Politics is often described as a dispute over a set of issues or maybe a dispute between groups with some stake in an issue. This is the simplest and crudest form of politics, the sort you get at the town meeting or a social club. In reality, political divides are much more complex, often tangential to the issues. Trump, for example, would love to spend a trillion dollars on roads and bridges. The Democrats have talked about it for years, but now they oppose it, because they hate Trump.

That’s one of the dimensions to politics. The opposition to Trump is entirely personal, often stemming from class identity. The more candid anti-Trump people come right out and admit that they oppose him because they don’t like his style. The personal dimension to politics plays a much larger role that it should, but democratic politics always attracts small-minded narcissists. The system itself rewards this sort of behavior, so even the more mature fall into the trap of personal politics.

This gets into another dimension of politics, one where you begin to see the divide between the camps. One side thinks people are the problem that politics must fix and the other side thinks the system is what needs fixing. Scott Alexander did a post on this a couple of years ago. One side sees politics as a war between groups, while the other side sees politics as a result of systemic failure. The left blames Trump or Putin for their woes, while the Right blames “the swamp” for everything.

The interesting thing about this is the two sides will flip when it comes to specific topics like crime or regulation. The Left thinks crime is the result of defects in society like racism, while the Right pins the blame on criminals or maybe judges, who allow criminals to walk free. This conflict versus mistake dimension of politics has a situational dimension to it as well. When it is convenient to blame the system, both types will blame the system. The same is true with personalizing issues.

Of course, on this side of the great divide, people tend to look at politics as war and focus on specific people as the trouble. That’s the nature of outsider politics, as it by definition opposes the system and the people in it. There’s also the fact that dissident politics is immature at this time. There’s not a lot of theory to hold it all together or even a common set of definitions. People call themselves dissidents, in some cases, because they think it sounds cool.

This gets into another set of dimensions that Greg Johnson has covered. Politics involves ideas, events, and people. Small-minded people focus on the people, while average minded people focus on events. The higher minded will talk about ideas, but at the top, all three are part of the political discussion. The cable chat shows are not going to spend time discussion theory, for example. Instead they cover the events of the day and the people involved in those events.

This is another reason why dissident politics remains focused on people. It is not that dissidents are stupid or ignorant. The issue at this stage is that most dissidents are politically immature. For generations, Americans have been conditioned to operate within that very narrow space of official politics. One side wants tyranny by government, while the other side wants a tyranny of corporate power centers. You get to choose who rules over you, but not how they rule over you.

One sign that dissident politics is beginning to grow up is the appearance of books and articles looking at events and ideas from outside the system. Chris Caldwell’s recent book, for example, is a serious treatment of the forces unleashed by the Civil Rights Movement in the 1960’s. Caldwell is not a dissident, although he could probably feel at home on this side, but he is clearly aware of what’s happening on this side. When intellectuals take dissidents seriously, the movement is maturing.

That’s another dimension to politics. There is a lifecycle to all political movements, whether they are driven by events or ideas. We live in an age in which the ideas of the Enlightenment have largely run their course. We are also at a point where the American Empire is coming to an end. Then there is the political order within America that co-evolved with the empire. The current turmoil is due to the confluence of several cycles coming to an end at the same time and place.

That’s why dissident politics remains immature. The start of the new must wait for the old to reach a stage when it can no longer retrain its replacement. For several decades now, the old system could keep dissident politics bottled up, but the cracks in the walls are obvious to everyone now. Like a landslide waiting to happen, there is a lot of energy stored up in the status quo. What will cause that energy to be released cannot be known, but it is just a matter of time.

That may be the most important dimension to politics. Time is not a constant in the political world. Often events move quickly and uncontrollably, while at other periods, time feels like it stops. Right now, we are in an interregnum, where stuff happens, but not much has changed. We are in the period between when the old falls away and the new rushes into replace it. Time stands still, but at some point, it is going to take off like rocket and things will change quickly.

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!

220 thoughts on “Dimensionality

  1. One can make erudite analysis of the U.S. collapse. But don’t expect WN’s to simply watch from the comfort of their lay-z-boy with beer and swisher in hand while making snarky comments.

    I see the U.S. going out the same way Britain is – we’lll go full authoritarian and I expect our guys to get the Tommy Robinson treatment along with the other various WN dainyos.

    I know our side loves to mock people like Robinson(and Roger Stone) but they are canaries in the coal mine. When they drop, you know worse is coming. 20 years ago they would have been classified as loons and ignored, not crushed by the authorities.

    The ruling class still at the end of the day, wants us dead and gone and I see little in the way of signs that they are giving up on the goal.

    Never, ever underestimate a wounded foe.

    • “The ruling class still at the end of the day, wants us dead and gone”

      I disagree. I don’t believe the ruling class does want us “dead and gone” at all. I believe they’d much rather see us firmly – and PERMANENTLY – brought to heel. They know damned well who designs, manufactures and maintains all those marvelous technological toys upon which their cushy lifestyle INCREASINGLY depends and they know what would happen if Atlas shrugged – or more likely succumbed to the death of a thousand cuts.

    • Very interesting article. Thanks for that. Goes a long way to explaining the current world.

      • You’re welcome. A whole lot of the nonsense we see today makes sense for me after reading that. Unfortunately, understanding WHY I am “the enemy” doesn’t make BEING “the enemy” any easier. {sigh}

    • Two things I pulled from it: (1) the civil rights legislation of the sixties eliminated the right of association. (2) the two political sides are now the bigots vs. the totalitarians. Good stuff.

  2. Everyone knows that Joe Biden is to senile to run against Trump, so it will be Hillary Clinton who will ride into the brokered convention and be “drafted” with the help of all those super-delegates.

    This is just another example of why it is the STATE itself that is your mortal enemy. It draws the worst of the worst and hands them immense power over you.

    By the way, people were talking “racism” up-thread. I look at it this way; everyone is racist. Yes, everyone. There are no exceptions. Millions of years of evolution crafted us to notice the differences between our tribe and outsiders. (with God’s help of course)

  3. My professor at the time, Dr. Lee, was one of those Koreans on the roof. He and some others did fire shotguns in the vicinity of the prospective looters but deliberately missed and the targets fled hastily. Lee claimed he didn’t see anybody harmed the whole time he was back home. Whether true or not I have no idea as Lee was very smart, smart enough to keep his own counsel.

    I live in the core of a major metro, Chitcago, by the lake. My compliant weapon of choice is my FNAR Competition in 308 tricked out with red dot and mid-range wide field scope. 5000 rounds says I hit a nagger or 500 before they burn it all down. We’re not going anywhere, there is no Plan B. We’re quite prepped for Coronavirus complete with reuseable suits, masks, filters etc.

  4. SUPERB work sir, as usual!!!
    My long deceased father was a classical trained English major.
    He observed what you have stated in here:
    “The highest form of discourse is about IDEAS.”
    “Second on down is about THINGS”
    “The lowest subject of discourse is People.”
    The denigration of our society has expanded the list now to not just people, but their hair, clothes and almost exclusively just gossip.”
    The race to be the most outrageous for media exposure to sell movies, makeup, or more media exposure, or whatever is beyond ridiculous. I never ever watch the Hollywood festivals pumping movies or tunes, like the Oscars, etc., but the last one was noteworthy as many of the starlets wore see through dresses to expose their nipples for max camera exposure obviously. Only saw it as Yahoo picked up the shots for their click bait.
    Remember the dip stick red head that had the severed bloody head of Trump made up to hold for the camera?
    Away we go spiraling down the rabbit hole.

  5. Z Man said: “That’s one of the dimensions to politics. The opposition to Trump is entirely personal, often stemming from class identity. The more candid anti-Trump people come right out and admit that they oppose him because they don’t like his style.”

    Check it out. This is from BREITBART. ” Mike Bloomberg Tells Fox News: I’m Not Upset with Many Trump Policies, Just ‘the Way He’s Doing It’ ”

  6. “People call themselves dissidents, in some cases, because they think it sounds cool.”

    Why you been lookin in my soul, Zman?

    But seriously, one of the left’s absolutely crushing advantages has been their shameless and relentless use of dishonest labelling. You already know all the labels they slap on us.

    The truth is we have to fight that game. We either have to (1) use honest labels or (2) use cool/euphemistic labels for ourselves, or even (3) rehabilitate and/or change the meaning of labels they slap on us.

    “Dissident right” is perhaps type (1) or type (2), or both, and that’s a good thing.

  7. “One side wants tyranny by government, while the other side wants a tyranny of corporate power centers.”

    Hmmm… the Democrats, clearly want both of these, and they are getting both. There are some areas where one could argue that the Republicans oppose one or the other, but in the main, they seem content with big government and big corporatism. (Except at election time, of course…)

    I would say it is our side that opposes both, with few exceptions.

    The time we are living in, the age of the American Corporate and Military Empire, will not come to an end until the big, contented middle, the fat and happy masses, are no longer fat and no longer happy. It will not end well. I would not be so concerned if I didn’t have children…

  8. Here is a very basic cheat sheet for the fundamentals of White ecological preservation. (aka the bogus title “White nationalism”) Please note that there is nothing whatsoever of “hatred” in this thought procedure. Please rid your mind of all associations with the cartoon villain “Hitler” and all his wack-job allies. They are put there by your enemies, in order to impede your understanding by a rather clumsy job of guilt by association.

    It is pure ecological thinking. Whites are an endangered species, and they are also a highly valuable species, who can easily be shown to be historically responsible for nearly all great human cultural and technological advancements for the past 4,000 years. No serious historian would dispute this. Not one.

    But at this time in history, Whites are under tremendous biological and ecological pressure, and are at grave risk of soon ceasing to exist. Why?

    1. Whites are so biologically naturally attractive, are so balanced in human intellect, physical variety, beauty, achievement and athleticism, that most all other humans, if given their druthers, would prefer to be White.

    2. White people naturally and automatically seem to create the most socially, politically, and environmentally pleasant human environments on earth, wherever they go. Who wants to live in Switzerland or Northern Italy? Everyone. Who wants to live in Burma? Nobody.

    2a. Pretty much every Third World sh!tholer would much much rather live in a White country, instead of his own native sh!thole. Would you rather live in Zurich or Haiti? Don’t think, just answer the damn question.

    3. Pretty much every Third World sh!tskin would rather have a White girl instead of his own womenfolk. Circumspice.

    4. Unfortunately, White genetic properties are recessive rather than dominant. Simply put, this means that for procreative purposes, White Plus Non-White Always Equals More Non-White. The math at this point is not so hard to understand: if every Non-White prefers to bang a White girl, and there is a fixed, limited supply of White girls, and White girls only live in White countries, and every Non-White person would prefer to barge into White countries rather than stay in their sh!tholes, well…

    5. A pattern emerges. And the pattern leads to the ecological destruction and permanent erasure of White people. Again, this has nothing at all to do with Hate, or Supremacy, or any other buzzwords. It’s just ecology and math.

    • And all of their women look alike, especially Asians. White women are prettier than any other race and by a wide margin. They also have a lot more “diversity!” We have blondes, brunettes, red-heads, (naturally) curly or straight hair and different colored eyes. We even have different skin tones ranging from olive to very light. Both white women and white men are the most desirable, at least according to a study I saw on the dating websites, which, of course, was framed as white supremacy, even though non-whites were way more likely to contact whites than whites were to contact them.

    • Ridding minds of hitler? So, let’s be clear here:

      Are we not allowed to use the world’s biggest nationalist flare up, WWII, and its largest contenders as a case study in human capital management?

      Or are we saying we shouldn’t be praising hitler?

      Nobody on this page praises hitler.

