Partisans and Objectivists

One way to describe the great divide within mainstream politics is that one side is the partisans and the other side objectivists. The partisans are focused on their objectives and what they think is good for their side. They just want to win and don’t worry too much about how they win. The objectivists are focused on facts and think that truth will prevail eventually. The partisans are what we call the Left and the objectivists are what we call the Right in America.

The partisans are an ends justifies the means mode of thought. They are unconstrained by rules or convention. In fact, they are not limited by what they said last week, as last week was a different time with different goals. In a world where winning is the only thing that matters, everything else bends to serve that end. If being seen as on the science is useful in the moment, they love science. If treating science like magic is useful next week, then next week they will mock science.

Objectivists, of course, find this mind boggling. They look at these contradictions as the Achilles’s heel of their opponents. They spend a lot of time pointing out how the partisans are contradicting what they said last week. Often this is effective, as the public tends to side with the objectivists in most things. The climate change stuff is a good example of how the partisans harm their own cause. Their flexibility with the truth is a liability when asking the public to take their word on science.

For the most part, though, this willingness to transcend facts, and even reality in some cases, is a great advantage in a democracy. Politics in a democracy is immediate, rather than deliberative, so that first impression counts for a lot. If in the fullness of time those initial arguments are found to be full of lies or simply wrong, it does not matter as everyone is onto the next thing. It is rare in a democracy for the debate to circle back and address an old argument or have a do-over.

A good example of how this works is the term “gun show loophole.” This remains a popular catchphrase on the Left. They know gun control is wildly unpopular, so they talk about ending gun show loopholes. The fact that there is no such thing as a gun show loophole does not matter. It sounds good. People don’t like loopholes of any sort as they seem dishonest, so they support ending gun show loopholes. The Left can appear reasonable, despite perpetrating a fraud on the public.

Of course, this summer we got to experience another example of how the truth is no constraint to the partisan. The people burning, looting and attacking people in the streets have been labeled peaceful protesters. Just this week, as video comes out of massive looting and pillaging in Philadelphia, the governor of the state called it a mostly peaceful protest. That strikes the objectivists as insane, but from the point of view of the partisan, it helps their cause and that’s all that matters.

As violence spread around the country this summer, the chant from the rioters was often something like “silence is violence.” In other words, if you did not vocally support them, they could rightfully assume you were plotting violence or supported violence against them, so they were justified in using violence. In other words, to the partisan, their violence is speech, while your speech is violence. The objectivists are stymied by this sleight of hand, so they have remained dumbstruck by it.

This willingness to transcend the rules of language was on display this week as democrats threw a choreographed tantrum over Judge Barrett. They claimed that Trump was packing the court, a term that goes back a century to when FDR tried to increase the number of judges, so he could get his guys on the bench. The fact that Trump was not actually doing anything like that was not a constraint on the Democrats bleating about court packing all week.

Just as their violence is speech, while your speech is violence, the logic of the situation is being turned on its head. They now claim that their plans to pack the court are a justified response to Trump packing the court. You see, when their enemy scrupulously follows the rules it is a gross violation of procedure, but when they overturn procedure it is restoring order and balance. This is not mere hypocrisy. This is the natural detachment from objectivity that is a predicate for the partisan.

This is why the partisans tend to prevail in a democracy. They have a wider range of options because they are not limited by facts and reason. Additionally, the objectivists are self-limiting, often ceding the field because they think the rules require it. One side gets to play dirty, while the other side tries to talk them out of it. The truth is, there is no reasoning with a partisan. There is no way to reason with someone who will not stipulate to the basic facts of life. They exist beyond reason.

This is the story of the last 30 years. As the partisans have become increasingly partisan, which means less constrained by reality, the objectivists have become more certain that reality will step and do the job they refuse to do. They imagine a time when the partisan suddenly realizes the truth of his situation, throws down his weapons and embraces the objectivist as a brother in logic. For the objectivist, reason has become escapism in order to avoid what must be done.

