudes and world views change, but they bring those changes with them somewhere else, only to be replaced by younger versions of themselves in the city with their former attitudes. It’s like a standing wave.

This isn’t just purely theory – I’ve watched this process happen with people I know a bunch of times.

It’s tragicomic ’cause it’s true.

wuslifecycle

The point about cities being essentially “standing waves” of shitliberalism is spot on, and the reason why densely-populated cities will never politically convert to light blue, let alone pink or red. (A good test case of this assertion is to create a new city along the coast populated with only very conservative people bussed in from middle America. Will the city gradually turn blue, or will it be the deep red of the people who moved there and enjoy its hedonistic escapes?)

Cities aren’t just population sinks; they’re shitlord sinks. Any starting population of shitlords in a city won’t be able to sustain itself because the shitlords will “boil off”, leaving for the suburbs or countryside where their values and aesthetic don’t provoke aneurysms in the locals.

Of course, the shitlord sink theory of urbanity competes with the theory of heritable political disposition, but my thinking is that inherited dispositions (and their relation to reproductive fitness) are positively or negatively affected by the Weltanshauung of one’s human habitat; i.e., gene-culture co-evolution.

The one child-per family formation of WUSes mathematically means that their population will halve each generation, eventually meaning their extinction. So how do the cities continue functioning if there are fewer WUSes every year who feel an affinity for the anonymous child-free fucking of city life? (“put condom dispensers in grade schools, BIGOT”)

OPEN BORDERS IMMIGRATION is one method cities are replenished. Another city replenishment program is accomplished through the anonymous urban environment acting as a matchmaking service substitute for what used to be the concern of parents, church, and community, drawing in prime age hotties and high horny level anime aficionados on the promise of endless unencumbered sex and romantic interludes while dining at sidewalk cafes (but don’t make eye contact with the glowering google strutting by!).

tl;dr There’s a reason the anti-White and anti-Heritage America globalists want to herd everyone into dense urban spaygrounds modeled after Calhoun’s rat experiments (which they sell by exploiting environmental concerns about “sprawl”). City life is a shitliberalism factory with a handy expiration date built-in for the hated native stock.

Read Full Post »

The Daily Mail wonders if we Westerners are living through a time period when the numbers of aggressive, unfeminine, caustic, ball-busting battle-bitches are on the rise.

I think we are. And I’ll tell you why it’s happening. First…

So seemingly serene is the 51-year-old that she even soothes others in the course of her career as a reiki therapist. [ed: wtf?] But, like an increasing number of respectable women, Jo has become so consumed by rage that even a simple trip to buy the weekly groceries can lead to frighteningly aggressive outbursts. Recently, she completely ‘lost it’ when another driver tried to take the space she wanted in a Tesco car park.

Jo’s response was instant, and utterly disproportionate. ‘I was there first. So I got out of my car as he approached and shouted: ‘F*** you, a*******, I’m staying here until I get this space.’

‘The driver was a man much bigger than me, but I wasn’t intimidated. I told him we’d be stuck there all day if he didn’t move — which eventually he did.’

There’s the problem right there. If the Gynocratic State didn’t leash men, women wouldn’t be testing men’s patience like this cunt did.

Worryingly, it would seem this is a dangerous trend, seen by many as yet another dark side of equality.

Equalism is a false prophet heralding decay, misery, and eventual capitulation to nonbelievers.

Stories of professional women drinking themselves into ill health, trying to keep up with male colleagues are well documented.

Nothing good comes from reversing the sexual polarities.

But they are now matching men on the aggression front, too, putting themselves in physical danger — risking their good name, career prospects and relationships. In 1957, men were responsible for 11 violent offences for every one perpetrated by a woman — today, that is four to one.

Some of this shift towards more female violence (if accurate) is owed to the race replacement pogrom in Western countries. White women are fairly pacifist by world woman standards.

Add to the mix long hours, pressure juggling work and family life, plus fluctuating hormones caused by the menopause, PMS or childbirth and it’s no wonder so many women are exploding with rage.

I would’ve said “childlessness”. Failing at their most important life job has got to make careerist tankgrrls feel a little peeved.

