The Supreme Hive Mind

Whenever the Left is running a caper or pulling shenanigans, there is a tendency to examine the event in isolation. Pundits and analysts will look for why the Left is doing the narrow thing they are doing, usually searching for the sort of causes that would motivate normal people. Money and power are the two most popular explanations from the conventional Right, as those are the things that matter to them. This sort of analysis misses the mark, because it obscures the commonalities.

For example, the left-wing censorship phenomenon on social media is discussed only within the context of the platforms. The on-going impeachment circus is narrowly examined within the partisan framework of imperial politics. Other than to notice the people behind these efforts have certain similarities, these events are treated as discrete efforts with their own peculiar motivations. Yet, it is what they have in common that tells us much more about the current crisis.

In the case of impeachment, it is an outgrowth of the “resistance” movement that started on-line immediately after the 2016 election. This was launched initially on Twitter by the sorts of women that have become a feature of modern life. These are the bitter, childless types, who have reached middle years without having fulfilled their purpose as women, so they are in a perpetual state of rage. Some are crazy for other reasons, but these female rage heads are a stock character now.

The word “resist” is an important clue. When one is on attack, resist is not the word you use to describe your efforts. The word “resist” is always used in the context of defending something from an aggressor. That’s how they came to view the 2016 election. It was an assault on their ideological worldview. Since their sense of self is deeply entangled with that worldview, 2016 was felt like an assault on their person. They feel that they are resisting an intrusion into their most personal of space.

It is this sense of being a victim, that their person has been violated by Trump, that is behind the impeachment rage. These people look at Trump entering Washington in the same way they view a rapist violating them. Since there is no way to make it whole, they can never forgive the violation. Their vengeance is perfectly justified, as they are infinity aggrieved. Trump entered into a zone they view as exclusively theirs, as if he violated their personal space, so he must be resisted at all costs.

Something similar has been happening with social media. The first social media platforms were message boards and comment sections on sites. The first heavy handed moderation happened on the left-wing sites like Daily Kos, which was popular in the Bush years. Anything that deviated from official dogma was removed and the poster was banned. That was their space and you dirty right-wing extremists had no right to enter their space with your filthy racist ideas.

This sense of ownership and entitlement took over the big social media platforms like Facebook, YouTube and Twitter. The same sorts of screeching harpies behind the “resist” campaign are policing social media for heretics. Those are their platform and they determine the community standards. The use of the word “community” is a big clue as to how these people think of these sites. They are not public platforms, but communities in the same way your town is a community.

It is this hive minded view of politics that is behind the fanatical purging of heretics and blasphemers from social media. The people behind it have conflated these platforms with their own sense of themselves. Just as Trump penetrating Washington is seen as the most egregious personal violation, bad thinkers on YouTube are imagined to be spiritual rapists, victimizing the community with their bad ideas. Purging these monsters from the community is now a sacred duty.

This is why there is no reasoning with these people over things like terms of service or the particulars of impeachment. It would be like trying to talk a female grizzly out of defending her cubs. Her instinct to defend is not a rational reaction. It is not the end point of a decision tree. That’s the same thing going on with the impeachment stuff, the subversion, the purging on-line, all of it. This is the reaction of an organism to what it sees as a threat to its integrity. This is how The Hive defends itself.

It is why any analysis of the Left in isolation tends to miss the point. Everything these people do has to be examined within the larger context of the hive mind. The blue-haired lesbian at Google issuing strikes to your channel is not a person, but a node within the larger network of the hive mind. These are people who have no agency, because what defines them is their relations with the other nodes in the Progressive hive mind. When you deal with one, you are dealing with all of them.

At the height of the French Revolution, Robespierre tried to impose a secular religion on the French people. The cult of the Supreme Being would be the official religion of the French people. In his speech announcing this new religion to the people, Robespierre said of the new deity, “He created the universe to proclaim His power. He created men to help each other, to love each other mutually, and to attain to happiness by the way of virtue.” Other than the pronouns, this is a modern liberal creed.

Instead of a supernatural supreme being, the god at the center of the Progressive consciousness is the hive mind. Instead of a name, they use names of its manifestation, like “democracy” and “community.” Yet, it is the same sense of devotion and ownership that drives them to defend it. The Left views themselves as defenders of the faith. It is why they are so ruthless and vengeful in defending that which is inside their mental space, like official politics and social media. They belong to The Hive.