A byproduct of this dynamic is that most people have no voice in the media, government or any other area of public life. The partisans advance their positions on behalf of their cause, while the objectivists fret about factual accuracy. In a democracy, objectivity is not a constituency, so the objectivists end up representing the interests of abstract concepts, rather than genuine people, which means the bulk of the people have no representative.

Another old saying relevant here is that in war, truth is the first casualty. The reason for this is war is a conflict between two sides, neither of which has a reason to see things from the point of view of the other side. It is the ultimate partisan conflict. If there is ever going to be a force to topple the current Left, their first task will be to eliminate those more concerned about truth and reason than the welfare of genuine people.

Promotions: The good folks at Alaska Chaga are offering a ten percent discount to readers of this site. You just click on the this link and they take care of the rest. About a year ago they sent me some of their stuff. Up until that point, I had never heard of chaga, but I gave a try and it is very good. It is a tea, but it has a mild flavor. It’s autumn here in Lagos, so it is my daily beverage now.

Minter & Richter Designs makes high-quality, hand-made by one guy in Boston, titanium wedding rings for men and women and they are now offering readers a fifteen percent discount on purchases if you use this link.   If you are headed to Boston, they are also offering my readers 20% off their 5-star rated Airbnb.  Just email them directly to book at

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.

314 thoughts on “Partisans and Objectivists

  1. Mother Nature will surely fix the partisan in the end. However, we don’t want that to happen. She will fix it by tearing everything down and showing you what is truly important in this world. It would be better to fix this ourselves, but if we refuse she will.

  2. The left has never been hit back hard before. They’ve gone too far, and the Republican invertebrates will merely be onlookers when the communists get hammered during their post-election coup.

  3. “As the partisans have become increasingly partisan, which means less constrained by reality, the objectivists have become more certain that reality will step and do the job they refuse to do.” Reality will step in and do the job. It will likely be in the form of vigilantes, who’ve had enough and have nothing left to lose.

  4. Another term for these partisans is “antinomians”; they believe that any atrocity is acceptable if committed “for the Revolution”. This works great against old-fashioned conservatives who are constrained to play by the rules, but once those old fogies are defeated, the antinomians turn against each other with the same ferocity because they’re all fighting “for the Revolution”, and Leftism disappears into its own mass graves.

  5. If you change partisan and objectivist to “Jew” and “white” the past fifty years of American history becomes much more intelligible.

  6. Too many people aren’t hardened against the reality in post-jogger America. As a prime examplar, look no further than Prince Harry who said that he had to “walk a mile in his wife’s shoes” to understand his “white privilege” (but wow is that ever a scary image). It’s all about feelz for people like him, he doesn’t understand the gritty reality of jogger nation. He is right that he has privilege but it’s not because of the color of his skin.

    • Everyone treats joggers like children

      They’re adults. No one is forcing them to stay here. They are free to leave and try their luck in another country.

  7. OK, I get it. War, what is it good for? Absolutely … killing those f**kin’ partisans! But did anybody else find Zman’s use of a term that was applied to the so-called philosophy of that uberlibtard Ayn Rand distracting? He’s not wrong about the Right’s ineffectiveness in clinging to facts and reason. I’ve learned the bitter lesson that speaking Truth doesn’t win any battles or set anyone free. I don’t deny its value or reject trying to grasp it; but truth is simply the wrong tool for the job that confronts us. In a similar vein, democracy has proven to be a partisan artifact that no longer serves a useful purpose and must be dismantled.

    • “Truth” is a guy thing, and probably mostly a white guy thing

      like muscle cars and the band RUSH

  8. The Walter Wallace riots show that detente between Partisans and Objectivists is impossible. With their genuine religious fervor, Partisans are in a frenzy that another black saint was taken from the earth. Meanwhile Objectivists are confused and befuddled as to why anyone would get upset over the justified death of a violent criminal.

    Jim Goad and the TRS guys both said the other day that cops need to learn to disengage from the black community. Both noticed that in every one of these situations, some black girlfriend, momma or gramma loses control of her violent bastard and calls the cops to resolve the family squabble. When the bastard inevitably attacks the cops and gets what he deserves, the girlfriend, momma or gramma shrieks about the “injustice”. That’s exactly what happened here and the solution is for cops to simply stop responding to black calls for service.