Indeed, earlier this month it was reported that Oxford-educated Jocelyn Robson, a company director, 40, etched the word ‘c***’ in capital letters on two of her former boyfriends’ cars after they broke up.

“Oxford-educated”. “company director”. I guess it would be redundant to add “Maestro of Manjaws”.

And last month BBC presenter Jeremy Vine released footage of a woman — smartly dressed and driving a top-of-the-range car down one of London’s most expensive streets — who swore at him to ‘get the f*** off the road’ and allegedly kicked his bicycle.

These are the kind of women that men pump and remorselessly dump. And then these masculinized women have the gall to wonder why they have trouble finding a husband.

Research has also found that women are significantly more likely to be verbally and physically aggressive to men than vice versa — something physicians are seeing more of in their clinics.

Correction: BETA men. Since it’s obvious to anyone who has trawled a social media account that the ranks of weepy supplicating beta males in the West is at an all-time high, it’s no wonder women are lashing out at them. Weak men are like fat women: each defies the opposite sex’s romantic needs.

‘We are treating more women than ever who are struggling to regulate their emotions and express themselves appropriately,’

Sounds like the typical problem of men. This is what it looks like when the modren woman’s estrogen level are as low as the modren nümale’s testosterone level: bitterness, spite, aggression, acting out from an uneasy feeling that the world ain’t right.

And why is this anger afflicting so many upstanding women, the sort you might hope would be immune to, or too ashamed of, having outbursts?

“Upstanding” translated from the equalist leftoid mewlspeak means “over-credentialed careerist shrew”.

Some experts suggest women believe that such outward displays of aggression allow them to seize the initiative from traditionally dominant men.

NOPE. That’s not it. The usual feminist answer to these sorts of social changes is never the right one.

The right answer is that power abhors a vacuum. And nobody abhors the loss of male power more than a woman, who will rush in to fill it with nagging, passive-aggressive bitching, and closed legs.

Whether it’s in the workplace or around the dining table, shouting, swearing or throwing things are increasingly viewed as valid methods for women to assert themselves.

Aggrocunts aren’t interested in asserting themselves. What they’re doing is crying out for a chance to be a feminine woman again who doesn’t have to assert herself.

Such outbursts can also become addictive, a form of almost animalistic release.

Women who are regularly dicked by a self-entitled ZFG jerkboy feel no need for further animalistic release.

ADVERTISEMENT

But as well as this rush, Jo also admits to feeling under constant pressure to provide for her family.

Economically self-sufficient gogrrls betray the essence of their sex.

Thankfully Steven who works with disabled children,

Nümale pussy.

has learned how to cope with her outbursts. As mild-mannered as Jo is volatile, he’s found that the best thing to do is to walk away and let the tantrum burn itself out.

Wrong answer.

Right answer: SHUT THE FUCK UP JO *readies pimp hand*

Her stepchildren, too, have learned to walk away from her outbursts.

Mix-and-match broken family. Cunt stepmom. Shit writes itself.

‘Our relationship is still strained, which is a shame, but I feel convinced she is as much to blame as me.’

Pathologically narcissistic BPD supercunt spotted.

And when, last year, she decided a driver was too close behind her as she kept to a 30mph speed limit, she braked suddenly and got out of the car. ‘I asked the driver, a young man, what the hell he thought he was doing driving up to my bumper,’ she says. ‘My heart was pounding as he called me a bitch and drove off.’

A young shitlord, to be precise.

Perhaps unsurprisingly, she has upset family and friends with her behaviour. In restaurants, she has embarrassed loved ones by high-handedly sending back food she considers isn’t good enough.

By the way, if a woman ever does this on a first date, you have complete license to exit through the kitchen and leave her with the bill.

Executive Summary:

DIVERSITY + FEMINISM = UNLOVABLE CUNTS

Read Full Post »

Every once in a while one sees the exceptional couple who together smash realtrue stereotypes. I saw one such recently. A very striking, tall and slender blonde White woman kissing her asian boyfriend adieu. I’ve seen White woman-asian man couples before, but usually the woman was nothing to write home about, which is how this particular couple managed to jot a tittle in my limbic ledger.

