One of the features of the current year is the regular reminder that western style democracy is a complete fraud. According to the political class, democracy allows for public policy to reflect the will of the people. The parties put forward candidates offering various policy proposals and the public signals their preferences by voting for one or the other candidates. The winners then set about trying to implement the policies they proposed. That’s how we’re told representative democracy works.

In reality, nothing like this happens. Instead, the parties put on a show for the voters, rarely intending to actually do what they claim. Instead, they manufacture differences between one another, so they can pretend the choice before the voters is stark. Once the election is over, the politicians go back to living their lives of leisure, waiting for instructions from the people who actually run things. The politicians are like robot actors, brought out for elections, then put back in storage.

The obvious example of this is the most recent American presidential election in which Donald Trump scored a stunning upset on the promise to reduce immigration, crackdown in illegal immigration and address the gross inequality resulting from globalization. So far, none of that has been done. Instead, he spent most of his presidency fighting a seditious coup to get him out of office. In fact, Trump’s three years are pretty much what Jeb Bush promised when he was running in the 2016 primary.

Notice that hardly anyone in either political party is terribly conce3rned about the FBI plot to overturn the election. Sure, there are a few lonely voices on the Republican side asking questions and demanding transparency. They have no support from leadership. On the Democrat side, they are actively colluding with the plotters to cover up the affair. One would think the people subject to the voters would care about the integrity of the process, but you would be wrong. The revealed preferences are on full display.

An ugly as the Trump era has been, it is civil and decent compared to what is happening in Europe. The Italians are now watching their political class submarine the will of the people in an egregious series of deceits by the Five Star Movement. The Italians voted for a populist, anti-EU coalition. Instead, the Five Star Movement cut a deal with the internationalist, pro-EU party to sabotage the nationalists. The result is the exact opposite of what the people voted for in their last election.

In Britain, the government put a choice before the people back in 2016, as to whether remain in the EU or become an independent nation again. The public chose nationhood by a respectable margin. In any democracy, getting 52% of the vote, particularly in a highly popular election, is a solid majority. Here we are, more than three years on, and the political class is still debating whether to accept the election results. In other words, the elected officials are deciding whether the election results matter.

To make matters worse, you now have members of one party actively colluding with members of other parties to undermine the orderly process in Parliament. Up until this week, the “remainers” could plausibly claim they are operating within the democratic process, despite thwarting the will of the people. Britain is not a pure democracy, so the pols have some leeway. Now, they are in active revolt against the system that they are sworn to uphold, in an effort to upend the result of the Brexit referendum.

In all of these cases, the question that never gets asked in the media is who is bribing these people to carry on this way. The most likely reason Five Star finked on its voters is the leaders too bribes from Brussels. In Britain, the “remainers” are certainly on the payroll of global enterprise. Those paymasters are most likely foreign. In the United States, of course, both political parties are wholly owned by the donor party. No one in the media bothers looking into it, as they are owned by the oligarchs as well.

The tell is that these shenanigans always work one way. You’ll never see the party of the globalist suddenly have a crisis of conscience and defect to the nationalists. It’s always the other way. There are no “remainers” siding with the Brexiteers in order to respect the will of the people, despite their own misgivings. In Washington, no globalists have switched teams to support Trump. In the charade that is democracy, the fink is always played by the same character in exactly the same way.

The reason we never see a politician break ranks in order to support the popular will against his own side is that western democracy is a fraud. Elections are a beard worn by the oligarchy to fool the public. The public space is filled with drama and outrage, drawing in the public. It is the circus half of the bread and circuses. Meanwhile, the oligarchs, most of whom are now foreign to the people over whom they rule, exercise the real power of the supposedly national governments of the West.

In the United States, both political parties are funded by the same people. For example, anyone questioning the endless wars for Israel gets pilloried, because Israel runs a massive lobbying operation to buy off both political parties. They work this racket in other Western countries as well. The tech giants operate in violation of the laws and civil order, because they own the politicians of both parties. Of course, the commentariat is being paid by the same people to maintain the fraud.

Every society has an elite. This is the natural state of mankind. In a democracy, this reality is concealed from the public. Instead, it is one man, one vote. The people decide public policy. In reality, it is a handful of men and your votes mean nothing. Worse yet, those oligarchs pulling the strings are wholly unaccountable. They don’t have to answer to the public. Instead, they pay flunkies and coat holders to do it. Democracy is a fraud to distract the public, while their society is looted by oligarchs.

The worst part of it is the public, instead of peering behind the charade to see the string pullers, vents its anger on the actors. In 2016 the public voted against the status quo in the form of Donald Trump. Angry at that result, they voted for his opposition party in 2018, as a punishment against his party for their intransigence. In 2020, the public will probably throw Trump out for someone promising something different, but the result will be the same. The result is always the same. Democracy is a fraud.

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!

It is natural for dissidents, collectively and individually, to decry their exclusion from the institutions of society. Collectively, their exclusion means the systematic exclusion of their ideas and their critiques of the prevailing orthodoxy. At the individual level, it means exclusion from the pleasures and benefits of their career. There’s also the fact that human beings are social animals. Exclusion, especially systematic exclusion, is felt as a personal rejection and that hurts even the toughest person.

There is, of course, the unfairness of it all. The people in charge of the institutions rely on purges and exclusion to protect their interests. There is the assumption that they rely on their institutional power to combat their enemies, because they lack the intellectual power to win a fair fight. They are petty men, who would rather persist in their error than face correction, so they use their power over the institutions to purge those who will challenge them and point out their error.

The natural temptation, therefore, is for dissidents to seek access to the institutions, in order to make their case. After all, if they can just get on the stage and make their points, so the theory goes, the superiority of their claims will win over the crowd and win them status. This is the mentality of the reformer, who continues to have a love and appreciation for the institution from which he has been purged. His complaint is largely personal, as he does not oppose the institution, just the people in it.

This has always been the emphasis of the paleocons. They are the result of the neocons gaining control of the conservative institutions. Those neocons then set about purging anyone who opposed their agenda. The paleos came to be more defined by their expulsion than by their ideas. They criticize the men in the institutions, rather than the institutions themselves. Their adversaries made the fight personal, and the paleocons were willing to take it personally. They still do.

That is the trap the modern dissident must avoid. Majorities will always place trust in institutions, as those institutions, if not purpose built, have been adapted to maintain their majority status. Man is a social animal and expects his participation in society to have benefits. Similarly, his society expects benefits from his inclusion. In a social order built around institutions, the natural dynamic will be to seek the benefits of those institutions, while maintaining those institutions.

The exile, in contrast, denied access to the institutions, will place his trust in ideas. His social sphere should evolve around shared ideas. That normal social dynamic will define the exile by his contribution to the intellectual life of his social group. The value he gains from it will be the refining and expansion of the ideas he shares with his fellow dissidents. For the proper dissident, exile provides the environment for a dynamic and creative intellectual life that exists outside of the institutions.

The best example of this is the Protestant reformers we call the Puritans, who eventually settled in North America. They began as reformers of the English church, but eventually ended up as exiles. They were not only exiled from the church, but from English society and eventually their country. As a result, Puritanism was able to develop into a fully formed and independent set of religious and social beliefs. Puritanism probably could not have survived if not for the exile of its adherents.

The birth of European conservatism is another example of how exile creates the dynamics for a new intellectual framework. The aristocrats who fled the French Revolution, found themselves as strangers in foreign lands. In exile, they first waited for restoration, but then moved beyond that to creating an authentic alternative to the radicalism of the Jacobins. The conservatism of Joseph de Maistre remains an authentic alternative to radicalism, because it evolved outside of it.

That is an important thing for modern dissents to grasp. The conservatism of Bill Buckley was always a Burkean response to American radicalism. That is, a response that evolved within the same institutions as the radicals. Burke did not develop his ideas as an outsider, but as an insider. Similarly, the American Right in the last century evolved in the elite institutions, as a traveling partner with the radicalism that developed after the Second World War. Left and Right were co-dependent.

This is the difference between the dissident and the dispossessed. The former not only accepts his outsider status, but relishes it. Free from the institutions, he can develop his own mental framework as a genuine alternative to the prevailing orthodoxy. The dissident sees his expulsion as the break, the vital break, from the historical and intellectual timeline. Rather than being carried forward by the momentum of his inheritance, he creates a new vision to replace the old.

The dispossessed, in contrast, are haunted by their expulsion. Who they are is defined by their loss of institutional support. They are the bitter ex-wife or the disgruntled former employee. They stand outside, perhaps shouting criticisms, as their identity is an entirely negative one. They relish every slight. They celebrate being criticized by those inside, because that’s who they are. They are people purged from that which had given them purpose and meaning. They are men without a polis and nothing more.

If dissidents are going to have a role in what comes next, it must be as the creators of something independent and indifferent to the prevailing orthodoxy. Communities of ideas, operating outside of the institutions, are the greatest threat to those institutions, because they cannot be co-opted and they cannot be easily attacked. Like the Puritans, the dissident eventually has to accept that what comes next for him is out in the wilderness, away from the existing order and independent of 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!

One of the consequences of the neoliberal order is that labor markets in Western societies are at war with themselves. On the one hand, the relentless competition within the managerial class, the so-called meritocracy, results in a relentless, passive-aggressive struggle for status. Within that class of people it is a state of constant anxiety, as these people worry that one small misstep will cause them to lose their standing within the managerial class. Everyone is miserable.

On the other hand, the math of the managerial system means pitting worker against worker, usually relying on foreign mercenaries, to suppress wages and prevent class solidarity. In order to support the swelling army of otherwise useless people in the media, academy and government, it means extracting ever more from the laboring classes and their private employers. The typical private sector worker is under relentless daily pressure to do more with less.

Compounding this is the natural response to these pressures, where workers accumulate in areas shielded from competition. Government grows, as a jobs program and as a way to maintain support for government. The massive growth in government, education and now health care are responses to the relentless competition within the so-called private sector. Skip to the bottom of this post, where there is a graph showing the growth in administrators within the American health care industry.

One vice jaw is the relentless pressure for efficiency in the daily lives of most workers, while the other jaw is a metastasizing layer of naturally inefficient services crowding into daily lives. The typical American spends all day under relentless pressure to perform, while having to navigate a labyrinth of ineptitude in the other parts of their lives. A trip to your kid’s school or a visit to the doctor is like entering a secret world where nothing gets done, no one gets fired and no one cares.

A reason America is such an angry place, despite the massive material prosperity, is that the labor markets are upside down. Prosperity and efficiency should result in a more relaxed and predictable private work place. Good times are supposed to be good times, not a frenzied state of constant worry. Within living memory, a booming economy meant a rise in general happiness, as workers and business enjoyed the fruits of general prosperity. Today, good times are defined by constant dread.

On the other hand, the administrative side of modern society, government, education, health care, should be declining in the lives of the people. In the dreaded private sector, automation means reductions in labor. In the public sphere, automation has meant an explosion of people. The post-Cold War economic boom has seen government more than double. The education bureaucracy has swollen like a tumor. Health care, as seen in that graph, has grown to become a dominant part of life.

Now, the dynamics in the workplace are not the only reason for the rising unhappiness in the West. Importing those foreign mercenaries to undermine domestic labor markets and dilute the vote has consequences beyond economics. Today, people find themselves living among strangers, who practice weird customs and speak exotic languages. America is rapidly becoming a land of foreigners. Diversity plus proximity always results in conflict. No one can afford to relax anymore.

There’s also the massive wealth gap in modern America. As the middle-class is being squeezed to support the managerial class, the over-class is looking like the aristocracy of 18th century France. The tech and financial barons live lives incomprehensible to middle-class people. Worse yet, the reckless disregard of the over-class makes them natural villains. Americans have been trained to admire success, but today’s successful are ugly, un-American people, who elicit nothing but contempt.

The growth of mass media certainly plays a part in the general unhappiness. At the end of the Cold War, most people had television and a newspaper. It was impossible for unwelcome advertisers to invade the private space. Today, we are awash in media and most of it is terrible. How many times do you have to have a video start playing while you are reading the sports pages, before you are in a sour mood? Make that a constant state and it is easy to see how mass media immiserates us.

Immigration, mass media and massive wealth gaps are certainly sources of unhappiness, but they can be remedied. People can form local communities, tune out the media and enjoy their own prosperity. The conflict in the workplace and the growth of the administrative state are unavoidable. Even in traditional homes, worry about the workplace will cause private anxiety. The swollen ranks of single people, defined by their career, are beholden to the daily uncertainty of the workplace.

Turning America is an economic zone, modeled on 20th century business management techniques, has resulted in a marketplace of miserable customers. Rather than economic prosperity resulting in a happy populace, it is a free-for-all of Darwinian competition, where everyone sees everyone as a threat. Prosperity itself becomes a daily threat, as it is built on a relentless drive for efficiency. Bad times meant belt-tightening. Today, good times means being replaced by a Hindu.

That slams into the other jaw of neoliberalism, which is the incoherent inefficiency of the managerial class and their plaything the administrative state. Leave the office to attend to something at your kid’s school or get a physical and you are confronted with a world of negative productivity, run by people with prestigious credentials, frittering away their days in nonsense activities. The constant clash of unpleasant realities makes a normal man spit on his hands, hoist the black flag , and begin slitting throats.