      All of us can analyze WWII to see why over intellectualizing the dialectic, theory and constraints of logic are over rated and actually standing up and doing things are underrated.

      And we can see how well developed (not necessarily correct, merely sophisticated in scope and size) dialectic can fail us by looking at Goebbels.

      Adamantly refusing to even acknowledge or cite examples from Germany in WWII is not very intellectual coming from a guy who is outlining constraints of white preservation in a “thought procedure.”

      • Somebody said Hitler?

        “Lmao there’s 3+ million migrants in Turkey who they’re sending to Greece.

        That’s bigger than Operation Barbarossa, the biggest land invasion in human history.”

        • Alzaebo, your reply is only tangentially related to my earlier post referencing an analysis of WWII for lessons in the importance dialectic for the success of nationalist uprisings (nationalist activity has been revolutionary since long before WWII by the way) but I have no disagreements that migration is always bad, period. I don’t even like when birds migrate, they spread the first forms of influenza which have since become one of the only endemic viruses of mankind (which means you need a new vaccine every year).

  9. I’m ultimately unconvinced that ideas run a course and get exhausted. I think it’s more likely that ideas like the Enlightenment (great branding, Enlightenment dudes!) are deeply flawed but these flaws are hidden while the social capital from the previous age gets burnt up. That can take a while for a case like Europe, which had more social capital than any other place, ever.

    What comes next is not the next thing so much as it is a simple rejection of these awful ideas and a return to the old modes of thought, which was far more sophisticated and life-affirming than what replaced it.

    • FWIW Marx had a similar idea. He believed societies and economic systems had internal contradictions that caused the status quo to exhaust itself and set the stage for its evolution. I tend to agree with him and you on that point.

      Then he went and devised a torturously complex (and failed) ‘solution’ to history which amounted to perpetual revolution and retardation.

      If I’m understanding you, I agree the solution should be simplicity. Keep what has worked, throw out what hasn’t. Adapt proven principles to the day’s problems instead of innovating new ones. Maybe the world hasn’t changed as much as we’ve been told.

      Interesting stuff!

  10. Since the Zman is the leading intellect of Dissidence– hands away from that revolver, Krull!– the best prepper sites are listening.

    I give you the Venerable and Most Splendid Ol’ Remus’ Woodpile, who showcases a comment by our very own Tars Tarkus.
    Hats off to Tars and Ol’ Remus!


    (Our love and prayers to Master and Missus Remus at this delicate time, as well.
    Godspeed you both.)

  11. The Europeans are also front loaded with a lot of parliamentary elections in the next few years which will add to the volatility:

    Denmark 2023,
    Finland 2023,
    France 2022,
    Germany 2021,
    Italy 2023,
    Netherlands 2021,
    Norway 2021,
    Spain 2023,
    Sweden 2022,
    UK 2022.

    The more politics is forced onto the front burner the more potentially volatile issues have to be dealt with publicly. This is a plus for dissidents.

      • I didn’t think there was a country whos culture was more degenerate than the USA, then I watched British TV… You have my condolences sir…

        • Thank you. Yes, it truly is stomach-churningly bad. On a brighter note, it is leading to a lot of noticing.

          • King Tut, dying to see Noughts and Crosses.
            Not punting!

            (BBC series: Britain was colonized by more advanced Africans- and the natives are getting restless)

          • I have read about this Noughts and Crosses and we all know exactly what they are up to. I am quite pleased actually because it will lead to greatly enhanced Noticing.

            Honestly, the enemy are doing are work for us. Imagine if they produced nothing but strident pro-white culture while the country was gobbled up from within? That would be far worse.

      • That maneouver woulda’ stopped the Ruskies dead in their tracks, and millions of lives saved

  12. Re: personal vs systemic. Politics comes down to interest. Interest comes down to economics and identity. How you make a living and who you are. Economics and identity have material and narrative aspects. Think trade/confidence and blood/history.

    Hence personal vs systemic and everything in between. They’re just tools to pull the levers to advance interest. Rhetoric in other words. Reason/emotion etc. That’s why the think tanks don’t run society, nor the military, nor business, whatever. It’s why politics is a dirty game. It’s why we need politicians. They’re master rhetoricians.

    Quick take. Hope it’s coherent.

  13. I come from a fairly large family, and one of my siblings is an alcoholic. He’s sort of a functional alcoholic, meaning that he isn’t really a danger to anybody, he isn’t out crashing cars or starting brawls, it’s just that his alcoholism causes an emotional burden to the rest of our family.

    But because he isn’t a public nuisance, it is strictly a family problem. Every so often we have a kind of informal family meeting to discuss what we might do to help him: encourage him to go to rehab or AA or something. My larger point, in terms of this post, is that it is a family discussion.

    Imagine if we were having this private, personally emotional discussion, but my blue-haired cat-lady sister invited a bunch of crazy homeless people, a bunch of random Mexicans, and a gaggle of Zionist Orthodox Jews who she found on the street corner, to all come take part in the family conversation. All of a sudden instead of talking about how to help my brother, we were somehow talking about refugee status for Guatamalans and how to raise taxes to pay for missile defense systems in Israel.

    That is what American politics has turned into, in Current Year. Literally half the things Americans are forced to discuss politically, have nothing at all to do with Americans. It is simply that we’ve allowed every single bedbug, tapeworm, tick, flea, Arab, Hindu, Negro and Jew on planet earth to come have a seat at the table, and hog the microphone. We can’t have a realistic politics until we vigorously cull the definition of who “we” are.

  14. We can kinda sense the new world coming as we watch the 70 year old men fight it out in current day America for the right to lead a younger multicultural nation.
    Trump is busy tweeting about how well blacks are doing under him.
    Biden is thanking “ the Thing” that created us all.
    Bernie is busy looking for where the knife will come from that stabs him in the back.
    The American experiment is getting tired but it could stagger on for years.
    As we watch it all just get crazier.
    And the Oligarchs get richer.
    The problem is we old farts got too much at stake in our current system and the young are happy just being virtual revolutionaries on the internet.

    • What’s remarkable is just how weak the bench is for both sides of the sandwich. Presumably, Pence will run in 2024. He’ll be 65 at that point. Who are the young guns on either side?

      • I think the old codgers in both parties cannot walk away; they think they’re too crucial to The Republic. They consume mainstream media more than most, and believe that their every move is historically important. We used to have a fair numbers of Diocletians who walked away from leadership to tend to their cabbages. But no more, apparently.

        • True, Marko. Heck, even when faced with severe terminal illness, they cling with a death grip to their precious sinecures. McCain was that way, and the odious Specter. But honestly the Clintons, the “surviving” Dem presidential field, Justice Ginsberg, and much of the House and Senate in both parties exhibit the same pathology. They don’t retire to tend to personal matters because, apart from climbing the greasy pole, they HAVE no personal matters to tend to.

          Your comment made me wonder whether the “codgers” generation really IS crucial to the republic in one way: namely, they’re the last generation to share a common culture, and to acknowledge the same authorities for transmitting that culture (I.e. TV news, newspapers, the name-brand credentialing institutions, etc.). They are the audience holding everything together via their common attention. Once they’re gone, though (and this will be the decade for that) everything will be much more atomized. The younger cohorts are fractured in ways that don’t even recognize one another. When they come of age after the codgers are buried, the various sides will have no basis to talk with each other; they’ll be effectively different nations.

      • Trump crushed GOP hopefuls. He make clear just how far apart Conservative Inc and actual GOP voters are. The GOP has no good younger candidates because the GOP won’t allow anyone but a Jeb Bush type to move up the ranks.

        The Dems’ problem is that its a coalition so it’s always going to be hard to find one person who bridges all of those gaps.

      • Perhaps the young guns will be like Trump or AOC—political, unknowns? As such, they lie in the shadows unnoticed. Those folk who continue to play the political game of rising through the ranks in order to secure the top position, is to me a vote against them.

  15. I have noticed a mild ambivalence towards Nick Fuentes in your posts and today you write that dissident thinkers who are small minded focus on the people and not the systematic. Nick routinely attacks the Big Guys.

    This implies that the more wizened have pattern recognition, logic and fund of knowledge that the small minded (like Nick) don’t. You then give the small minded brief respite in the fact that their movement is immature, offloading the blame on lack of dialectic.

    You also made claims in previous posts that this current wave of dissident thinking is akin to previous waves (buchananite 80’s) and will also fail, citing the adage “every cycle eventually ends” along with other perennial factors.

    Is it possible your salty? Let’s be honest: even amongst dissidents there is poor correlation between actual understanding and rank as a dissident. This is an eternal principle of humankind: we don’t respect knowledge. But not all is lost…

    Is it possible that a sophisticated dialectic is not so essential for the dissident movement?

    Contrary to the wonderfully linear and heroic arc of history depicted by public schools and the History channel, few revolutionary movements in history were able to leverage their dialectic to the point of a game changing advantage. Their dialectic worked as a canvas upon which to paint the actions and events which would ultimately comprise the bulk of the final product.

    An example: Goebbels dialectic was a case study in sophistication, but Hitlers failure to sack Moscow, poor triage skills with sending Rommel to Africa and charging Stalingrad in the winter lost the Reich’s war for Germany’s mind. Shortly later the Nazis imploded internally with an attack on a conference with Adolf in attendance. Adolf was shook, the elders whispering, and the end was nigh.

    It’s my contention that Dialectics set the stage upon which the back room decision making, public actions and sleaze ultimately perform the melodrama of history.

    And so for my final conclusion: don’t overthink, don’t overdo. Ride the wave of history. All the dialectic can’t save this current NWO. And too much action led to CVille, the bloodbath of Stalingrad…both events being blows to nationalism rather than wind in its sails.

    The heart wants what it wants, and theories for social governance are like advanced medical care: at a certain point it becomes a doctor’s choice, the hospital soup of the day, and there is a limit to knowledge. Fate plays a role. You bash enlightenment fallacies but you rely too much on a materialist conception. I am a materialist too, but just one that recognizes the limit to the value of understanding is much closer than one thinks due to the inability to access true knowledge and the poor utility of that knowledge when it arrives in epiphany and discovery.

    Lack of dialectic shouldn’t stop anyone from making the move away from what repels them (NWO/Saturnalian/Abrahamically Inclined Artifical Intelligence With Tendency for Monotheistic Manic Central Government) toward what captures their hearts (the soft kiss of their women, the survival of their Blood, the ancient rhythms of nations and tribes).

    Trust Nick more.

      • Why? I used it 7 times, in an essay format response with about 400 words, and the theme of the essay was dialectic, and the theme of Z mans essay was dialectic.

        My usage of the term (which is an excellent English word, and bests describes the central theme of philosophy of notable theorists like Lacan, Wittgenstein and Hegel) is in direct reference to Z mans piece about the lack of “theory,” “language,” and poorly established vocabulary for “system” analysis. All of these can be conveniently summarized by the word dialectic, which defines the linguistic and conceptual constraints of a worldview. Your one lined snark is typical, and offers nothing. Go simp on someone else’s reply.

        • Jim, I guess you should try to express your points using words of no more than two syllables and sentences of 6-8 words so that the reading complexity is at a level no higher than 6th grade. 😉

          Ok, I’m busting BadThinker’s balls here, I enjoy his comments here as well. Both of you keep on postiing.

          • I sounded like a cringe fag defending my use of the word, I apologize to BadThinker for being butthurt.