For sites like this to exist, it requires people like you chipping in a few bucks a month to keep the lights on and the people fed. It turns out that you can’t live on clicks and compliments. Five bucks a month is not a lot to ask. If you don’t want to commit to a subscription, make a one time donation. Or, you can send money to: Z Media LLC P.O. Box 432 Cockeysville, MD 21030-0432. You can also use PayPal to send a few bucks, rather than have that latte at Starbucks. Thank you for your support!


Numbers Still Matter

A general assumption, even by the biology deniers, is that China will eventually surpass the West, because China is full of smart people. There’s no questioning the underlying assumption, as China always comes out at or near the top in IQ studies. This replicates in the United States, where East Asians are dominating admissions for elite preparatory schools and colleges. Pretty much everyone agrees this is mostly due to the fact that Asians are smart people, who also work hard and value education.

There’s one problem with the China supremacy claim and that is China has always been smart, but China has always been China. It has never been Renaissance Europe or even Industrial Europe. Occidental people have conquered the world and built global empires, while East Asians have struggled to control their own turf. Even now, China has a per capita GDP one fourth of Mississippi, the poorest state in the union. Those smart Chinese have a long way to go to catch the West.

China’s inability to get over the hump and become something like a Western country is an important thing to consider. To assume, as many IQ absolutists do, that their mental firepower will be enough, is to miss the forest for the trees. Clearly, there is something else to it, as China should have dominated the world a long time ago, if IQ was as determinant as some claim. It should not have taken the Industrial Revolution two centuries to sink roots in China if it was only about IQ.

This is important to consider when thinking about the demographic changes happening in America. Those East Asians pushing out the remaining whites from elite schools will, presumably, begin to take up positions in the ruling class. This was the pattern with Jews who first flooded into colleges, then it was elite colleges and then finally the institutions. When you look at the enrollments of elite schools, whites are the most under-represented group now. That will only get worse.

The question then is what sort of ruling class will we have when Asians take up positions in the American elite. More precisely, what sort of ruling class will we have when it is a Jewish and Asian ruling elite, with a passive white rump and some browns tossed in as decorations. Given the clannishness of Jews and East Asians, that is the most likely result of what we are seeing. The Antwerp diamond market offers some clues as to how this will play out over the coming years.

One thing to consider is that East Asians and Jews may thrive in occidental societies, but only because those societies provide the right framework for them. On their own, in control of their own lands, both groups have punched well below their IQ. Just as China has under-performed based on IQ, Israel is an under-performer. There are other issues for Israel, obviously, but Israel could not survive on its own without support from the West, especially the United States. No one disputes this.

Like China, Israel has had many chances to get her act together and exploit her human capital, but it has always ended in tears. Israel always ends up being a nation of oxpeckers with no big game as a host. Instead they succumb to picking at one another until they exhaust themselves. Eventually they fling open the gates to a conqueror in order to have a natural landing spot. Israel is a land of advisers and critics, perpetually haggling with one another until some outsider ends the bickering.

Of course, China has always been a land with very rigid vertical and horizontal social relationships. The Chinese tendency toward authoritarian bureaucracy was too strong for Marxism and now too strong for neo-liberalism. China today is the same place Marco Polo found seven centuries ago, just decorated with technology appropriated from the West. China is proof of the great chain of causality. Her biology and culture dictate the institutions, politics and economics.

What does this mean for America when the ruling class is dominated by Asians and Jews, with a sprinkling of whites and browns? Given that neither group is equipped to operate a modern occidental society, the choices are collapse or a slow retooling of America to reflect the biology of the new ruling class. How a naturally authoritarian people will work with a naturally subversive people is a mystery. In fact, it seems unlikely that such an arrangement could work at all.

Another possible outcome is that the decline reaches a point at which Jewish and Asian exceptionalism begin to reverse. The circumstances that presently allow for their success disappear and they begin a steep decline in terms of group success. In a world where getting into a good prep school and then an elite college is declining in value, the ability to game those systems quickly loses value. Think of a world in which no one trusts the media. Having control of the media is a liability, not an asset.

This is why fears of a ruling class dominated by people of an Oriental outlook is probably misplaced. The displacement of whites from the ruling class is just another symptom of the decline. It is a phase that will lead to greater social unrest and instability as North America slowly becomes majority-minority. A ruling class distrusted by and alien to the majority of the population is not going to have a long future, no matter how smart and ruthless they are as people. Numbers still matter.


For sites like this to exist, it requires people like you chipping in a few bucks a month to keep the lights on and the people fed. It turns out that you can’t live on clicks and compliments. Five bucks a month is not a lot to ask. If you don’t want to commit to a subscription, make a one time donation. Or, you can send money to: Z Media LLC P.O. Box 432 Cockeysville, MD 21030-0432. You can also use PayPal to send a few bucks, rather than have that latte at Starbucks. Thank you for your support!