    Notice how those cities that saw the first wave of BLM rioting in 2014-2015 have been relatively quiet this summer? This is because the cops in those cities have learned to stop or slow responses to black calls for service. They’ve learned to show up to a call hours after the low impulse control squabblers have either shot each other or cooled down. This way the cops can simply call for the medical examiner or ambulance to collect the bodies and move on.

    This approach seems to work well for everyone concerned. Sure, the murder rate in slow-response cities is soaring, but the overwhelming evidence is that the black community is ok with this. They get to resolve their petty disputes however they want and the cops get to stay out of the way and focus on other stuff.

    The Partisans of the 70’s and 80’s mocked Hendrik Verwoerd for describing apartheid as “good neighborliness”. But he was utterly correct. Apartheid works. Separating the races and allowing each to establish their own norms and expectations for themselves is mutually beneficial. But as pointed out in today’s post, Objectivists cannot “convert” Partisans into understanding and accepting this. Conversion is impossible.

  9. The question is, do the AWRs do what they do because they are irrational and divorced from reality, or do they consciously choose to behave irrationally for tactical reasons? I suspect a bit of both.

    • I can’t answer that question but I can say that I am learning to take pleasure in the metamorphosis of AWRs into the very Africans they worship in their increasing irrationality and mindless passions and diminishing aptitude and cognition. It’s punishment from the gods.

      “You love them so much? Ok fine. I will make you into them. Ha ha ha !!!!!”

      • True. Just look at all the white riots in places like Portland for confirmation of their Africanization.

    • Friend, I have come to question whether “reason” plays any part in present day society. I wish no one harm. I hope for the best for everybody. Apparently this is no longer enough.

  10. Z — Could you (or someone else) say a little more about this “gun show loophole” thing?

    I didn’t know much about it, so I looked it up and it seems quite straightforward. The claim is that some sellers at gun shows are not FFL holders, and because they aren’t in the business of selling guns for profit (at least nominally) they are no more obligated to keep records or conduct background checks than they would be if they were on their porch selling dad’s old shotgun to their next door neighbor. To me this certainly looks like a “loophole”, in that it would provide a way for a criminal get around the law and buy a gun without a federal background check.

    So can someone explain why it isn’t a loophole? I’m not interested in whether you think background checks are a good idea, or how often criminals actually do buy guns this way, just whether, in states that have not passed their own laws to “close” the loophole, private citizens can legally sell guns at gun shows without being required to conduct a background check and keep records of their sales.

    • There is no loophole. That’s what he’s saying. Any private citizen can sell a certain amount of their collection before they are considered a dealer. Some of them just choose to do so at gun shows.

      • But that is exactly the loophole that is being complained about! You are acknowledging that it is possible for a criminal to avoid a background check by going to a gun show and buying a gun from a private (non-FFL) citizen. That is the loophole! It disturbs me that you don’t see this.

        The suggested remedy is to make background checks mandatory for all sellers at gun shows. You can say the true goal is to make them mandatory for all private sales, and you are probably right, but that’s a slippery slope argument, and if you are going to make that argument you should acknowledge that the loophole does exist, and then explain why closing it would be worse than leaving it open.

        • It’s got nothing to do with gun shows though. And it’s hardly a loophole. It’s the foundation of the Second Amendment. There is no Second Amendment with mandatory background checks. Background checks are soft registrations. It’s just a question of tech eventually uniting the information. I think everyone should have the right to own a gun, even felons, they do anyway You get caught doing violent crime with it, you get executed. Simple. Then we can do away with all this bureaucratic faggotry, which only works in all white high trust, high functioning societies, but bites us in the ass in this one.

        • A felon can come to my house, or me to his, and buy a gun from me without a background check.
          The location of the sale makes no difference to the transaction.

    • It’s a wedge issue. Once it becomes illegal to sell guns by private parties at gun shows, it will become easier to ban the sale of all private party transactions of firearms. It places an unreasonable burden on the gun show promoter because it would be hard to police anyone who made contact at the gun show but sold outside the gun show itself. In practice (even though you said you don’t want opinions), based on my observations actual sales between private parties at gun shows is a negligible factor. Calling this a ‘gun show loophole’ is just a way to delegitimize gun shows and gun culture in general.

    • It’s not a loophole b/c the law that applies is only for registered sellers, not private parties

      It’s like saying giving Christmas gifts to each other is a loophole at avoiding gift taxes

      • Even to me what you are saying sounds evasive, and to anyone who isn’t already in the pro-gun camp it could reasonably be interpreted as lying.

        When people refer to “the gun show loophole”, private parties selling guns at gun shows without doing background checks is exactly what they mean. So when Z said “there is no such thing as a gun show loophole” I initially thought he was saying “no, nobody can sell guns at gun shows without doing background checks”, when in fact, according to you, what he was saying was “sure they can, but I’ll pretend I don’t know what you are talking about and deny that the loophole exists”. This is playing games with semantics, like quibbling over the meaning of “is”, and it isn’t a good look.

        • Why are you even asking this stuff here? Google and Wikipedia have the answers. It almost seems like, well I don’t want to go there. It’s somewhat ironic given Zman’s post today. It is what it is and it’s always been this way. If you want to be a gun nanny, vote for Kamala. Background checks are only useful for crazies, since criminals will disobey the laws regardless, as everyone knows. But 95% of crazies can’t afford therapists (my possibly hyperbolic guess), so even the ones who get treatment and diagnoses through official channels and are subsequently flagged during background check, the system still misses all the uninsured crazy lonewolfs. Not to mention, the psychological establishment has clearly sided with our liberal overlord, and can add any number of things particular to our perception of reality into their list of psychopathologies. They already will prosecute you for defending yourself, especially as a white guy against a jogger, you really want to give them more rope to hang people because you are autistic about your conceptualization of honesty?

          If you’re so scared, go to church, and buy a gun, before people like you take them away.

        • JEB, the handful of times I went to gun shows, they were held inside of a building. Every seller and buyer there HAD to register the sell with and including a waiting period. Outside the building a few individuals were hawking their fire-arm to take advantage of the concentration of a potential buyer. There is no gun show loophole.

        • A loophole is NOT the non-existence of a law. A loophole is a way around a law.

          There is no law requiring mandatory background checks between private sellers. So there can be no loophole or way around something that doesn’t exist.

          Here would be a loophole. The law reads “Any sales of firearms between private sellers in the USA shall require both parties to register blah blah blah”. So to get around the law they hold gun shows on Indian Reservations or on cruise ships in international waters which are not technically part of the USA.

          Make sense?

        • A good look would reveal they want us disarmed, and that they have done us harm and mean us further harm.

          fsking idiot

  11. Excellent post. But remember, the other side sees it exactly the same way.
    We are at an impasse. When the sides can not agree on the basic premises, there is no way to compromise.
    We must crush them.

  12. Hence a grudging appreciation of Pinochet. Diagnosed exactly this problem when still containable. Removed it and bought Chile 45 good years. Which they are now pissing away.

    • Santiago is a lovely Euro-influenced city that is near First World in parts.

      Really sad to see the lunacy take hold down there.

  13. (“so the objectivists end up representing the interests of abstract concepts, rather than genuine people”

    Wow. This is directly related to my thoughts about Creation, the “Big Bang”, and such terms as a Source, a Supreme Being, the Heavenly Father.

    Re the idea that we mites, who live in the crevices of a thin layer of scum that floats atop the surface of a liquid drop, are yet the miraculous seed, the mind, the very engine of the Universe.

    Perhaps our host will forbear a small bit of “…but where did we come from?”)

  14. The Philly op was a wag the dog for the Biden family over Tucker and Bobalinski.

    A Chicago patriot, cfbleachers, battling the Leftist machine in court, noted that their main tactic was inversion, inversion, inversion.

    Their mindset is to always flip the story.