  16. It will be interesting, because there is a lot of rage among young whites right now about what older (sorry) boomers have helped unleash over the course of the last few decades, and yet these people are ageing and on their way to being enfeebled and dying. I’m not some Nazi hunter who gets his jollies beating up old men, so I can barely work up much besides pity for someone like Biden or Chris Matthews (who’s “retiring” today). My father’s a Boomer and a liberal, and I don’t want his last thoughts in life to be that he helped make the Occident less livable for his posterity (even though that’s kind of what he did). I just steer clear of politics around him and recognize no good can come of “red-pilling” someone that deep in a blue coma. There’s an idea: we need to reexamine respect for the aged, and the sacredness of ageing. It seems like our cultural elites have expended a lot of energy destroying inter-generational bonds and respect the same way they wrecked relations between the sexes and between parents and their children (“Don’t trust anyone over 35” might be the literally stupidest axiom to live by). Were I of a more conspiratorial bent I might think that it was all a plan to have these white oldsters like Biden and Bernie on the stage just to prime people to laugh at ageing whites and to crystallize in people’s minds the image of whites fading off into the sunset and losing their political and cultural power, and ultimately their country. (That said, I still hope Pelosi ends her days being fed tapioca mixed with ground glass by a loud black Jamaican orderly who watches her soaps with the volume on full blast at the rest home where the botox monster melts into something resembling Cthulhu).

    • The “I wish my grandchildren were brown” woman. My lord. Show that comment to some normies, it’s fun to watch their reactions. A big part of the problem is many have deluded themselves into thinking things wont change. Most people don’t know the USA is going to become less than 50% white soon. The media focus tested that and have found it makes most white people become racist. So they rarely talk about it. It awakens the normies.

      • Fash, what is not allowed to be talked about are the things with power to move people, and to move them in the directions that the PTB don’t want. Seek them out.

    • Joey – full credit for having the patience and respect you do re your father. My mother is a silent and I’m the boomer – and I’ve journeyed so far from where I began that I can hardly even talk to her (not to mention she’s hard of hearing and not nearly as sharp as she once was). Inter-generational cultural bonds do matter, but I reject a blind respect for the old. As I often remind my sons, everyone grows old but few ever grow up.

    • Agree with Junger- old white buffoons on the Clown World stage, showcasing the dying of the light. Part of the marketing.

    • One can only feel guilt for what one has knowingly done. Why should I feel guilty for the present changes in US demography? Such was done by duplicitous liars in Congress. When someone here posts exactly how he thinks I could have made a change at any point since I’ve come of age, say the Nixon era, I’m all ears.

      Corollary to the above is that I also feel zero guilt for minorities and their present standing in society.

      The above is not to say one doesn’t feel empathy or compassion for those following us generationally. It is definitely harder to prosper and the promise of America when I was young is no longer the same. I often wonder if I could succeed half as well today as a couple of generations ago. But that’s not guilt, perhaps a profound sadness, but never guilt.

  17. Trying to predict when the avalanche hits is the tough bit. Few are those who prefer to move out of multiculti land, bunker up, and wait around for years until the collapse occurs. There will be many on both sides: those who prematurely displace and those who wait too long to displace. There are serious downsides to both. I suspect the best investment is not some mountain fastness or urban bunker, but investment in skills for oneself and one’s family.

  18. The interregnum is going to limp along for another few years. This is a placeholder election. But a critical moment in this confluence of events is that the 2024 election will no longer be Boomer vs Boomer. Both parties will do their best to put up an acceptable corporate Stepford Wife to try and keep a lid on things, but the volatility of the demographic conflict will come boiling to the surface. Even if Biden or one of the Jews wins they probably won’t go for a second round. The Rs if they don’t put up Romney will put up someone he’s comfortable with. The Ds will have run out of )))white))) runway. Turning over center stage to squatters and looters who want to divide the spoils will be the ultimate accelerant. That day is coming whether it 2024 or a bit later.

  19. “Time is not a constant in the political world. Often events move quickly and uncontrollably, while at other periods, time feels like it stops.”

    The USSR simply fell apart in a span of months. There is little consensus on what caused it beyond broad concepts like loss of legitimacy. “Star Wars broke their budget” is a GOP canard, for all that it played a part.

    Planning for a specific collapse scenario is risky. Ask goldbugs over the last 5+ years. We’re fairly sure something’s going to break down, but not what, how or when.

    Forcing the issue is a risky step for revolutions. If you have to ask yourself if you’re growing and popular with the people, you’re probably not. And seizing power isn’t the same as governing. Was the 70-year Orwellian off-ramp of Communism worth it for the Russians? Net-negative. Creedal Communism had shallow roots even after decades of hard Leninist-Stalinist totalitarianism.

    Without those popular enduring roots, revolution isn’t worth it even if you can pull it off.

    Having a number of strategies in play inside and outside the wire gives us better odds for having Our Guys in the right place at the right time. There may be a time when a single insider can make a big difference (Trump got elected, for what it’s proven worth), or a time when some chunk of the U.S. becomes ours by default after years of Imperial neglect (see Detroit).

    Change will eventually come whether we work for it or against it. Let the flow of events do some of the heavy lifting for us and leverage the sweet spots.

    • “Change will eventually come whether we work for it or against it. Let the flow of events do some of the heavy lifting for us and leverage the sweet spots.”–Yes! Copy write that concise statement. I’ll be quoting you!

      • I second that. Thank goodness I got to be in Boy Scouts for a year, one thing of many always stuck with me:

        Be Prepared.

    • To really get as good of a read on things as possible, one must be a “fly on the wall”. Observe what is going on, take notes, figure it out, and make sure you are on the right track. Think of a drone, hovering above, filming what is going on. The drone observes, but doesn’t make judgements about what it sees. Only later does the interpretation and judgement come into play. Then one takes those interpretations back to the drone footage, and makes sure they mesh and work together. Then take more drone footage, and make sure it confirms. That’s how you stay on the right track, and you don’t get waylaid by charlatans and phonies.

  20. If whites ever manage to form political and/or cultural groups specifically dedicated to their our people – such as you see already with literally every other racial and religious group – things will change quickly.

    At first, a huge majority of whites will act aghast that their fellow, low-brow cousins have done such a thing, but they – and, more importantly, their kids – will see how pleasant those communities are compared to their multi-culti world where they are forever the bad guy. The defections will start as a trickle and turn into a flood in short order.

    The only thing holding the current order in place is whites not acting like every other group. If that changes (and we can definitely be the catalyst for that change in mindset), it’s game over.

    • Actually, from the moment that we are allowed to form organisations to promote and protect white interests, we’ve already won. After that, it’s only a matter of time.

      • Exactly. It’s why the TPTB will fight tooth and nail to stop it. They know that it’s game over if any white identity group is allowed to operate and comes to be accepted by even a small percentage of whites as legitimate.

        Why do you think the FBI has been arresting “white supremacists” lately and saying that they are domestic terrorists.

        • And a new TV show called “The Hunters” starring Al Pacino, about a group that hunts down “neo-Nazis.” (which they consider white nationalists.)

          • Used to really like Pacino and looked forward to new stuff. Oddly enough, he doesn’t seem to be getting better as he ages.

            Don’t think I’ll be seeing this show.

    • It’s strange, we already have physical white flight but not psychological white flight.

      People literally move without thinking about the implications of why they did that or what it means.

      The key point is to bring about psychological white flight. That’s our job! To make it that people say to themselves that they are moving to place X, joining organization Y, or writing book Z as a self-conscious act of white solidarity.

      Then, as you say, things will be different.

      • IMO people are unbelievably stressed out these days because of cognitive dissonance. What they are supposed to believe in, versus what they actually want to do. Once one understands the things we are not supposed to talk about or to think, then the reality around them, and what people want to do and say, fall right in line with what they understand, deep down, to be true. Once I figured it all out, I found a sort of inner peace about quite a few things that go on around me.

        • I think as important, or more important than, “It’s okay to be White” is “It’s okay to notice.”

          Every once in a while you can literally see the (figurative) pieces start to fall into place for the person you say that to. There is a pause, the eyes widen. But it’s not as if you suddenly have a new lifetime member of the DR. It takes repeated small feedings to sustain the change of direction.

    • Yeah, right of free association would be sufficient for me. I’m unprepared for all the killing that would be necessary to make amercu lily white. If whites could just throw off this perverse masochistic programming and develop even a bare modicum of cultural confidence- I would be satisfied.

  21. There’s also the fact that dissident politics is immature at this time. There’s not a lot of theory to hold it all together or even a common set of definitions.

    When I hear the word “theory”, I reach for my revolver.

    Here’s my theory: if you are an ethnonationalist, you’re on my team. If you’re not, you’re not.

    We’ll have plenty of time to talk “theory” after we win.

    • 100% this.

      Simple questions often cut easily through the tangled knot of theory. So much debate is made unnecessary by that simple statement: I’m an ethno-nationalist.

      It also make very clear who is on your side ideologically and who is not. Michelle Malkin would never say that she’s an ethno-nationalist. That’s fine and we can work together at times, but it very clearly shows that we are not working toward the same end goal.

      • Michelle Malkin is a righteous champion for America, but she’s also our most dangerous enemy, because it’s types like her that allow people to think harmonious co-existence is possible.

        She’s married to a Jew – I don’t know whether they’ve procreated, but I figure their offspring will have some serious identity issues. I’m not saying no exceptions should be made, but we should be aware that every poc we allow into our white Wakanda, is trouble down the line because their children are always going to feel like outsiders. We might not be doing them any favors by letting them in.

        • Interesting point of discussion. How similar, how dissimilar? Taken to it’s logical absurdity, “You’re a Dane, I’m Dutch. You can’t play in my sandbox!” Or perhaps less absurd: last week we discussed you being an atheist, while I, somewhat tending towards deist. Where is the line drawn? Worth more discussion at some point down the road.

          • “You’re a Dane, I’m Dutch. You can’t play in my sandbox!”

            In principle, no. Mass immigration by Dutch would be corrosive to the native culture if there were enough of them – that’s why I’m against inviting white South Africans to Denmark en masse and would, regrettably, think the same if Swedes started pouring across the sound, fleeing the Caliphate.

            But as long as our kids look like the locals, we could choose to raise them as either Danish or Dutch and they’d be able to inhabit their tribal identity without too many problems, except for a little anxiety about whether to roll up your pickled herring or whether clogs should have leather tops or be all-wooden.

            The real problems start when your foreign ancestry is written on your face. We could be lucky and they’d be strong enough to identify as Danish despite their skin color, but in all likelihood they’d suffer from a debilitating case of muh roots, and mixed breeds almost always come down on the poc side of their parentage when they go in search of muh identity.

            Michelle rightly got a big round of applause when she presented herself as an emphatically non-hyphenated American at AFPAC, but there’s no guarantee her children would be as strong or as enlightened. In fact, there’s a pretty good chance they’d embrace the hyphenated lifestyle with a vengeance, a chance that rises dramatically the more hyphens you introduce into your tribe.

            Of course, this question is one of those things that we should postpone until after we’ve won, but I figure the vetting should be done locally, on a by-case basis like the do in Switzerland, where your neighbors get to vote on whether you are Swiss or not.

            (A few years back, some Dutch animal activist had campaigned to outlaw a Swiss tradition involving cowbells, her idea being that cowbells stressed the cows. When she applied for Swiss citizenship, the locals told her to get the fuck out of their country.)


          • I think I heard of that activist in Switzerland being denied. I also believe I heard in Switzerland that you must have local recommendations for citizenship application/approval—which I took to mean there is some vetting process to rate how you’ve adapted to Swiss norms and culture. I’m all for that.

            As to my prior comment, I’ve no experience wrt raising children in a “foreign” land. My father immigrated and never mentioned shit about the old country, nor allowed the speaking of Dutch if I was part of the conversation—although I do know a lot of Dutch swear words as my father could never break himself of that habit. 😉

          • Your father was a wise man.