Changes In The Land

Americans have always been a mobile people. The first settlers started moving west into the interior, almost as soon as they established colonies. The search for land was the main motivation. As the country expanded West, the race for land and the resources under the land led to millions packing up and heading West. The Industrial Revolution drew people north into cities and then west into new industries. At the end of the last century, the great exodus out of the north was the story.

This mobility is often counted as a sign of economic health. The assumption is that a big diverse economy in a big diverse country will have areas booming while other areas are not so booming. That means people and capital will flow from the down areas to the boom areas. As things settle, new boom areas, possibly the old down area, will spring up, starting a new flow of people and capital. Just as the velocity of money in the economy is a positive, the velocity of people is a good thing too.

As we enter the demographic age and the American government loses control of the border, the flow of peasants and barbarians into America is the story. While this is easily solvable in theory, as a practical matter it is hopeless. The government is controlled by cosmopolitan globalists, who have no interest in maintaining borders. The slight slowing of movement under Trump will be followed by a deluge. The same is true in Europe, where they will be swamped by a billion Africans this century.

The thing is, people tend not to wait for their government to respond to changes in the economy and culture. Block busting, which was a way for the usual suspects to skim value from white urban neighborhoods in the middle of the last century, resulted in something called white flight. This resulted in a whole new economic sector servicing white refugees from urban areas. Suburbia was born from the great movement of people out of the cities, away from diversity and vibrancy.

In America, where packing up and moving is a part of everyone’s story, the most likely response will be a new migration. This time, the migrants will flow away from the barbarian hordes pouring over the border, into places that are less vulnerable. The people behind the invasion, of course, have long since insulated themselves from the consequences of their demographic hostility, but everyone else will have to figure out a way to do the same. A great migration is upon us.

The first thing people will look for is the complexion of possible destinations. As the Southern states get more vibrant and the politics become more third world, middle-class whites will look for nearby white states. California has seen a flood of middle-class whites heading to places like Nevada and Colorado. This is not without its problems, as those refugees bring their voting habits with them, thus spoiling their new homes just as they ruined their old homes. Invasions are never a good thing.

In a broader sense, it also means people will actively look for super white states like in New England or the upper Midwest. That could be why the rulers are dumping Africans into places like Maine and Minnesota. They are trying to cut off their victims at the pass by destroying possible destination for them. Still, even with the African dumping, these areas are super-white and therefore becoming desirable. In time, a white flight out of the South into the North is a likely outcome of open borders.

As the government loses control of the border, it is also losing control of the country, which is why global enterprise is stepping in to police the public space, monitor the public and so on. What’s happening is something similar to what happened in the Western Roman Empire in the fourth and fifth century. Power is shifting away from the Imperial state to local power centers. It will not be long before global enterprise is subtly serving whites and Asians fleeing the great invasion.

You can see a bit of this in California. One way the tech giants scared the hues away was through real estate. In order to live in San Francisco, you had to be in the “new economy” as no one could afford to live their otherwise. In 1980, for example, Oakland was close to 50% black. It is now less than 25% black. San Francisco, where the black population peaked at about 20% is now 5% black. In the future, global giants and their industries will play a big role in the demographics of your community.

This suggests there will be two models for dealing with the great invasion. One will be something like techno-feudalism, where people are tied to a corporate lord, because that is their protection from the invaders. The defense in depth that evolved in the late Roman Empire resulted in no human mobility. People, including their rulers, were tied to the land. What the future holds is one model where people are clustered into static communities controlled by corporate oligarchs.

The other model will be the old American model, where people head to someplace lacking vibrancy. The hope will be that the cold will keep the hordes at bay. Perhaps the use of local laws, as is happening in Idaho, to discourage the wrong sorts from moving in will become their defense in depth. Voting where you were born makes a lot of sense in this sort of environment. Maybe it will just be a lawless place where tribal assumptions are enforced ad hoc in order to keep the peace.


For sites like this to exist, it requires people like you chipping in a few bucks a month to keep the lights on and the people fed. It turns out that you can’t live on clicks and compliments. Five bucks a month is not a lot to ask. If you don’t want to commit to a subscription, make a one time donation. Or, you can send money to: Z Media LLC P.O. Box 432 Cockeysville, MD 21030-0432. You can also use PayPal to send a few bucks, rather than have that latte at Starbucks. Thank you for your support!