No one wants asian guy? Not her. She wants asian guy!

Naturally my forensic Eye of Shivron whirred into gear to assess this violation of the cosmic biomechanic laws. The asian guy wasn’t a Keanuiac half-breed. Full-blooded from slope to slant. He did have some physical advantages which set himself apart from the usual ant people test-cheating hordes. He was average height (which adjusted to asian standards meant he was tall). He dressed like an A&F frat bro: crisp knit shirt, plaid shorts and sockless docksiders. Muscle-wise, also average (which again adjusted to asian standards meant he was buff). Facially, inoffensive enough to make a few asian-american girls rethink their opposition to dating inside the nippon tribe. Jawline was acceptably uncucked.

All in all, he looked completely Americanized (I’d guessed he was Japanese-American, but could easily have been Korean). Still, his alabaster lady was a White hard HB8 topping to a model-esque 5’9″ or so. And clearly, unmistakably, in love with him. (When he turned to leave her behind, I caught her staring longingly at his retreating figure for a few seconds. Those rovebirds!)

He could’ve been loaded, sure, but I think it was something else. Something that this man —

Dennis “pussy magnet” Kucinich

the fairy godmother of manlets, has similarly exhibited in photos with his hotter, tighter, younger wife who is at least three standard deviations out of his league (if we define “league” solely by the draw of a man’s physical appearance).

Wondering what that something is which our SWAG roverboy had? Look at these Kucinich pics and see if you can figure it out:

kucinich1

kucinich2

kucinich3

You’d be hard-pressed to burden a man with more physical and ideological shortcomings than Dennis “The Kuntroller” Kucinich — short, weird looking, skinny, old, liberal kook — yet here he is married to a genuine red-headed hottie. His unicorn horn stands taller than many nü-Aryan shitlords’ war pikes.

Yet the photos of him with his beauty reveal his secret. Notice anything missing?

That’s right, NO HOVERHAND.

Kucinich holds his lady tight and right, drawing her into him and pressing her flesh into his feeble old mannery that does not even lift. Notice too he doesn’t lean into her; if anyone’s leaning adoringly, it’s her.

Kucinich’s alpha male body language transmits a loud and clear message: “I take complete ownership of my woman”.

Ownership, aka men’s prerogative, is a vital ingredient in romantic relationships. Feminists and manlets swoon with hysteria, but TruGirls love it when a man doesn’t mince his meat. Declaring ownership of your woman, especially in public, is a powerful signal not only to other women that you have the mysterious “he’s got it” goods, but also a reminder to your beloved that you don’t live in apprehension that she’ll someday soon withdraw her love. Body language ownership is the opposite of the appeasement and fearfulness that the hoverhand betrays of a man’s character.

Returning to our SWAG, that’s what he had. In spades. During the kiss goodbye, he drew her by the waist into his chest and squeezed her ass in full view of NSA surveillance cameras. He winked at her before turning to depart, and didn’t look back to assure she was still tailing him with her gaze. There was no hoverhand, no leaning, no awkward pigeon footing, and no tender salivary pecks and canoodles so common among beta males who think a woman’s bosom is a security pillow to nestle their weary cuckheads.

Lesson of the lovingkindness: The right attitude and an unflinching assgrab will more than compensate for a man’s physical imperfections. If only more men would learn this lesson instead of projecting the contours of their visual-centric desire onto women.

PS Anecdotally, I don’t feel nearly as much aesthetic repulsion to WW-AM couples as I do to mudsharks. Maybe my hindbrain swiftly calculates that the genetic distance, physically, behaviorally, and mentally, between a White woman and a northeast asian man is a relatively small one set against the Saharan expanse between a White woman and a black man, and therefore my disgust reflex is comparatively dampened with the sight of the former. One is taking a piss in the White gene pool while the other is dropping a steaming deuce in it. Alternately, it could be that the extreme rarity of the former makes it more of a curiosity to me, and thus less noxious, while the relatively higher frequency and, especially, propaganda-fueled essence of the mudsharkers provokes a stronger emotional response (tied up as these coal burning couples inevitably are with their anti-White Narrative sponsorship).

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »

%d bloggers like this: