January Grab Bag

The week after the New Year week is always a weird one. In the dreaded private sector, people are busy catching up on what they did not get done over the holidays. Closing the books for the year and getting ready for the coming year keeps people busy. For the political class, it is a time for extra partying, as newly minted pols arrive and the old politicians return to the Imperial Capital. The media is busy being instructed on how to lie to the public in the coming year. The result is a slow week or two in January.

I thought about doing an immigration show or maybe a shutdown show, given that Trump had his big speech on Tuesday. The speech was a bit of a flop, as far as I could tell. I looked at some twitter feeds of immigration patriots and they were not impressed. On the other hand, everyone was horrified by the image if Chuck and Nancy. They looked like weird lizard people from another planet. The more the public sees those two, the better it is for Trump in this fight. He should get them on TV daily.

Anyway, I went in another direction, looking for stuff that was not terribly political, at least related to current events. I do start with a segment on Tucker’s great monologue from the start of the year, which made so-called conservatives very sad this week. I think in the fullness of time, we will see this as a turning point of sorts. It’s a time for choosing among the so-called conservatives and libertarians. They can either join team anti-white or join team white. The days of ignoring this reality of dwindling.

This week I have the usual variety of items in the now standard format. Spreaker has the full show. I am up on Google Play now, so the Android commies can take me along when out disrespecting the country. I am on iTunes, which means the Apple Nazis can listen to me on their Hitler phones. The anarchists can catch me on iHeart Radio. YouTube also has the full podcast. Of course, there is a download link below. I have been de-platformed by Spotify, because they feared I was poisoning the minds of their Millennial customers.

This Week’s Show


  • 00:00: Opening
  • 02:00: Tucker’s Speech (Link)
  • 12:00: Head Shots (Link)
  • 22:00: Universal Deceit (Link) (Link)
  • 32:00: The Blood Feud (Link)
  • 42:00: The Two Laws (Link)
  • 47:00: White City (Link) (Link)
  • 52:00: Let Nature Fix Africa (Link) (Link) (Link)
  • 57:00: Closing (Link)

Direct DownloadThe iTunes PageGoogle Play LinkiHeart Radio, RSS Feed

Full Show On Spreaker

Full Show On YouTube

60 thoughts on “January Grab Bag

  1. James Lafond recently noted that Baltimore appears to be attempting to initiate a trend of classifying ‘deaths in a hospital’ as something other than homicide – he believes he has seen murders get removed from the rolls on this basis in 2018 – see http://jameslafond.com/article.php?id=11029 (“edited down by at least 5”) and at least one other article I can’t find where he alleges this is confirmed by someone on the BPD.

  2. My personal preference for building signage would be “Tsunami Evacuation Route”(https://nws.weather.gov/nthmp/signs/signs.html). Not completely out-of-place in parts of Portland (google Vanport). Also after the Japanese 2011 earthquake there were “High Water” warnings for the Columbia River as far inland as Beacon Rock (20 mi inland of Portland).

  3. Your comment on Johns Hopkins’ use as a battlefield injury research lab was reminiscent about similar claims made for the perpetuation of the “troubles” in Northern Ireland. A very high percentage of British Army medics were rotated through there at some point.The general feeling in England was that a more useful parallel to injuries in actual humans would be possible by reverting back to the previously used baboons, hence the “peace Accords”.

  4. pssst, “Z” – why does the United SNAKES CORP, D[e]C[eit] maintain mercs all over Africa? Single word answer: CHICOMS. They are “doing [confiscatory] BIZ” – albeit, John Perkins style, while the former is [desperately] attempting to counter with increasing “political intrigue/[military] terror”. I respectfully tender: https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-12-26/china-take-over-kenyas-larges ; https://www.africanliberty.org/2018/09/10/like-zambia-sri-lanka-also-handed-over-port-to-china-to-pay-off-debt/

  5. Thanks for the piece on biker gangs and copyright laws. It’s ridiculous people give credence to these relics of the 70s. The Feds are so sloppy they’ve listed police riding clubs as motorcycle gangs !

    Maybe bike gangs are more prevalent on the West Coast, but I’m sure the Spanish gangs have eclipsed their influence. Is this more funding for the “War on Drugs”, hidden motive to strip more rights or bumbling government stooges ?

    Looks like another nail in the coffin of our ( as you like to say ) non-existent Constitution. Point that out to some to some like-minded friends and they get very upset. When will more people realise DC has wiped their ass with that document ?

    Great podcast as always Happy New Year

  6. OT, Jakiw Palij, the former German prison camp guard who was deported last year, at age 95, is dead.

    As I watched that sad little drama play out, I couldn’t help but be struck by its petty vindictiveness, and how disproportionate it was.

    Palij was, a nobody. 20-21 years old when the war ended in 1945, he wasn’t any sort of mastermind of any great evil. He was a kid swept up in a brutal war.

    Yet he was hunted and hounded relentlessly. A rabbi organized regular street protests in front of his house for years. In his last months he was hauled out of his home on a stretcher to be sent back to Germany and that was supposed to, what, right some wrong?

    The article refers to him multiple times as a war criminal, but he was never tried for war crimes, no less convicted. He was deported for lying on his Visa application way back in 1949. Wanting to hide that one was a German camp guard seems like a forgivable shame to me, especially 70 years after the fact.

    There are undoubtedly Hutu participants in the Rwandan genocide living in the U.S. Most likely there are or were participants in the Armenian genocide, the Holodomor, Mao’s cultural revolution, the Cambodian killing fields, Tiananmen Square massacre. We have known Weathermen terrorists — murderers — holding respected positions in U.S. universities. We feted that nasty old terrorist Arafat in the White House and the world gave him a fucking Nobel Peace Prize. There are hundreds of powerful, evil political figures around the world, responsible for the deaths of millions, living well, immune from answering for their crimes.

    But this sad, powerless old man had to be hounded unto death. For reasons. And people cheered. There is something dark and sinister about that


  7. All Trump had to do was sound like the reasonable one. There’s no mass public outcry to end “the shutdown”, and to the extent there are loud voices demanding an end to the impasse, there are equally loud voices demanding the wall be built. Putting government employees on TV – quite literally some of the best paid people in America today – to whine about missing ONE fricking paycheck that they will be back-paid for once the shutdown ends – just convinces more and more people that the POTUS is right. (If you can’t miss ONE freaking paycheck without having to switch to driving Uber and eating cup ‘o noodles, then it’s no freaking wonder our Government is such a disaster of incompetence and corruption.)

    So, Trump sounds reasonable, and Chuck and Nancy come on looking just about as ridiculous as I could have hoped for. Just a pair of angry scolds.

    Trump is in a good place, and his supporters are of the collective opinion that he should shut it down for as long as it takes.

    NBC wrote a piece on their website describing the “hellscape” that would result from the shutdown. This is their hilarious list:


    The shutdown will do nothing but hurt Democrat constituencies and liberate Republican constituencies. As far as TSA goes, Trump could easily just tell municipalities and airlines to hire private contractors and he will disband the TSA screeners. Problem solved.

    Burn it down.

    • It’s great how the media is claiming that the world is coming to an end, thanks to the shutdown, and, yet, things move along as usual.

      The Federales are complaining about getting a paid vacation. I sense that Joe Sixpack and Joe Briefcase are well aware of that.

  8. Rather than bitching about giving your kids “white privilege advantage” the Proggies should simply fortify their 3 year olds morning cereal with some lead paint chips. Easy peasy.

  9. Heard something interesting on the radio this morning:

    Where is the polling on Trump’s address? Or the response?

    Hard to believe they’re not polling. Easier to believe they’re not getting the results they want.

    Are we seeing a perfect reverse barometer here?

  10. “Frailty, thy name is woman!” Women will tend to join the side they see as winning, and find absolutely nothing wrong with it even if they were espousing the exact opposite views five minutes prior. And they’re experts at rationalization. I’m pretty sure that most women are either overt or covert narcissists. The covert ones are far more dangerous because we don’t see them coming until it’s too late. Modernism has done so much damage to the female psyche it’s a wonder we are still here at all…

    • I don’t care about attracting wamen to the movement. If we start winning, they’ll come to us. Women are sponges.

      • This is true. Women gravitate to whomsoever is holding power or looks like they’re going to be holding power. The reason so many women are shitlibs is because the people holding the whip-hand are shitlibs. Outreach is not just a waste of time it is actually counterproductive as women despise men who are actively trying to curry their favour.

        Build an unstoppable movement from strong men and the women will follow automatically.

  11. I found myself inspired by Tucker’s January 3 remarks: a bold opening salvo for his show and for the new year. And I must admit, I knew as he was delivering them that the minions of Conservatism Inc. would be outraged by his words–because, among his other targets, Tucker was taking aim directly at them.

    People tend to forget (or they don’t know to begin with) that the “conservatism” we’ve lived with in this country is a distinct species that came to life in the 1950s. It’s the “fusion” conservatism that figures like Frank Meyer vigorously advocated in the pages of the early National Review, which wedded “traditionalism” with free market economics. Those two philosophies were not an obvious match–opponents of the fusion idea saw the unrestrained market as a great engine of social upheaval–so the fusionists had to make a lot of arguments about how the two could fit together amicably.

    They were good arguers, and the result held together and was very successful for half a century–so much so that most people now assume that the conservative spirit was always Fusionist.

    But anything that takes a lot of intellectual effort to hold together is inherently unstable. “Traditionalism” and Capitalism could find plenty to love about each other in the face of their common enemy, Soviet Communism. But as that enemy receded in history, the differences between the two would become more pronounced, and in some ways irreconcilable.

    The figures currently populating Conservatism Inc. are all children of the Fusionism marriage. That marriage has been unraveling for a while. The advent of Trump exposed that unraveling to the light of day–and of course the “kids” hate him as the interloper who forced them to confront the reality of the parents’ separation. But I think Tucker’s Jan. 3 monologue was akin to final divorce papers being filed: a turning point, as Z-man termed it, which codifies the grounds for dissolving the marriage, and will lead to the choosing of sides that follows every divorce.

    • Spencer is correct when he says that “conservatism” is just a grab bag of random policy positions which don’t necessarily have much to do with each other. If I’m pro-life, why does that mean I have to wave an Israeli flag? If I believe in traditional marriage why does that mean I have to oppose national healthcare? Many of the tenets of “conservatism” are just Cold War leftovers, influenced by the NeoCohns, for their own benefit. (Free markets, muh capitalism, individualism, et al.)

      • Yes, it’s clear in retrospect that the Cold War rivalry was not just one leg of conservatism, but the pillar around which the edifice of establishment conservatism coalesced. With the end of the Cold War, that coalition no longer had any cohering rationale, other than habit. It was then only a matter of time before that formulation of conservatism died.

        Ironically, the end of Soviet Communism—that is, the end of that daily reminder of the depravity of the Leftist dream—May in the long run have given a new lease on life to Leftism, as we have seen.

    • The collapse of the USSR was the worst thing to happen to the U.S. The U.S was a lot stronger and the elites cared a lot more for the country when the Bear was breathing down their pencil necks.

  12. Regarding the concept of popular sovereignty and the government doing the will of the people, one of the first truly heterodox ideas I had came shortly after the Cold War ended and it became clear that Republicans weren’t going to pursue the issues that got them elected. The thought was this:

    Throughout the Cold War the West sniggered at the “single candidate” elections behind the Iron Curtain, but after a while I began asking whether two candidates was infinitely better than one, or just one better. Until 2016 at least, the answer seems to be one better, or perhaps no better.

    Our ruling elite — depending on your formulation either the Uniparty or the Progressives with the Republicans as their rearguard — are not just non-responsive to our needs and desires , they are downright hostile to them. The big donors and the most cucky pols and pundits are shedding all pretense. They are eschewing the rearguard and pledging for the vanguard.

    Two, it seems, is the same as one, except, perhaps, in the production value of the theater …

  13. Perhaps Trump’s speech was designed to showcase the Chuck & Nancy Ghoul Show! Nah. Nobody could be that smart. Though the memes are more memorable than the speech.

  14. A pair of goblins. Thats how the guys over at TRS described Chuck and Nancy’s rebuttal. Nailed it, right on the nuts. They’re demons hell bent upon the destruction and enslavement of white America.

    • Goblins, yes–but I immediately saw two vultures, waiting for the great beast called America to die so they can pick its bones clean.

  15. Z, the effect of modern medicine upon the murder rate has been huge. Actually a good fraction of the effect is not “medicine” per se, but far better emergency response. The faster you can get a victim to the doctors, the more likely he is to survive. But certainly medicine has also improved.

    In any case, you can find estimates of the effect in published research. I.e., this paper: Murder and Medicine: The Lethality of Criminal Assault 1960-1999. Over the 40 years they studied, the total reduction in homicide from better technology was roughly a factor of 4; see figure 1. Thus, there is strong evidence that the homicide rate is not a sign of a more peaceful society, but rather a richer one.

    • Great stuff. I also suspect segregation has some role. There was greater interface between whites and the black ghetto in the 70’s and 80’s than today. This is something La Griffe du Lion examined many years ago. http://www.lagriffedulion.f2s.com/hood.htm

      Overall violence went up in urban areas, as blacks came into greater contact with whites. At some predictable point, whites noticed and put distance between themselves and the hood. While black-on-back crime has not changed, black-on-white crime declined. I’ve yet to find good data on this, but the math suggests it is probably true.

    • Not a doctor, but oversaw EMTs as a fire officer, and even though the 2000s there were vast improvements in the equipment we carried on the rigs. Thankfully was not in a district where gunshot wounds were a problem, but vehicles, construction accidents and the like generated plenty of practice cases. Having advanced clotting agents, CATs, AEDs, better means of controlling hypotensive shock made a real difference in the condition of patients when they arrived in the ER. OT, but it only took a few years for NarCan to make from ER, to Medics, to EMTs, to the standard medical bag carried on every rig.

    • Interesting. Sorry for the laziness of not looking it up, but it would seem that a reasonable side effect would be that a lot of crimes that used to be classified as murders would be classified as attempted murders or felonious assaults. It would be useful to know how to rates of those types of crimes have changed over the same period.

    • True, but violent crime rates don’t require homicide…and violent crime rates have been declining for many years. So yes, we might be saving more lives, but there’s also a decline in violent crime. If you get shot and live, you don’t show up in the murder rate, but you do still show up in the violent crime rate which is still lower.

      I suspect that wealth does lower the overall violent crime rate, though. It’s just common sense that if people are working more and earning more, they’ve got less reason and less motivation to commit violent crimes as the risk-reward profile skews in favor of lower risk activities. When we read about crime stats I think it’s important to factor in increased liberalization of gun ownership, increased employment, and broader social-welfare benefits (“riot insurance” as I think Zman has called it in the past). Also just a general societal trend towards less violent solutions. You don’t have to kill your spouse any more with divorce laws being so liberal. Less need to rob/assault somebody when you can sit on a street corner and collect a nice bounty off of strangers driving by, and Uncle Sam is sending you a nice fat EBT card.

      I think the white violent crime rate now is about 2 per 100,000 and for blacks is about 20 per 100,000. The CDC lists the #1 cause of death for black men between 15-34 as homicide. Tragic.

      • “Working more and earning more”

        Hah. You mean blowing their head off one brain cell at a time to porn and video games. Wealth has allowed more and more young men to sequester themselves in their rooms and balloon to sizes heretofore unheard of. Blacks have resisted this trend but not avoided it.

    • Right-wing voices should be “self-deplatforming” from the Silicon Dons. Twitter isn’t going to shut down the anti-white hatred of Bishop Swan and Talcum X.

  16. Haven’t listened yet, but in thinking about whether the cucks will join the team, it all depends on whether they will be able to face the storm of name calling that will come. The only way to break that power is to not allow it to determine and control what you do or say, to lose the fear of it. The loss of that fear can be the most empowering thing one has ever experienced. For the white politician who is currently cucking hard, but knows all his wins come exclusively from the votes of white people, he needs to understand that sooner or later his constituents will tire of his cucking, and someone without his fear will come along and take him out in a primary, or possibly even in a general election. He can either start actually representing his constituency, or lose. Time to choose.

      • I point I have made in the past is somewhat proven out here. “White nationalism” has been used as a moral term by the Left for too long to be of much use. Most whites have internalized this. Greg Johnson disagrees and thinks the term can be rehabilitated. Maybe he’s right and I’m wrong. That said, King’s error here is in engaging with the Left on their terms. Once you accept the morality of the Left, you make them your master.

        • I get your point but I think it’s also true that any other term we choose, for example “Dissident Right,” can be made synonymous with “Nazi” by the media/academia in a matter of months. There is no more straightforward term for white advocacy than “White Nationalism.”

          • I don’t know. That’s a popular thing to say, but I see little evidence of it. The Left has tried my whole life to make “conservative” mean Nazi and they still they mocked for it. These people are not gods with unlimited powers. Further, I’m not a fan of clarity in this case. Making it easy for the enemy to identify you is kind of dumb. It’s the French dressing their officers in bright colors at the start of the Great War.

            A successful dissident movement must work in the shadows to a great degree. That means coded language. esoteric language and working around the realities of Progressive dominance. Anything that makes it easy for the Left must be avoided, no matter what your “principles” tell you. Principles are for after you win.

          • Clarity is usually both moral and expedient, but you’re right about it here.

            However much people do the We High IQ bit, if it’s not tempered by discretion it can often be worse than simple brute strength and ignorance.

        • It’s rather disturbing when we who have been Right From The Beginning start attributing the word “moral” to any description of anything by the amoral antimoral Left.

    • Many commenters at Instapundit are dead set on the Tricorn hat view of “I just want them to come here legally!” I really think it’s going to have to be a generational change. The boomercons have far too much invested in the color-blind society and simply cannot comprehend why these aliens keep voting for people that look like them ‘against their own economic interests’ as the left is fond of saying. The idiocy of Homo Economicus on the right has to be beaten with a shovel forever. Bommercons are also heavily insulated from the impact of their beliefs, much like the left. They have the money, the positions of power in their communities, etc, that they don’t recognize how bad it is for the younger generations.

      • Yes and no. The “I want them to come here legally” is predicated on the fact that our legal immigration really isn’t all that high. A million a year in a country of 330,000,000 is pretty small. I think it can and should be smaller, but it’s a great start because legal immigration says we are a Sovereign Nation. I think that’s all the Tricorn hats are saying. Once you win the war on illegals, you can start to trim the legal immigration too…as we did from the 20’s through the 50’s…limiting it to Europeans. Right now the battle is clearly between “We are a Sovereign Nation and we have a right to our own country” vs. “We are not a sovereign nation, and we need to be ethnically cleansed through mass immigration to pay for our sins”.

        The Tricorn hats understand this. We’re currently not even clearly winning the battle that America is a sovereign nation that contains Americans and we have the right to tell other people they can’t come here. If you can’t win that battle, it matters not a bit whether you want legal immigration lower or not.

        • The counter argument to that is “I want them to come here legally” concedes that immigration is normal and opposing it is immoral. After all, if Congress passed a law saying anyone who can get here is a citizen, then the billion or so who arrive would be here legally. In other words, the “I want them to come here legally” just leads to a debate about how best to let everyone come here “legally” and we’re back where we started.

          America is full, We have all we need. I’m willing to consider exceptions on a case by case basis. Otherwise, immigration is bad for Americans and therefore should be zero.

          • Z: “After all, if Congress passed a law saying anyone who can get here is a citizen, then the billion or so who arrive would be here legally.”

            Every civic nationalist who proudly announces, “I only want them to come legally” needs to be asked, “So if there was a law legalizing open borders or a mass amnesty then you would welcome all the new citizens?” After all, all that matters is legality.

            I detest the foolishness and cowardice of civic nationalists.

          • Depends on the definition of “them”. I have no problem with Brits or Irish or Swedes. The Tricorns aren’t out there saying “hey let’s turn Gary, IN into Mogadishu”.

          • Sure, let us take in more leftist cucked losers from Swedenstan. I am sure they will turn into foaming alt-right dragon-men the minute they land here. /sarc. As far as the Micksters, can you name one Irish dominated city/state in the U.S. that is not a corrupt rat-ruled hellhole.

            Ethnic nationalists are just as blind as the civnats re: immigration.

          • I’m curious what you affirm UpYours. You reject both civic and ethnic nationalism. What else is there? Do you affirm anything or are you just a contrarian?

        • The problems with the “Europeans” term is that the definition of “European” has changed a lot over the last 250 years. The founders and the 1924 Immigration law specifically wanted to limit or even eliminate Irish, Italian, Polish, Ukrainian etc. immigration who were not considered “European” or “white”. Today, a Ukrainian lefty peasant would be considered “white” and let-in. Is that desirable?

      • That is because many of the Boomercons saw the result of a non-color blind society, Germany and Japan c. 1933-45 or Fmr. Yugoslavia c. 1991-1999, unlike their heads up their ass alt-right.

        • Hate to break it to you, but the British Empire and various of the French Republics were also non-color blind. Every single Nation prior to the 1960’s/70’s was, and most still are. Talk to a Slovak about the Hungarians sometime, or a Finn about Russians.

    • Revealed preferences say otherwise, IMO. The average conservative politician is concerned about the donor class, who will ensure they won’t starve when they are inevitably voted out. The donor class has untold billions to pay people off. Eric Cantor settled for mere millions.

      Publications that no one reads are kept in business thanks to tech billionaires. We like to say that “we aren’t voting our way out of this” but any talk of revolution is foolish, even if the presaged economic collapse actually happens. Our movements cannot sustain an effective boycott, we have no business talking of war.

      • The central question is that of electoral tribalism. Mainstream conservatism has been henceforth either unable or unwilling to shame non-whites out of tribal voting. Nor is it able to get enough whites to vote tribally in the percentages that non-whites do. It’s debatable whether or not this is even possible. Our politics is based around married white households. Look at today’s Millennial white women, they will hit the Wall long before ever supporting building a Wall.

        • Unfamiliar perhaps to the older generations of readers, Jared Holt has been a major pain to our movements. But as far as most are aware, he isn’t especially paid that well and lives in an expensive coastal city. Compare that to the six-and-seven figure SPLC dons in low-cost Alabama.

          Now imagine how many AnCom part-timers that would accept Weinstein levels of degradation to have a position like Mr. Holt. And recognize that no billionaire is currently facing fiscal heartburn for their patronage.

          • I’m highly confident the SPLC dons spend little actual time in Alabama. They probably alternate summers between the Vineyard and Tuscany.

    • I am moving quite firmly into the accelerationist camp, especially for the boomercons who have yet to realize that their politicial ideals have consequences. Boomercons believe their cherished 401k accounts will be safe from confiscatory taxation because of tax laws written by a 99% white Congress at a time when America was 90% white.

      Guess what, boomercons, AOC and her disproportionately swarthy cohorts in the Democratic Socialist party have quite different plans for that pool of accumulated wealth. They don’t yet have the numbers to do more than talk, but they *will* be coming after it in the 2020s. I see no evidence that the current crop of Republicans in the Senate will do anything other than fold like a cheap suit.

      The smartest thing the dissident right can do now is to support the most extreme leftist Democrat candidate for their district in the House. Every Democratic Socialist we can put in the House pushes the Awakening of the boomercons closer in time.

      • “but they *will* be coming after it in the 2020s.”

        And THAT is the killshot, right there. The enforcer troops are already being offered our women.

Comments are closed.