            I don’t believe someone born in Ye Olde Country can truly change nationality, no matter how long they live abroad, but they can make damned sure their kids grow up to be American.

          • The Japanese have an effective way of dealing with these sorts of identity problems:

            They require people of Korean ancestry to carry a Korean passport no matter how many generations they’ve lived in Japan. If they suddenly develop into a racial activist their passport gets yanked and they live happily ever after in Korea.

      • MM is much more a civnat than an ethnat, but does being an ethnat mean being in favor of a 100% pure ethnic homeland? Can you be an ethnat in theory but not in practice? I’m sure deep down MM thinks the USA is a white country, and she has been blessed to be born & raised in it, and knows which ethnicity has brought home the bacon for her, so to speak. So she’s aligning herself with the AF movement because she actually believes in an ethnostate, but to her that means a majority-white (she said as much in her AF keynote speech) with like-minded minorities sprinkled in. To some this is civnattery; to others this is the closest to a cohesive ethno-state we can get, without becoming North Korea.

        • Mark – The problem is not so much being North Korea as it is beginning with exceptions and ending up back where we started. As Zman noted the other day, ideological allies are fine at this point, but down the line we need natural boundaries that don’t need constant intellectual reinforcement. Race is that boundary. To aim for mere “majority White” with lots of IKAGOs rather than a White nation with a very few righteous exceptions sets one on a different path towards a very different end.

          • If a successor state ends up with a few percent of non-Europeans who have actively sided with Western Civilization, I have zero problem with it. Their offspring will blend away beyond recognition within 3 generations, establishing the “natural boundaries that don’t need constant intellectual reinforcement.”

            If their hardware (DNA) is good enough to run our software (Western culture) and they CHOOSE to do so even when it is not to their personal advantage (as Malkin has) then it is no detriment. Be flattered, and be magnanimous.

            The vast majority aren’t even bothering to pretend to assimilate, so I don’t see this as any kind of huge problem. The main thing is for any FUSA state to have a ZERO immigration policy. Ruling elites (and someone must always and will always form a ruling class) must be by design of state systemically forced to cultivate the health and fecundity of their own working class if they want more workers.

            Michelle Malkin isn’t the problem. The problem is the globalist cockroaches (Ryan, Romney, Clinton, Bush, Bloomberg, Will, etc) who think they have a right to flood our communities without our consent with unending hordes of utterly unassimilating Somalians, Indians, Chinese, Nigerians, Mexicans, Cambodians, etc. The cheap-labor-over-ALL-else maggot people must go somewhere else.

          • If Malkin is married to a jew, neither she nor her family belongs in a White ethnostate, no matter how wonderful a person she is.

        • “does being an ethnat mean being in favor of a 100% pure ethnic homeland?”

          Yes, by definition.

          Now, does that mean that we’d ever achieve that goal? No. But it should always – always! – be your lodestar and desired destination. Her path is the sweet lie that allows weak men to avoid the hard but necessary choices. Once you back away even an inch from 100% pure ethnic homeland, you enter a world of never-ending arguments about definitions and degrees, and you end up right back to where we are now.

        • Btw, here’s a section of MM’s wikipedia page that tells you everything you need to know:

          “In 2006, Malkin gave a lecture at her alma mater, Oberlin College, discussing racism, among other topics. She denied allegations that she had been insensitive to the “plight of minorities”, listing several racial epithets that had been used against her, and by relating a lesson she learned from her mother for which she is “eternally grateful”. When in kindergarten, Malkin went home in tears one day because her classmates had called her a racist name. But her mother comforted Michelle by telling her that everyone has prejudices.”

          If MM was honest, she would say that whites in the United States should have never let her family in or any other non-white family. However, what’s done is done, but we must stop all non-white immigration now. This country is great first and foremost because it was built by whites. Their Enlightenment ideals were wonderful, but those ideals grew out of the biology of whites and will die without a white majority in this country.

          But she’s not. She’s a race realist CivNat, which means that she believes that smart people around the world OF ANY COLOR can build and maintain what whites created in the United States if they just share the same values as those whites.

          She’s wrong, and, what’s more, she should know it.

        • Yes, purge Malkin but keep the Kennedy’s, Clintons, Bidens, Andrew McCabe, James Comey, Peter Strzok, Aldrich Ames, Klaus Fuchs, Robert Hanssen, etc.etc.etc. 100% white homeland will be perfect yup. Cannot believe that the DR is full of people with such poor grasp of history. Intra-racial and intra-tribal warfare have killed 100x more people than interracial and intertribal warfare. Yeah 100% white homeland will work great, ask the 100% white Slavic Yugoslavia how that worked out, or any one of the African racially pure nations.

          • I suppose the answer to that would be: rather be ruled by a dumb One of Us than a smart One of Them. But yes, huwhites like the Clintons or Blairs are every much my enemy as your average shitlib POC. And squatting Slavs are not my cup of tea either. Whatever. In this day and age I prefer anyone in charge who’s based and rational, and that includes non-huwhites.

          • I’m not saying purge MM because she was never in our camp in the first place. What I am saying is that we can work with her type when our interests coincide, but always remember that we have very different destinations in mind and both sides should acknowledge that.

            If you don’t know where you’re going, you probably won’t get there. And you sure as hell won’t get to where you want to go if you follow someone who wants to go someplace else.

          • So, you think multi-racial societies work better. Talk about not knowing your history.

      • Mookin is an opportunist who follows what is profitable and popular. . 15 years ago that meant being pro-war. Now it’s anti-immigration. And like all women in the movement, makes money and fame repacking ideas created by ppl who are smarter.

        • True, grey, but you use the army you have, since you won’t get the army you want.

          Liasons. Allies. I think of Malkin as a liason, since whites are not alone in this fight, and all people of goodwill need a bigger army.

          I’m a racist, but that doesn’t mean I’m malevolent. Everyone is, and should be, should be a happy racist. We honor our ancestors, love our people, and sh*t-can any of our own who brings shame to our skin.*

          • *(Verbatim to the Mexican neighbor yesterday, thats my canned speech to all colors. I first said it to Cartel lads in Laredo a quarter-mile from the border, and they agreed.

            I also start by saying our rulers hate us all, and that everyone needs a place to be who they are, where they can relax and speak freely.)

        • Malkin didn’t choose the profitable route by joining with Fuentes and the AFPAC crowd. She could’ve stayed with Conservative Inc. with Charlie and Gorka and all the rest of them and made much more money being controlled opposition to the left. Being an opponent of the immigration industry isn’t where the big money is. Charlie’s MAGA book is a big seller, by the way.

          • Right. Malkin is an ally. I kind of trashed on her above, but she and her kind are people we can and should work with. But we – and they – should never forget that we have very different goals in mind.

            Doesn’t mean that we can’t work together or that she is a grifter. She gave up a lot to even be a CivNat.

    • The Right has got something of a “Hamlet problem”–using talking/theorizing as a way to procrastinate and avoid action.

      I think most people know what needs to be done: organizing and action. Our goals are really pretty simple:

      (1) Racial identity, which is both a prelude to, and emergency fallback position from:
      (2) Ethnostates

  22. There’s an old saying in British politics that reputation builds glacially but falls in an avalanche. I think that is something that we could well see occur over the next few years and not just in US politics but everywhere else in the West too.

  23. The most interesting aspect of Chris Caldwell’s book is the lack of defensiveness in his writing. I’m so used to qualifiers being used by pundits to ensure they aren’t thrown into the void it felt like something was missing from a mainstream book like this.

    Never once did I read:

    “I’m not racist, but”
    “The civil right movement was righteous, but”
    “Misogyny is bad, but”

    While he was intentionally vague on some hatefacts known well to our side, he had the guts to go full attack mode on the sacred cows in the 1960’s.

    That, in itself, shows the tide is turning.

    • In real life conversations with normie-con friends, several times when talking about racial topics they’ve started with something like “I’m not racist, but…” Immediately I butt in and state, “I don’t care if you’re racist or not,” or “stop worrying about being racist and playing by the left’s rules.” And maybe adding, “stop being such a p*ssy!” Every time, there’s relief, as if their minds are freed and we can now proceed to talk freely.

      • Well done, but be aware that you thereby implicitly concede that being a racist is wrong.

        • What is “racism” and why is it wrong?

          One of the reasons for the failure of “conservatism” is that it is liberalism lite. As Z puts it, don’t fetch the stick because if you do, you are conceding the first principle and will lose the argument.

          • Yes, but even Z uses the term “racist” as a negative. He repeatedly says that he’s not a racist and seems to imply being a racist is bad.

            I’m assuming that he means the definition of “hating someone purely because their race.” Z says that he’s not a racist but a race realist.

            I say that’s splitting hairs. I’m a racist because I love my family more than I love yours.

          • Loving your family does not require you to hate your neighbor. Therefore, hating your neighbor, based on nothing but their biological characteristics is a choice. Choosing to hate strangers strikes me as a pointless waste of energy.

          • No, I get it. And by your definition, I’m not a racist because I don’t hate others based on biological characteristics. (In fact, I’ve become far more tolerant since I accepted racial differences.) I don’t hate other families because I love my own.

            The problem is that there are many definitions of the word racist in use. You’re using the correct one, btw, but that doesn’t change the fact that most people – and definitely SJWs and NWL types and even many CivNats – consider even acknowledging that there are races (SJW) or that there may be differences among various races (NWLs or many CivNats) to be racist.

            You’re using your definition (even if it happens to be the correct definition) of racist but not the common definition, so when you say that you’re not a racist, most people would assume that you mean the common definition rather than your definition.

            Is that stupid of them? Sure. I mean, you literally have thousands and thousands of words showing that you don’t agree with them, but for the uninitiated, it’s confusing.

            I do, however, concede that from an optics standpoint, I was wrong. Our side doesn’t gain many (any?) of the kinds of converts that we want by running around saying, “I’m a racist.”

          • Once I understood and accepted the ideas of race realism and separatism, hate for anyone just seemed like a wasted effort that can blind me to the truth of matters. He has his space and his thoughts and his nature, and I have mine. If our paths cross harmoniously, so be it. But fences and physical distance can often make for good neighbors.

          • Of course. But I’m looking specifically at the word “racist” in terms of how to deal with it since the word seems to be a bit of a sticking point in these parts.

            Some people want to embrace the word to take away the stigma of acknowledging racial differences and to nullify the word as a form of attack. Unfortunately, while that makes some sense (I mean, I literally just did it), it’s makes for very bad optics. And optics are the most important thing right now.

            Others, such as Z Man and, interestingly, Vox Day, choose to use the word’s literal definition (which, admittedly, does make some sense) and condemn racism and racist. The problem is that the literal definition and the common-usage definition of racist/racism are very different. Therefore, when someone from our side condemns racism or racists, outsiders might take that as that person agreeing with the Left that believing there are differences among the races is wrong.

            Perhaps the best course is to simply say the word racist has lost any real meaning and is mainly used as a way to shut people up, so I’m just not going to use it.

          • No, Silly, you weren’t wrong.

            I say “I am, and you should be too” always- for shock value. Slap ’em awake, see, the heavens didn’t fall- then offer the hand of agreement and consensus.

            “I respect you for putting your people ahead of yourself” lets them feel in their bones that they are part of something larger. It’s a handle they can grab onto to find further agreement.

            (Not for every situation, also true. Plus, risk.)

            You’re giving them a platform to rediscover the concept of ‘mutual interests’- while recognizing and respect for our differences.

          • “I’ve become far more tolerant since I accepted racial differences.”