First Lies

One of the defining features of the managerial class is how it uses rhetoric to shape the debate in order to eliminate the need for debate. They are not in the habit of debating their ideas and fads, mostly because they don’t want to debate those things. It is a soft-authoritarianism where they seek to shame and cajole their opposition out of the public square, so they don’t have to debate them. A good example of this is a piece on the debate between young activists and the racketeers.

The author of the piece is an editor of First Things, a publication that used to bill itself as a conservative religious journal aimed at “advancing a religiously informed public philosophy for the ordering of society.” As in the case of Buckley conservatism, establishment Christian organization set as their goal to fit themselves into the Progressive moral order. As a result, First Things is a thoroughly house-trained operation that offers no threat to the prevailing moral order.

Putting that aside, it is a great example of how the establishment, broadly defined here to include all the subgroups on the other side of the great divide, first seeks to shape the debate so as to exclude those seeking to debate them. In this case, the writer has no interest in addressing the actual core of the fight between the groypers and the racketeers of Conservative Inc. Instead, he claims the debate is between white nationalists and classical liberals over the issue of free speech.

There is a word for what he is doing here. It’s called lying. For starters, there is no definition of “white nationalist” that includes Nick Fuentes that would not also include the founders of Buckley conservatism or the Founders of the United States. If that is what the author intends, then he is the extreme radical here, claiming that the very founding of the nation is immoral. After all, the term “white nationalist” is currently defined to mean immoral, as in a heretic or blasphemer.

Calling Charlie Kirk and the other racketeers of Conservative Inc. “classical liberals” is a revealing bit of rhetoric. Within living memory, Buckley conservatives would have avoided such a description. Religious conservatives certainly would not have used the term positively. Up until the last generation or so, no right-winger would claim that society is no more than the sum of its individual members. After all, the Buckleyites called themselves Burkeans, not Hobbesians.

Once he redefines the sides in the dispute, he then gratuitously characterizes the nature of the dispute. On the one hand, he claims the sides disagree on Israel and homosexuality. On the other hand, he claims both sides agree on the value of free speech and debate. At best, this is a superficial analysis that suggests the author is unfamiliar with both sides of this battle. At worst it is an effort to frame the issue in such a way as to make it easy to defend Conservative Inc.

The claim is that Nick Fuentes is the bad guy, a white nationalist, who is not a real Christian, while Kirk is just a secular libertarian. The reason the “white nationalists” are attacking the classical liberal is Kirk foolishly embraced free speech. The writer spends the rest of his post on a rant about the dangers of white nationalism, a rant that is part of the stock rhetoric of the Left. In other words, in typical Progressive style, it’s all about the good guys and bad guys, the white hats and black hats.

Of course, you never debate the bad guys. To do so, as the Left always reminds us, is to legitimize them. Giving white nationalists a platform could lead people to think that their claims have legitimacy. In order to avoid that, the bad guys must be destroyed, which in this case means anathematized as social pariahs. Mr. Schmitz is doing exactly what dissidents have been accusing Conservative Inc. of doing for generations now, acting as a gate-keeper for the establishment.

To be more accurate, they are not just gate-keepers in a passive sense. That’s another lie they like to promote, as if they are just defending the status quo. In reality, so-called conservatives like Mr. Schmitz are skirmishers, running ahead of the main battle line in the culture war. In this case, the job is to anathematize the critics, so they can be more easily dismissed by the main army of the Left. The whole setup of the post is as a vehicle for pointing and shrieking at the dissidents.

It is rather ironic that the groyper’s actual complaint, the real dispute between them and the racketeers, is exactly what Schmitz is doing in this post. It is not a dispute over speech or individual liberty. Those things play an ancillary role, but they are not the primary issues. The issue is that allegedly conservative outfits like First Things have conserved nothing but their position within the Progressive establishment. They spend all of their time defending their alleged adversaries.

That is why Conservative Inc. has embraced left-wing rhetoric to defend itself against the dissidents. They have no choice. They cannot defend their behavior morally and they cannot defend their record. Like common street walkers, conservatives have been willing to jump into whatever car pulls up to the curb. In order to avoid admitting this, they have to shift the focus from themselves onto some bad guy. After many long years getting into lefty’s car, they have taken on his habits.


For sites like this to exist, it requires people like you chipping in a few bucks a month to keep the lights on and the people fed. It turns out that you can’t live on clicks and compliments. Five bucks a month is not a lot to ask. If you don’t want to commit to a subscription, make a one time donation. Or, you can send money to: Z Media LLC P.O. Box 432 Cockeysville, MD 21030-0432. You can also use PayPal to send a few bucks, rather than have that latte at Starbucks. Thank you for your support!