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!

Sportsball has started up with college programs kicking off their season and the professional sportsball getting started this week. Like most dissidents, I have lost interest in sportsball, for the most part. I’ll watch the college games, mostly because I tend to work on Saturday afternoon. I’ll put on whatever game is available and listen to it while getting work done. The professional games are close to unwatchable. The media presentation is unbearable and the games themselves are not good.

Professional sportsball is totally poz’d up now. During their summer practice period, there were stories about allowing girls to play. Since a girl would get snapped in half playing sportsball with men, the point of entry is kicking. A girl calling herself Carli Lloyd is contemplating a tryout as a NFL kicker. Where this stands at this point is unknown, but the idea of it is ridiculous. I’ve been to a lot of sportsball games in my life and never have I heard anyone say they hoped to see a girl playing the game.

I’ll take it further and say I vehemently oppose adding girls to sportsball. In fact, I’m OK with ending girls sports entirely. Girls should not be playing sports. They should be learning how to be proper women. Exercise is fine, but teaching girls to compete like men is as dumb as trying to teach a fish to ride a bicycle. Sure, a bear playing piano, a monkey drinking a beer and girls playing basketball can be amusing. Building a society around freak show attractions, however, is barbaric madness.

Probably the most vulgar example of this barbaric nonsense is female fighting, like UFC or boxing. Reportedly, a Chinese lesbian beat up a white lesbian to win a trophy and become the first Asian lesbian to do so. The sick bastards that stage this stuff would be torn to pieces and fed to the dogs. The beta perverts enjoying these displays should be sent to the camps. Only a degenerate wants to see women beat one another to a pulp in a fighting ring. This is not how civilized people treat their women.

The reason this nonsense is pushed on us is mostly spite. The fans of sportsball are overwhelmingly male. The paying fans are overwhelmingly white male. Since the religion of the ruling class is based in hated of white males, forcing girls, homosexuals and exotics into the games is normal now. Over the weekend, a sportsball player announced to great, orchestrated fanfare, that he is bisexual. The whole point of these stories is to ruin what little enjoyment white males can find these days.

Of course, when normal men object to this crap, the response from the usual suspects is “why does this bother you?” The answer is that the whole point of forcing this junk on sportsball fans is to bother them. That’s the reason they have girl referees and girl coaches now. It’s why they keep trying to interject homosexuals into the story. The point of the question is to obscure the fact that our cultural masters are trying hard to ruin anything that normal men find enjoyable. These people hate us.

Putting all of that aside, what jumps out when watching sportsball these days is how everything is drenched in sentimentality. Instead of presenting the two squads fighting one another on the field, the game is filled with stories of how the various players had to overcome hardship. You get the sense that the next revolution in television is going to be a hookup that causes the viewer to experience sadness, anguish and despair, as each of the heroic stories is relayed during the game.

It’s not just the television presentation. The coaches and players have all been trained to complain about the difficulties they have had to overcome in order to be in the sportsball competition. Every player says no one thought he could do whatever it is he did and every coaches swears his team overcame great adversity. The point of a sportsball presentation is to convince the viewer that life is hopelessly rigged against you and only the exceptions find any happiness. Just kill yourself.

Presumably, the presentation is popular, but it is hard to know. The normal people I know all complain about the way sportsball is presented. Many have simply stopped following this stuff as a result. My interest has waned, for sure. On the other hand, they say the television ratings are strong, so people must watch this stuff. Then again, the ratings for these shows are probably a lie like everything else these days. The presentation of constant sorrow comes with constant lies.

The funny thing, though, is a key part of keeping the populace pacified is keeping them entertained with things like sportsball. Allowing the lunatics into to ruin it for the target audience seems like a bad move. In dissident circles, you find lots of former sportsball fans, so a good way to fight the dissidents would be to make sportsball attractive to the typical white guy. Maybe these people’s need to hate us simply overcomes their desire to rule over us. Hatred is a powerful narcotic.

On the other hand, maybe the hardcore sportsball fans can be counted on to overlook the poz that is slathered onto the presentation. If you are really into following your team, maybe you don’t notice the rest of it, so the proselytizing falls on deaf ears. Those who notice either turn off these shows or already believe the nonsense. The effort to poison the minds of white males is just a waste of resources, maybe even driving white males away from media and into dissident politics.

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!