            That would be the logical consequence of an understanding and acceptance of HBD science. I would also add such understanding would be beneficial, rather than negative—to all races—as we’d logically seek to perfect what Nature designed us for, rather than seek that which is unobtainable.

          • Hating your neighbor is indeed pointless, until your interests conflict. And ultimately, all interests are biological.

          • I prefer “I don’t care about black (or any other group) people and I don’t think they should care about us.” That elicits more gasps than out-and-out “racism”. Tells you something about hate vs indifference. Haters care about their target on some level.

          • Jesco. Correct. Stated a slightly different way: Hate is not the opposite of love. Indifference is the opposite of love. Hate makes you do things not always in your self-interest (as does love). Indifference poses no such pratfalls. Therefore choose indifference to rid yourself of the weakness of both love and hate.

          • Love is not a weakness, generally. It becomes one when misdirected. Also sort of depends on which “love” we are talking about.

          • BadThinker, correct. I should have been more clear. Misdirected love is not a virtue, but a weakness. Love of self, family, and yes country (tribe, community) can be powerful and virtuous.

          • If you’re locked in a room with an annoying person, you may come to hate them when you wouldn’t if you simply encountered them at a party.

            There are people whom I somewhat hate at work but I understand that my feelings are a result of being confined with them. If I met them at a church bar-b-que I might actually enjoy them in small doses.

          • Jesco, better. Simpler. Citizen’s starting to win me over, as explaining bad optics can be a dangerous waste of breath, a weak backfill.
            As Dutch counsels, simply keep to my side of the fence.

            But then, I’d have to stop being such an a**hole.

          • Even if interests conflict, hate seems wasteful. You do what you must for you and yours. I see a snake threatening, I kill it. If not, I ignore it. But I never hate it.

          • Ok, so maybe “hate” is not the best word. How about “avoid”? You play the odds. You care about your safety and your families safety. You know the stranger next door belongs to a group that is statistically more dangerous, and that they are bombarded with anti white propaganda daily. Avoidance. Reread John Derbyshire’s essay.

          • You bring up a good point about definitions. I believe the definition as you have worded it was the definition of racism at one time. But the enemy discovered that it wasn’t broad enough to cover people who don’t hate minority groups, so they changed it to “anybody who makes distinctions between the races is a racist.” I once made the comment to students in the classroom, “The Asian kids really are doing great academically,” or something along those lines. The students all gasped and said “Mr. ProUSA, that’s racist!” Or another time, a Chinese guy walked past me on campus and I said “oh hi…Oops! I thought you were someone else.” He replied, “That’s racist.”

            Of course, they were taught the new definition long before arriving on the high school campus.

    • The interviews he did about the book had some of that hedging and I remember at least one reference in the book to how awful life was for blacks before the Civil Rights Era. He can’t go full dissident or he could never get the book published, but I think he is also at heart a blank slate guy.

    • Caldwell’s book was a torpedo right at the waterline for the LibCon corporate state and its ideology. It’s not a long book, and as an education in political history it’s hard to equal.

    • LOL, now that I know a few of our guys in real life, it’s becoming, “Now, don’t get me wrong, I am a racist, but…”

  24. I admit that I could be full of beans… but the vibe coming from the dissidents seems to be changing. Political movements accomplish things. They DO things. The vibe I am getting today from the dissidents is that of Monty Python and The People’s Front of Judea where the members sit around and prattle about theory while their people get nailed up to the cross left right and centre.

    Perhaps they’ll come and go just as the Alt Right and NRx did, Who knows. All I know is that something stupid and violent this way comes… and we will need to meet it or we will end when America does.

    • Well, in our defense, doing things can get us fired and our lives ruined. We can’t just form organizations and start doing things like other groups. You’re basically saying to dissidents in 1935 Soviet Union, “Hey guys, why are you being such wimps? Why don’t you start openly protesting against Stalin and maybe form some groups to oppose the NKVD?”

      Our movement is young and, de facto, illegal so you might want to cut us some slack. We’re groping in the dark knowing full well that our next step could be off a cliff. So, yes, it’s slow going. But why do you think that many of us are here. We want to start doing things. Indeed, we are.

      • You’re basically saying to dissidents in 1935 Soviet Union, “Hey guys, why are you being such wimps? Why don’t you start openly protesting against Stalin and maybe form some groups to oppose the NKVD?”

        Just so.

        The internet is where we are strongest and the internet is the future; this is where we must fight our battles. IRL-events is playing the enemy’s game, and it gives them something to aim their artillery at, something to subvert.

        • Simple order of what to do: (1) get your head on straight and embrace what you know, (2) arrange your personal life to reflect your best options and choices for you (3) reach out to others, when and where you can to organize and support each other (4) keep pushing and building in the directions you want and need to go.

          Avoid the (1) good idea (2) mysterious black box (3) good outcome. That’s for losers.

          • reach out to others, when and where you can to organize and support each other

            Yes, but not in a political context. Create social networks to strengthen your community, not to proselytize. That’s not to say you shouldn’t try to nudge people, but don’t organize politically IRL.

          • Felix, we’re on the same page. Our Guys can operate as an inner circle among more normie populations of basic heritage American MAGA types.

            99% of the time, we can just be flyover folks. We don’t have to lead with a flag in hand and a uniform. We can be the guys with the skills and mindset ready to lead when it’s necessary and proper for Our agenda.

            Off-grid guys and sh*tposters can both play a role. IRL organizing is best for most everything except proselytizing, while the internet is probably a better arena for proselytizing than RL.

          • Wise words. Indeed, there are many things you can do without signaling that you are a dissident to be suppressed.

        • This thinking, this idea that unless we are “doing something” completely destroyed the Alt-Right. As if doing “something,” ANYTHING, is better than “nothing,” where nothing is really just not being leftists and protesting in the streets with the full backing of the system. It’s just dumb.

          Internet is where we can reach people. We need hearts and minds right now, not scalps. Going into public in real life will accomplish only 2 things: Getting us messed up and scaring the elite into crushing us while small enough to be crushed. We are STILL paying for the Alt-Right.

          Internet is where we can control the message we give out. This blog is a perfect example. There are no people hurling stink-bombs into the blog and morons fed-posting can be quickly dealt with.

          I agree with you. Tactics and strategy matter!

          • Tars, yes. But meet up face-to-face and build out a personal network of off-line contacts. The internet will be denied to the likes of us one day. The lists of offenders have already been made, and we are on them, guar-an-dam-teed.

          • Yes, I agree, but I also think this needs to be done locally and indeed, face to face. The way it is being done now, at least in some corners, is to find kindred spirits from your area online and then meet up with them, the pool party method. But even if it didn’t have the massive amount of risk that it has, I still think it’s a bad idea. There should be a firewall between your dissident online presence and IRL. Creating your own network around circles of existing friendships, especially for young people, is just a much better way. They won’t be built on mere superficial bonds of shared political beliefs, but on the real bond of friendship.

            When I was younger, I shared my political beliefs with my friends. Everyone understood race and most were libertarian-ish. We were mostly the first generation having to go to integrated and bused schools (we all started school in the mid 70s), so being red-pilled on race was really a requirement. Pool parties just cannot replace this.

        • Remember modern history and Nicolae Ceaușescu. He was in total control until one day he wasn’t. That day he spoke from the state house to a crowd of thousands and there began a rumble—booing, cat calls, and the like. No one was afraid any more once they realized they were not only “not alone”, they were in the “majority”. His speech was stopped short and his body guards lead him away from the balcony. He fled the state house, then attempted to flee the nation he once ruled. He was apprehended by “state officials/soldiers”—folks who conveniently changed sides—and a day or so later he and the Mrs were history.

          My suspicion/hope is that we may find ourselves in the same situation one day once we are no longer cowled.

          • Yeah. He went from loved to dead in no time flat. It shows just how quickly things can change, especially when people are forced to pretend to think a certain way. Most people talk like the narrative is true, but they live like we’re right.

      • When the pozz hit my family and I was told to bow down, celebrate my homosexual SJW daughter or FOAD… I hit the road. Cost me my family. I could probably make more money in a vibrant and diverse workplace too … but i’ll take a hard pass. I get that not everyone has what it takes to hold to principles.

        But… cucking out has its own costs and not all of them are financial. Soul, honour and self respect are real things even if you can’t put a price tag on them.

        Best of luck to you citizen.

        • Sounds like you failed your daughter then ran away to me… Probably should have formed a better relationship with her, if you had she probably wouldn’t have become a freak.

          • Perhaps.

            I used to think like that too, that such people were the result of poor parenting and poor genetics. How smug I was.

            Now I see other Yesterday Men wondering what happened to their kids and families and marriages.

            It’s up to you now, FG, to come up with all the answers. All the best to you and yours, I hope you do better than we did.

          • Not old enough to have a daughter, but I made sure to form a good relationship with my sister and consistently drop redpills. Maybe being younger helped since I went to school around the same time as her so I knew what propaganda they fed her and how to counter it. The answer is find out what bullshit they are feeding your kids and explain to them point by point how it’s bullshit. And do it in a way that is not argumentative. Worked for me. She is safe and normal.

          • Fashgordon,

            Have kids and then come back and opine. Much is what you put into them but much of who they will want to be is outside your control. I have a stepson that I lavished as much love, wisdom, and temperance as I did on my own flesh and blood son. I could never break through to him. He floats about life, refusing to see the world as it is, rather, he prefers the fairytales provided by his former teachers, hippy deadbeat dad, and whatever dribble comes from Leftists. He’s a good person, but a weak man, he took much of the self-loathing, white entitlement stuff to heart and I couldn’t get him to see his own value… so now he drifts through life accomplishing little. Have a little sympathy and understanding for John, you don’t know until you raise kids in this world.

          • So you are claiming a younger sibling would be more receptive to advice than a son or daughter? I have trouble believing that, and sorry to be harsh but what you said reminded me of my weak father who has shitlib tendencies and whenever disagreements come up all he does is get all huffy and run away. Doesn’t make his case, doesn’t apply reason, all I get is wow just wow and a retreat.

            Maybe John put in actual effort to try and save his daughter from self destruction but the SJW shit is so weak I find it hard to believe a guy who’s not a zombie couldn’t successfully dispel that brainwashing. And how young is she? If she is like 20 or something there’s definitely still hope for her. I was pretty retarded at 20, and definitely mentally malleable.

            I refuse to believe we can’t save those we care for from this mind virus.They who infect them with it are weak, all they have is money and media. We have truth, we have grit, we have human goddamn nature on our side.

            Never Give up, Never give in.

          • FashG,

            Yes, the leftie garbage is weak, but you and I are older and remember things being different. The world kids grow up in today, even the last few years, sends them entirely different messages, depraved, eponymous, and unceasingly. The young, and as a dad I have to remind myself constantly, are new humans and have only a limited experience with the world. Take into account children have their own inclinations and constitutions built into them, they are not simply factory products to be assembled over 18 years. I have three cousins (brothers) all raised in a strict religious household with lots of love and support and were raised in a rural setting. One is a fireman/ preacher, the other is a cowboy/ ferrier and the third is a lying stealing meth head whose children had to be seized by the state. Go figure.

          • Dude, I’m 26. Things have rapidly gotten worse so much so that I wouldn’t know much about what a kid in hs is going through but I never lived in a time when things were normal. But then looking back at history, things really haven’t been normal since the 50s have they? And even then things were starting to turn. The rapidity to which things are accelerating now though is amazing. It’s really kicked up in the last decade.

          • “explain to them” spoken like someone who has never had kids… Being a parent os a lot different than having a younger sibling. the authority dynamic is heavily altered.