The Jim Snow Laws

Everyone raised in the Unites States over the last fifty years has been required to memorize the official dogma regarding Jim Crow laws. These were state and local laws that enforced racial segregation in the Southern United States. The official version preached to this day is that they were draconian restrictions on blacks preventing them from having a normal life. Modern blacks are told that their condition is the direct result of white discrimination against blacks via these laws.

Now, there is a debate as to the intent and the effect of these laws, mostly because the Left has re-imagined that period in American history. The official version of the Civil Rights era is a fantasy with little connection to reality. What is not under dispute is that these laws existed and they had a negative impact on blacks. Black institutions did not receive public support. Blacks were denied access to the legal system, which often denied them justice when the victims of white malfeasance.

The best argument against these sorts of laws is that they created a second class of citizens, as a legal construct. You cannot have democracy if you have second class citizens, as democracy assumes all men being equal before the law. If the effect of Jim Crow was separate and equal, then maybe they would fit into democracy. In reality, they were separate and unequal, even accounting for the differences in the races. Therefore, as a legal construct, they violated the ideal of equality before the law.

While not always written into the legal code, certainly not explicitly, the Jim Snow laws are just as offensive to the ideal of equality before the law. The evolving legal construct under which whites are treated different from non-whites is a variation of what existed in the South during segregation. While the intent of Jim Crow was to keep the races separate, the intent of the Jim Snow laws is vengeance. It is part of the blood libel against white people in America.

The most recent example is the firing of hockey coach Bill Peters after allegations of racist remarks made by the coach came to light. Peters admitted to using the magic word when addressing a black player ten years ago. Why a Nigerian was in Canada playing hockey is never explained, but Peters admitted to the crime. He was first required to publicly grovel for his crime. He posted an open letter apologizing for blaspheming a black, then he was fired and forever banished from hockey.

Now, his behavior may be unprofessional, but coaches have never been known for being polite or sensitive to the feelings of their players. Even so, the crime happened a decade ago. There’s no evidence this is an ongoing thing. Maybe there is a case to me made that he should apologize to the black guy, but only a lunatic nurses a grudge for a decade over mean words. Instead, it is assumed he is a racist, because all whites are racist. This just proves it. Therefore, he must be banished.

This type of situation could never happen with a black. For starters, blacks use the magic word in their everyday speech. Good whites break into reverent tears whenever they hear a famous black utter the incantation. It’s like a magic spell. Further, non-whites are free to rage against whites without restriction. The New York Times hired Sarah Jeung because she hates white people. Michelle Goldberg has a prominent position on the pages of the Times, because she hates white people.

This double standard does not stop with the war of words. Blacks are now allowed to murder whites if they can claim the white was racist. In the case of Michael White, who murdered a white man in cold blood, the assumption of racism was enough to give him a pass. The N-word pass has become so embedded in the culture that every black accused of wrong doing claims he was reacting the use of the magic word by the white person he attacked. This is the latest example.

The default assumption of the Jim Snow laws is that whites are relentlessly racist and always motivated to harm non-whites. Therefore, whites are required to prove they are not acting on racial bias. In the case of Curtis Flowers, this claim is now going to the Supreme Court. No one doubts he killed these people in cold blood. The issue is that whites cannot be trusted to render the verdict. After all, it assumed they are so racist, they cannot be trusted to convict a black killer.

The heart the Jim Snow laws is a blood libel. Whites are guilty by the virtue of being descended from whites. They have inherited their guilt. The fact that this assumption is at odds with reality is immaterial. The people in charge of the culture hate white people, so the Jim Snow laws are enforced. In the case of Maxwell Hare and John Kinsman, they were sent to prison for the crime of being white. They are in jail, having been denied the basic legal right to face their accuser.

The main differences between the Jim Crow laws and the new Jim Snow laws is the intent of the laws and the temperament of the people enforcing them. It has been forgotten, but most blacks were fine with segregation. Jim Crow was about preserving two distinct cultures in the same place. Jim Snow is about wiping out white culture and the white people defending it. Unlike the defenders of Jim Crow, the Jim Snow proponents will never relent. Their vengeful hatred will never permit it.


For sites like this to exist, it requires people like you chipping in a few bucks a month to keep the lights on and the people fed. It turns out that you can’t live on clicks and compliments. Five bucks a month is not a lot to ask. If you don’t want to commit to a subscription, make a one time donation. Or, you can send money to: Z Media LLC P.O. Box 432 Cockeysville, MD 21030-0432. You can also use PayPal to send a few bucks, rather than have that latte at Starbucks. Thank you for your support!