          • Perhaps, but I’ve seen too many cases where children’s poor life choices are hard to put all on the parents.

          • As kids get older, parental influence slackens and peer group influences begin to dominate. Public schools, the media, friends, movies, all push in the opposite direction from you. Some kids can surprisingly resist that pressure, but most can not. Peer pressure is a powerful force.

          • lfrank – not only peer pressure, but the kid’s own genetic nature. My older one was always a daredevil and risk taker – that’s in his nature. He has made some stupid choices but hasn’t wrecked his life . . . yet. The younger one is much more cautious – too much so. Same parents, same upbringing, etc. There’s only so much parents can do or peers can wreck – genetics is ultimately more powerful than either environment.

          • The other reason parenting is hard is because you get to spend the rest of your life thinking about what you wish you could re-do over.

            Too late. So many regrets.

        • Not sure why you think that I’m advocating bowing down. In our personal lives, we absolutely should stand up for ourselves, our beliefs and are people. I’ve been called a racist multiple times . . . by my neighbors, and I never backed down. I’ve told my daughter that if I hear her parroting anti-white slogans from school or TV that I will take it as a direct insult and will not accept it.

          I’m simply saying that it’s stupid to stick our heads above the parapet while the machine guns are firing.

          • Perhaps I chose my words unwisely, I meant nothing personal to anyone.

            There is never a good time to go to war, or stand on principle, or break off relationships with friends or family. You can make a case for keeping your head down indefinitely. I tried to do that, and did for years. It’s given me something of a chip on my shoulder and sometimes it gets the better of me.

          • Dear John, keep your head up, bro. You did the right thing with regard to your daughter. I know it’s hard, but try not to second guess your decision no matter how much b.s. flies your way from persons who likely have no idea what they’re talking about. And stick to your guns at all costs.

            I don’t presume to know whether you failed her or not during her formative years. I do know that girls are an entirely different baby than boys are to raise and in any number of ways.

            One of our daughters decided she was going to go her own way right after she turned 16. And I can tell you that, no nonsense type I am, I’d have kicked the shit out of one of her brothers for defying my authority and acting out the way she did at that age. I couldn’t very well get physical with her so I sent her away to live with relatives right after she turned 17. And I banished her from initiating any contact with the family until further notice. This was after I’d given her ample warning of what was about to befall her if she didn’t straighten up and fly right quick, fast and in a hurry. What ultimately sealed her fate was that she didn’t believe I would follow through with my threat to send her away, and you should have seen her face when I told her she had to go – utter disbelief!

            I can’t get into the gory details of how I handled that situation start-to-finish, nor all the crap I took from people who have little if any idea of how to properly raise and discipline kids under a given set of circumstances, in a combox. But I can tell you that it took our daughter almost three years to finally come back to her milk after she got it through her thick skull that I wasn’t going to lift her banishment until she could prove to me through genuine humility and obedience that she had come back to her senses.

            I did all of this, not just for her long term good, but also for the greater good of her entire family of origin. She had/has five younger siblings who I couldn’t risk picking up on and emulating her behavior, and she needed to learn the lesson that her mom and I had somehow failed (in spite of our best efforts) to instill in her – that the world doesn’t revolve around “me” and any ol’ thing I decide I’m big enough to do at any given moment. All the other kids seemed to have gotten that memo, I don’t understand how she missed it. Ha! Nah, I understand it; I understand it all too well in point of fact. I also know her better than she knows herself. I knew when I sent her away that she would most likely eventually break down, but I also knew it would take awhile.

            That whole thing had a pretty happy ending, thankfully. She is happily married now to a great young man (Salt of the earth type, hard working, family oriented, etc) who, like his FiL, won’t put up with her B.S. for a minute when it raises its ugly head. She’s expressed lots of regrets for her behavior during that mixed up period of her life, and has apologized to her mom and me profusely many times since our reconciliation. I just reassure her that it’s all water under the bridge as far we’re concerned, but also that we tend to get what we pay for so if I were her I wouldn’t have any girls if I could help it. Ha, ha!

            My best wishes to you, Sir. I hope your situation with your wayward daughter will work itself out and she comes to her senses over time. Just keep that great line from the movie Good Will Hunting in mind:

            What is this, a game? Yes. And I have to win.

            It is a game your daughter is playing with you. And you have to win. For her sake and everyone elses.

            God Bless!

          • Good for you TM.

            Unfortunately that is what it takes with those people. Daughters are smarter and more devious than boys. A boy will challenge you and fight you fair and square and take his lumps when he loses.

            Girls manipulate and deceive. My daughter gave me an ultimatum that was basically, “Do what I say and agree with me … or I will hurt myself and the family…”

            I told her that if she’s that stupid, she can go for it and expect no help from me. The rest of the family encouraged and enabled her. The family split along moral and ethical lines… and that was the end of it.

            Dunno much about what happened after that. I heard that there’s been rampant divorces going on, my daughter no longer talks to them either… and no vestige of family remains.

            I know 4 other men in the same boat I am in and they have it even worse because their marriages broke down under the strain whereas mine did not.

            I’m glad you were able to heal the rifts, TM.

      • I go back and forth on it, but on most days i do conclude that we are far to timid. Certainly, i often feel that my ancestors are somewhere heaping scorn upon my pusillanimous trajectory.

      • Citizen, you are correct, the threat is real to our jobs, good names, societal status and families.

        On the flip side, our opposition can be so incredibly stupid. I can’t help but think of when CNN went after that internet poster of the mildly amusing CNN/Trump boxing video. They cowtowed the individual responsible, but the ridiculous persecution of the man by CNN cost them in trustworthiness and sullied them in a lot of people’s minds.

        There’s hope

    • Milo got $15M to build something in the media and blew it on parties and blow. The America First guys are trying to build something in the colleges and new media on a shoestring. They’re clearly focused on creating institutions for the long-term.

      • Milo had potential to lift the “movement” into mainstream. Hate to say it, but he did. His character launched more dissidents than anyone else. Here’s hoping Michelle Malkin does it better…and she’d better, because I’m pretty sure she doesn’t spend all her time with blow and hair products.

        • I remember him from when I was young, I liked him but only because I thought his whole thing was an act, that he was pretending to be a caricature of what the anti whites wanted us all to become… but then he never dropped the act. He was always going to be a flash in the pan.

    • We’re too disorganized and atomized to be of any use in a hot conflict. How many of us could put together a dozen bros willing to DO things, even to the extent of moving their homes closer together for mutual support?

      Action without plan or purpose is a waste of energy and resources as well as being needlessly risky. DO SOMETHING NOW is a self-defeating and immature strategy. We need to resist these adolescent urges and focus on what’s practically achievable.

  25. As the Collapse types say: “Slowly, then all at once.” We are blessed with time to prepare ourselves, and the less time we spend dickering over where to place the deck chairs, the more time we spend attending to our family, our souls, our communities of friends, the better off we will be.

    There is lisslte of the future to be found in the Internet sphere. That’s why I always encourage my fans to spend time finding their like-minded fellows and figuring out what they can do together, and how they can leverage their skills into a meaningful existence for each other when the walls start falling and the barbarians begin their charge.

    We’re given only one life, important to live it in a way that is true to God, our families, and those who will inherit the Present from us.

    • Large cities will become cauldrons of chaos with roving gangs raiding any convenient resource for whatever it demands. These conflicts will be brutal and many will make a last-stand cowering in their urban homes.

      Better to be in a smaller rural town with lower population density and greater separation time as the hordes move outward from the cities when resources are depleted. Eventually martial law and national guard forces will re-assert some semblance of control, but you will need to survive the first 60 days or so on your own robustness.

        • As Zman himself has acknowledged, a small homestead in rural West Virginia is preferable to remaining in Lagos indefinitely. Better safe than sorry is ancient wisdom.

          • TomA, always good to be able to band with like minded neighbors of good repute. However, I’m skeptical of “roving bands/hoards” preying on the weak—unless you are in a weapon free utopia. It has been my impression that these type of bands are dangerous only to those who do not resist. Never seen them do anything but dissolve in the face of resistance-especially armed resistance.

          • More than half our population has been wimpified, and most of them live in the big cities. They are easy prey. Look to Sweden for an example of hormonal young males making trouble that overwhelms local LEOs, and they haven’t even had a collapse yet.

          • TomA. Can’t argue when the truth is I don’t really know. What was said here a few months ago wrt prognostication as being more “wish fulfillment” than anything else?

            My impression is colored by my environment. I am in a place where I carry a gun, everywhere, anywhere. No thought’s or concerns about it. No restrictive laws wrt such. I’m trained and practiced in such “arts”.

            Everyone I know as personal friends are basically the same. It’s like the air you breath—impossible to conceive existence without such. Yet, I admit, few if any I know have had to use such in life and death situations. Even those back from the sandbox have not fired a shot in anger. Who knows.

            But I do “know” one thing: The first time such violence is used in a societal conflict as often discussed here, things will never be the same. A taboo of the highest sort will be broken. There is no going back.

          • People can change very quickly when life and limb are on the line Also a lot of wimpiness comes from a combination of fragile comfort and the fact that the police’s handlers prefers to set them on regular folks to “maintain the fragile piece.” This can also change fast especially if people decide the leaders have to go.

            Truth is force is effective long and short term. The L.A riots are proof of that, a lot more looters and rioters were shot than anyone wants to admit too and the net result is we haven’t had a serious mini insurgency since than.

      • I see that scenario repeated over and over and over again in right wing circles. “The cities are going to go nuts and then then the black hordes are going to start free ranging!!”.

        I think the history of things like this – tell a different story. City dwellers tend to stay put – at least a good percentage of them do. Somewhere out there in internetland – is a guy who writes survival advice – who survived in Sarajevo during all those wars in the former Yugoslavia. He makes the point multiple times – people don’t really run. The history of WW2 shows this pretty clearly as well. There were ALWAYS civilians left in the cities – no matter how bad things got.

        Yeah – ok – maybe some small contingent of blacks might hijack a pickup truck and use it like a technical and think they’re going to raid the white suburbs. And yeah – maybe one or two unlucky families will be set upon and their home burned and their cute teenage daughters raped……

        But that won’t last for long.

        Even here in MA – I HIGHLY doubt that white suburbia would just sit back and allow themselves to be subject to black hordes run amuck for any extended period of time.

        It gets tiresome to listen to the same old tropes repeated over and over and over again – when the history of SHTF situations tells a completely different story.

        Do I think cities will become shit shows ….. yes.

        Do I think the shit show will bleed well outside the city borders ? No.

        • Different story in Canada where we are highly “integrated”… especially Toronto.

          The rich white neighborhoods are directly across from the highrise projects. No issues so far, but said whites keep voting in more and more mud people.

          Shooter Faisal Hussein drove 10 minutes to get from his no go apartment complex to the Danforth, a rich white neighborhood.

          Things are really going 3rd world in Toronto, last time I was there, the open drug use and level of blacks walking around was shocking (in a seedier area). Asians are taking over all the decent paying jobs on the high end. The children of the rich whites are studying arts and travelling abroad.

          Things are going to get very bad very quick for these lunatic white Toronto elites who have ruined our country for their own supposed benefit.

        • The shit show will bleed to the places outside the city borders that do not have the means or the will to fight back or defend themselves. The devolution always falls into the “might makes right” thing. The desperate and criminal elements will pick on the places that cower and don’t fight back, while those who do stand up to them will be avoided. Simple level of reward for effort expended, on the part of the bad guys.

          Case in point, Korean rooftop sniper grocers during the Rodney King riots. Their shops were avoided and not raided or burnt down.

          • ProUSA: i imagine those shop keepers knew what the “3 S’s” mean, and why they mean what they mean.

          • Shit, shower, shave???

            Seek, sight, shoot???

            I wished I were an educated red neck ‘cause I’m not catching on. Still, I upvote you.

          • SSS = Triple sieg rune.
            Koreans shopkeepers are all NAZIs. It’s a bit of an open secret, I’m afraid. But in typical East Asian fashion, they not only copy but do it cheaper. Three, count ’em three “lightning bolts” for the price of two!

            Alternative interpretations of “SSS” include “shoot, shovel, shut up” but I’m not buying that.

          • There were more than 50 deaths during the riots. 50 were ruled homicides. Lots of arrests for looting but no murder trials. Most of the Koreans packed up and moved to the San Fernando Valley.

          • Pro, to my knowledge they did not, but they openly and visibly demonstrated a dead seriousness of mission, and that was enough for that situation.

          • Unknown. They did fire shots. They became so accustomed to being on their own (and sleep deprived) that they did fire shots not only at people entering their parking lots, but would also pop off shots at people just walking down the sidewalk in front of their businesses.

          • I don’t remember. There was always a bit of hesitation in these defense situations. Koreans may have shot for legs or just in front of lead rioters.

            That being said however, I do remember when the riot was “shut down”. The police were given the order to shoot to kill all looters and those out after curfew. I believe most of the 50+ body count was earned after that order. All over by the next morning (after several days of indecisive action) IIRC.

          • No order for “shoot to kill” after curfew was issued. That was a helpful rumor. Orders to shoot were given in the ’67 riot though I dont know how many if any were shot. Sunset marked curfew in the King Riots and curfew violation was grounds for immediate arrest. As was traveling in a car within the affected areas with more than one spare can of gas (1 gallon) in the back of the car, though this was intermittently enforced.

          • Dutch,

            “The shit show will bleed to the places outside the city borders that do not have the means or the will to fight back or defend themselves.”

            I think the biggest impediment to people defending themselves isn’t so much the means or the will, rather, it is boils down to normalcy bias and subjugation to authority.

            The normalcy bias that “everything will be okay and return to normal” wears off after enough incursions. The bigger hurdle is hostile authorities targeting “vigilantism” among the law-abiding. We see that on a daily basis…. we tailor our speech to the appropriate current political correctness, black youth riots labeled as “teen flash mobs” and whites are given the hairy eyeball by law enforcement (as are the cops themselves) if a minority criminal is killed or harmed in any way.

            That isn’t just something one overcomes by changing their mindset as with repeated exposure to assault. A hostile authority is a physical obstacle that has to be overcome and/or requisitioned by the local community. Even then you are dealing with a media that is hellbent on sacrificing any white who resists being victimized. That’s a tough one.

            Maybe that’s what you meant by lacking the means or will to defend themselves. Plenty of whites are exposed only to the talented tenth or perfect television show minorities and may lack the necessary mindset to see the threat. The rooftop Koreans dealt with both the natives and the police on a daily basis. They KNEW nobody was coming to help them based on past experience and they KNEW exactly what their former customers were capable of.

            Anecdotally, I know for a fact that the rooftop Korean’s trust of law enforcement was so (rightfully) low that they manned those rooftops until well after the unrest had been squashed… many had to be removed from the rooftops by teargas grenades. They weren’t buying the whole “it’s safe, you can knock that shit off” speeches from LEOs.

          • To me, a significant element of the “means and will” is the nature and defensibility of the neighborhood. Both my home at the edge of town and my “up the hill” get-away place are in highly defined neighborhoods with minimum and easily controllable access. I think the problem comes in when people can’t really tell if the neighborhood ends one block over or three streets away. I have consciously avoided that problem. The neighborhoods obviously “end right there” and one is inside the highly defined borders, or outside of them. Makes it easy for the locals to make the call when someone is being observed or checked over on the way in or out. I don’t know how a neighborhood could possibly defend itself well without a well defined and defensible boundary.

            Both places have been in close contact with the LEO communities over the years, and also have retirees living there, so there is a good relationship. Ideally, the sheriffs can deal with other people in other places, and, more or less, leave us alone because we have things covered. If things are quiet, it’s no big deal one way or the other. If things are happening all over, there won’t be time or manpower for us. It also falls into the “leave them alone”, as there are other things that need to be dealt with. In a sea of potential future unknowns and possibilities, it seems a better arrangement than most.

          • Out here where boundaries are defined by barbed wire, I’m not really expecting much trouble.

          • that’s the thing, the government is not going to make an announcement that it is every man for himself.

            So you have a gang of fellas gathering in front of your house, their intent is obvious and you shoot a couple of them. There is no guarantee that when order is restored that you will not be prosecuted for murder.

            So figuring out at what threshold you can use force is tricky. Because as others have said it is not going to be a zombie apocalypse.

        • To some extent the cities are already cauldrons of chaos with violent gangs running around destroying stuff.

          But honestly, I agree that the narrative of city dwellers making their way to the countryside to wreak chaos is hyperbole and unrealistic. They imagine a “Walking Dead” scenario where the gov, the state itself just completely collapses. This is just not likely in any plausible scenario. Even a pandemic as bad as the Black Death is just not going to lead to such a thing. Even if there was a major economic collapse, a worst case scenario too, the state might scale back, but it wouldn’t completely collapse and policing would remain very high on the triage. The rules would completely change. Shooting looters is unthinkable today, but it would be one of the first things implemented in a SHTF situation.

          Most of it is just apocalyptic porn.

          • I remember the King riots in Los Angeles and even living some 75 miles away from the epicenter we had gangs of Mexicans cruising about and checking things out. I’m talking skinheads. The cops had vanished to god knows where and it got scary

            It was only with the Marines and ANG coming in that it got calmed down. If they weren’t there, it would have spread.

            Today it would be much worse given the ethnic composition of LACO and the idiots who run the LAPD and state government.

            Shooting looters? You really think the pro-crime Lefties who run most cities and the state won’t crucify most whites for fighting back, then you’re full of it. You have no idea how much Lefthate gun owning whites.

            The only way you get sanction to shoot looters if you live in a red state with a red government. Otherwise you get a life time appointment to the big house.

          • It depends on how bad it gets. L.A. is far from Conservative but it still has law and order elements.

            It also may get bad enough that the gangs and such who have long standing beefs with the authorities may decide to take it out on them.

            If that happens all bets are off.

          • Remember the LA riots we are talking about were in 1992. Who knows what some of these poz’d cities will now do, or if their police arm will carry such orders out.

          • I’m not talking about random white people shooting looters, I’m talking about the cops! Norms do not hold up under severe pressure. If the kind of breakdown that they are talking about happening was to happen, all the rules are going to change and shooting looters is just one of them.

          • Your local law enforcement may have been stepping up patrols in problem areas in your town or even providing police to the greater Los Angeles area. The California National Guard sent in troops from all over the state and even the Border Patrol (though I don’t know in what capacity they operated) sent manpower to Los Angeles.

            Most folks aren’t aware that riots occurred in some of the correctional facilities and additional manpower had to be sent to quiet and contain those compounds. The Guard assisted with keeping those locked down.

          • Tars: you’re 1/2 right. If you live in rural Georgia, no, you dont have to worry about the urban horde. If you live in the southern suburbs of Chiraq or eastern burbs of LA, you should probably be concerned. If you live on the outskirts of but still inside San Francisco, Portland, the Imperial Capitol, or NYC, you should be very concerned. But see, the ANC squads genociding Boer farmers, or Pol Pot’s rural roundups – just depends on how long things stay how bad.

          • San Fran has a very small minority (troublesome) population and high-priced real estate is their greatest barrier. Closing down the bridges and rail will protect them from Oakland.

            Portland, I think all bets are off. They have a hostile white population that will side with race rioters and actively attack the police if given the opportunity.

            NYC, depends on the borough and Manhattan would remain safe from race riots. At least as it is currently comprised. Give D’blassio another 5 years and he may return it to the 1970s.

            The Imperial capital or Chicago, Philadelphia, Houston,and Pittsburgh, your guess is as good as mine.

          • I don’t know Penitent Man, I don’t think the shit-libs of Portland are going to support the African criminal class when they are the ones suffering from them. It’s one thing to virtue signal when someone else is paying the price, it’s another thing to do so when you are paying the price.
            NYC has an army of cops, one of the largest in the world. The (((rich bankers))) in NYC will get all the protection they need.
            Remember Katrina? Cops went door to door taking guns. The rules that apply in normal time are changed as needed when the SHTF, even in the short term.

          • Tars,

            (Love the moniker, I devoured those books when I was a young teen… I enjoyed the stilted writing, princesses needing rescue, flying ships, guns and swords.. what wasn’t to love?)

            I’ll defer to you on Portland. I haven’t been in years but know a LEO that works that area and it’s a hot mess… but your point is taken that the regular provocateurs may not be so anti law enforcement when they are targets and not just larping alongside their pets.

            Good point on Katrina, they didn’t seize guns everywhere (mostly isolated poor white and black neighborhoods) but guns were seized.

            On NYC, the NYPD staffs for almost 40,000 officers (a decent size army by any standard.. roughly 2.5 American infantry divisions) but I imagine social disruption will vary in effect on whether you live on the upper west side or in Jamaica Queens.

          • Ferfal, who writes about the collapse of the Argentine currency 2001, recommends staying in place in the cities. In the country, any unplanned flight is alone, a target for roving bandits.

            Every liberal dipstick I know says they’ll head for the hills, as if farmers didn’t own shotguns. More supplies for me!
            (Have fun getting back, too, on no gas.)

          • I like Ferfal’s stuff. Lot of practical information for the particular level of spicy he experienced. From using serated knives for fighting (because your opponent knows he’s been cut) to stocking up on DVDs and books for entertaining your family because outside isn’t safe at certain times. He also has a good bit about what to use as currency. You dont get to decide what people will take. Sometimes they wanted jewelry or booze, other times when stores were fairly stocked they wanted cash. Interesting reads.

        • Carlsdad: you make a good point about not fleeing cities, but it belies your conclusion. There were still civilians in Stalingrad in Jan 45, so a little dindu wilding isn’t going to set the whypepl to fleeing – or resisting. See, the Vendee, the Red Terror in Madrid 1936-38. The fundamental error you have, imho, is you dont account for anarchotyranny. In many large metro areas, there will be hundreds of leos shutting down homeowner or neighborhood defenses, but they will do nothing to stop the “mobile redistibution committees.” Remember, they want you broke and dead, your wife enslaved, and your kids raped, and they think its funny.

        • Yup. Was present for the L.A. riots (uprising as the natives like to call it) in a professional capacity. Rioters and gangs tried to rove but were contained to their own areas. When they tried to migrate toward the wealthy and middle class neighborhoods they were met with unflinching resistance.

          Cops fell back in an unorganized rout when there wasn’t much there worth protecting. As some of the mobs started to move to the north and northeast those images of cops running from their burning squad cars in ones and twos were replaced with walls of blue when productive/moneyed areas were on the menu. Wealth in varying degrees provides scaled protection.

          I think you might be a bit on the heavy handed side Tom A. Time will tell, but I believe we will be looking more at a Brazilian model. Rich and middle class areas sectioned off by police protection with ghettos somewhat “contained”. Crime and violence will bleed out of those areas but lessening as you move toward better areas. Think post-2001 Argentinian cities as another likely outcome. Not saying it’ll be great to live in cities, just not Rwanda.

          You are spot on in regards to small town/rural living… just not in the avoiding black biker zombie cannibal gangs sense. It’s simply better to live where the land is productive, you know the people, you have breathing room, and most of the folks look and act like you do.

          • Penitent Man, do you think that “wall of blue” was in part their sense that the people in the neighborhoods they were protecting had their backs, and it mattered? Or those neighborhoods reminded them of their own neighborhoods, so they needed protecting? Or some of both?

          • Dutch,

            From my perspective on the ground it seemed like the blue walls were placed by command elements. Rumor circulated that a mob was going to “March on Brentwood” and another that they were going to head for Recida. Still another rumor was that rioters were going to attack probation and parole operations thinking they could destroy the records. Command moved forces accordingly to interdict with a heavy presence. Tactically the poorer parts of the basin were surrounded (I was largely in Inglewood and exterior Watts). A containment cordon was set up loosely at first then hardened as more personel came on line.

            As for the motivation of Guard and police forces I can only speak for the other men I was with. Most of us were pretty sick of the whole place and everyone after three days. Day four some of the decent folks in the black area came out and thanked us profusely. Most had stayed locked up in their homes terrified to go outside… so that helped with the previously held belief of my men that the whole place could rot and die. Even the crackheads had stayed off the streets for the first three days, but by day three they were Jonesing and they shambled up and down the streets like the Walking Dead looking for a fix.

            The Leo’s among us mostly had a professional air of detachment. They deal with those areas regularly. Having said that, you could detect an uneasiness and excitement in them. The riots were out of most of their realm of experience, though we did have one Gurdsman that had been there for the 67 riot as a private.

            My guess is no better than yours. I imagine those men forming the wall between the rioting area and, let’s be realistic here, the civilized area probably felt a greater attachment to what they were doing. I would at least, if I hadn’t been in the epicenter area.

          • Dutch and PM–From my perspective who knows. My current CA upper-middle-class neighborhood has a large police station, a large fire station, and a National Guard presence within a couple of miles from my house. Also, a number of police and firefighters live in my neighborhood.

            My assumption is that the police will protect or evacuate their own families first and everything else is secondary. I make it a priority to know these guys so hopefully, they will somewhat include me in the case of bedlam.

            Interestingly enough a number of them have boats in the local harbors. I don’t think this is by coincidence. A completely safe place to be would be a mile off the coast as you watch CA burn.

          • PM-I lived in So CA during both the Watts riot of 1965 and the LA riot of 1992.

            The police and the CA National Guard both were proactive in 65 but not as much in 92. However, even in 92, the Guard set up machine gun nests in areas around commercial buildings.

            Whites in 65 were much more proactive in protecting their neighborhoods than in 95. The way I look at things is that I only know what will happen when it happens; the rest is conjecture. As a kid, I lived both in very poor black and white neighborhoods on both coasts. I fought in both situations when needed but I only know that I would fight because I did. I have never been in a war and assume I would rise to the occasion but will only know if/when that happens.

            So who knows. I assume that the CA police and Guard will have a hands-off posture during the next riot but…… The only thing making me think/hope they don’t is that even a fool can see what happened in Detroit and Baltimore. I don’t think even the most pretentious white person in power would allow the white upper-middle-class neighborhoods to be destroyed. But we shall see. We shall see.

          • Ex. That’s just it. Name the White people running LA? Here in my majority Hispanic city, there is an Hispanic mayor and a city council mostly of Hispanics. The Chief of Police, albeit White, is a poz’d homo—he does what the council wants.

            Now perhaps even an Hispanic council and mayor don’t want the rich White neighborhoods to burn, but they certainly do cater to the Hispanic themes of the day—welfare, sanctuary city protection for IA’s, and so forth. One wonders if a heavy hand will be used to suppress an uprising should the need present itself.

            However, Hispanics here seem not in the rioting mood. I only see that historically in Blacks.

          • Compsci. Absolutely true. And will get truer as years go by. I was waiting for a CA local to catch that.

            I agree with you. It will not be Hispanics doing the rioting ALTHOUGH during the 95 fun I stupidly drove my pickup truck through streets full of Hispanics and blacks flowing toward the local stores to loot. Luckily I was able to leave BUT my truck was totally surrounded. If the majority of those people had sported darker melanin I am sure I would be dead.

            I have lived in South America and walked through the favelas and I don’t see our Latino brothers being stupid enough to burn down white enclaves but one never knows.

          • ExNative,
            I think you are correct, Sir. Each situation has it’s own flavor. The Guardsman (private in the ’67 riot and E-6 (7?) for the ’92 riot) pointed out the difference in response aggressiveness as well. Partially because the country was different back then. Largely because the LA mayor was that piece of shot Tom Bradley, who, stymied the Guard response because he argued his police force would take care of it and I honestly dont think he cared much for anything other than his own. I place those 50+ deaths firmly on his dead head to this day.

            Bradley pushed back against then Governor Wilson denying the Guard. At the armory, we were at approximately 50% strength by noon the next day and could have deployed. We kept getting conflicting orders as to what our TOE would be. 50 rounds no bayonets. Standard 240 with bayonets. At one point the order came down for deployment with ammo all held by designated NCOs to be distributed to the rank and file on an as-needed basis and the Guardsmen to be individually only armed with empty rifles and bayonets (On that order the senior NCOs and junior officers carried word to the Captain that we would not be going to the riots should that occur and it was rescinded a short time later). Finally the Guard was ordered onto the street the second day with each man armed with at least 50 rounds and no bayonets.

            The reason I mention this is that I believed it reflected a struggle if wills between Wilson and Bradley (may Bradley roast in hell). That was 1992. I imagine in today’s US the authorities response would be even more tepid.

            Who knows? I think it’s a safer bet to get to know your neighbors and if the need arises to “defend” your neighborhood go low key. Don’t larp as the plucky patriot armed to the teeth in broad daylight behind a barricade of cars across the street. Particularly if there are news (vulture) crews about. If you have to, faces and distinguishing tattoos covered, rifles out of sight. Remember, 1992 it ain’t, with cell phones and the internet everyone is a “reporter.” A shot fired across the bow of an approaching mob from the shrubbery is just as effective as climbing on a house roof San Juan hill style.

            Thia is my best guess on how to go forward if spicy times come to your neighborhood. At least for an incendiary event. Long term societal downgrade to simmering crime and violence… I can only make slightly educated proposals.

          • PM-“1992 it ain’t.” I could copy that quote for eternity.
            My parents were naive saviors trying to protect the “less fortunate.” I paid the penalty.

            Thanks so much for the history lesson of those times; totally appreciated. I have no doubt you guys saved my life and for that eternal thanks.

            Hopefully, we can meet IRL. I know that on the Internet we have to be so careful. You might be FBI and so could I. That said; hopefully we can meet at some point. I will buy the beers. Have a good week.

          • ExNative

            We won’t always be in shadows. I appreciate the offer of a beer. I did very little back then, an inconsequential cog, but I did learn some lessons.

            The riots did something for me that was more useful than my time in the Middle East. It broke my normalcy bias factory-setting forever. Wars in foreign countries are within the realm of normal. We grow up watching war movies, hearing our elders speak about them. Patrolling a major American city while it burns is a strange disquieting experience.

          • PM, your description of your experience, along with our dialogue above, makes me think the key to making a successful LEO deployment, in the face of an uprising, is all about leadership and clarity of mission, along with the numbers to be able to hold fast and prevail. Sounds like things got done in ‘92 despite the upper leadership, not because of it. A message I am getting is that if the people making the LEO deployment decisions, in such a situation, are competent and have their heads screwed on straight, things will be OK. But watching the long trail of local police chiefs coming and going, to capture that last pension benefit on the way out, and largely promoted on gender/race quotas, that part of it doesn’t look too good these days.

      • One reason small towns are so important is the sheriff and prosecutors are less likely to be corrupt toward over prosecuting the right, while letting the leftie trouble makers walk. The right can easily defend themselves in urban areas from the criminal element, but then they have to deal with the Soros funded DA offices.

        • …which is why it is absolutely foolish to take on the blue soldiers without first taking out high ranking civilians. Head-of-the-snake. Shock and awe them and create havoc. Eventually they must be replaced. We could’ve saved hundreds of thousands of American soldiers lives if our government had just taken out evil rulers in those countries where we fought and died. Same principle here.

          • Greeks just burned the UNCHC center for the Turkish/Israeli NGO immigrant wave, and beat up the federal police in their motel in Lesbos, driving them out.

            Do upper middle class servants have the same armed protection as their masters?
            Purely theoretical, as I do worry about the safety of these valued members of the Great Society.

            Even the Iraqi street guy said, “Forget soldiers. We should k*** the paymasters.”

            Well, since ya can’t reach them…
            But that’s what local elections are for.
            I really like that “Eventually they must be replaced.” Can’t agree enough.

      • OK, Reality Check Time.

        Who, commenting here, is ready to shelter in place for 2 – 4 weeks if there is a COVID 19 lockdown in your town_?* Looking at China we have a pretty good idea what that situation would look like.**

        So, as an exercise, go out on the inter-webs, peruse, and then make your own readiness checklist tailored to your own specific circumstances. Then exercise that checklist.***

        After that, we can all resume speculation about what’s coming around the next bend of history.
        * I rate the odds in the US as low but not 0. But how do I know what some knucklehead mayor or governor, particularly in Coastal Cloud Land, might do.
        ** Utilities mostly stay on but you can’t go outside to walk or drive around except on official business. Fresh food becomes scarce. You get 1 or 2 deliveries a week, period. It can be worth, your life to go to a hospital full of active cases. Etc.
        ***Can’t cover everything in a blog comment. But, just for starters, everybody will have 40 – 50 gal. of potable water stored in their water heater, if they have sole access to it. Making the list is valuable all by itself even if it’s too late for some of the items now that the stores are out of masks, gloves and toilet paper, etc.

      • I agree about rural vs urban but it might depend on who controls DC at the time, right? If you get a Democrat president I imagine that he will unleash hell on rural America. He or she will do anything and everything possible to protect blue urban enclaves. We always talk about shutting down urban centers, but that won’t be easy. I just learned that much of the water and power that goes into Southern California comes from water rich states in the Pacific Northwest, where I always believed it came mostly from the Sierra runoff and the Colorado River. I do not have facts to support that, but just the testimony of a few people up “north” where the water and snow in states like Washington and Idaho produce plenty of lakes and rivers. The feds know that they have to control this and other things to keep their blue urban enclaves protected and safe. Those same feds could not care less for rural patriots and their water needs, their heating needs, or their food needs. I’m not an expert, I just get random thoughts and I’m usually wrong.

        • Can’t protect every bit of vulnerable infrastructure. Those that aren’t get destroyed and those urban areas downstream are hosed.

          • roo_ster, Pro, please remember that the OSS- which became the CIA, which became the dark pool intelligence agencies that *actually* run the world- the OSS was formed of manhunters who chased down “werewolves”, German patriots committing sabotage on water pumps and power mains, outraged at the rape and murder of their defeated nation.

            Please be careful.

          • Well, Remus did say that even if you don’t eliminate the heads (my favorite) you can sufficiently instill fear by removing the key subordinates. If I get cancer then I have nothing to lose.

      • There is no way to know the rural areas will be at all peaceful. Especially if they are on the approaches to a city, or a target.

        There will be trouble in some cities, but urban security and policing are in America remarkably robust compared to other nations.
        And the citizens are quietly well armed, they just don’t advertise.

        As for surviving on your own robustness – only if there is no threat. Threats come in numbers.
        So do survivors.

    • If you dont already, I believe you would enjoy the writings of John Mosby (pen name), who blogs under Mountain guerilla. I’m not shilling for him, but he has been advocating similar concepts for about a decade. He has gone patreon in the last 6 months, but his old articles, still up, are gold.

Comments are closed.