  15. Another example is redefinintion of the term “debt deflation.”
    What it actually refers to is that when interest rates are low and inflation is high, one effectively pays back less than one borrowed. The deflation applies to the debt itself.
    But economists are now using the term to justify a “debt jubilee” (eliminating debts) by saying the “debt deflation” is occurring as people are having to use more of their income to service debt and are therefor having to reduce their consumer spending. They are saying that due to debt, and the need to repay debt, the economy is deflated.
    That, of course, is not deflation at all. it’s recession. Deflation is the opposite of inflation.

  16. I think it’s an artificial distinction Z. It’s true that the left tends to be more partisan than the right but to me the divide is between those who feel and those who think. What happens when the feelers don’t get their way? They destroy, out of immaturity. So it comes down to those who throw tantrums because they don’t get their way, and their parents who understand the realities of life.

  17. Z’s essay makes good sense to me, until the final paragraph. I agree that in a war Truth is the first casualty. However, Z’s final paragraph leaves me uneasy:
    “If there is ever going to be a force to topple the current Left, their first task will be to eliminate those more concerned about truth and reason than the welfare of genuine people.”
    To me this sounds like he advocates ignoring — or worse — people who ask that the truth be considered. If that be so, then the Right has descendent into La-La land, having discarding any facts not convenient to their position, and as such are probably no better than whatever absurdity of the Left they claim to be battling. Surely Z is not saying we should off any nay-sayer who isn’t with the program?
    Taken to a logical extreme, if the Right ignores relevant truths, their efforts at reform will be more no successful than any reality-denying, foaming-at-the-mouth Liberal’s.
    I’m probably reading too much into Z’s words. There are relevant and irrelevant truths. If our side is partisan for the welfare of people, that is good. It’s even better if we keep in mind that some things are true, whether those are truths we like or not, whether they help or hurt the causes we advocate.

    • I think he means we slap down the “just the facts” normies so a more elevated people with genuine human passion and compassion and understanding have the latitude then to install the necessary programs and protocols for a healthy society

  18. Our biggest issue as a country is Immigration. What is the dissident plan to influence perception in this regard if Kamala wins? Oh right, there is no plan. Leftists obviously aren’t inherently pro-immigration, in fact the opposite, they’ve just taken that position in recent times. But
    one thing you can convince even immigrants, brown black and yellow alike of, is that not only should you pull the ladder up, you should step on the guy under you’s fingers so he falls off. It can’t be hard to convince white environmentalists that immigration is bad for nature, they are just being contrarians because racism is an old white guy thing they must oppose, and it wins them points with their pets. If Trump does lose, we need to figure out how to win over their pet’s minds on the whole immigration thing, and show them more competition for their jobs and wages is bad for them too, and then the goofy white environmentalists will naturally give in to their misanthropic instincts, without the obstacle of white racism in the way.

    This is by no means an unwinnable goal, and it serves our interests no matter what the future holds.

    • I think Steve Sailer noted how the Sierra Club was once anti immigration because of the trash along the borders and so forth but then the immigration activists bought them off

      But if polls are to be believed, a lot of Mexican Americans resent the illegals probably more than we do for those very reasons of lowering their wages. Anecdotally, just listening to Mexican Americans I do find this to be the case.

      Not sure about how Asians feel. They probably are less concerned b/c they have higher paying jobs and their income doesn’t seem to have been affected by massive tech workers and the like. But eventually it will happen.

      As for blacks? The ones who work do become visibly frustrated by the illegals lowering their wages and taking their jobs. I’m not sure how the welfare dudes and gals feel. But I do have to roll my eyes at how rude black women are to the Mexicans behind the fast food counter when they struggle to understand ebonics. “Do you not umberstann Eeengliss?” And I know Mexican gangs have cleaned out the blacks from places like south Los Angeles — f/k/a the “South Side”.

      • Yes. I agree. The biggest obstacle becomes how to get the right out of its own way to focus on optics, which is obviously a more leftist paradigm thinking, that gets a lot on our side’s skin crawling just hearing it, but which we must adopt if we want to advance our interests, IMO anyway.

        Asians are definitely tougher,, especially obviously Han Chinese. The one thing I would say that is both good and bad- America is where they evolve from hive minded humanoids, into full humans, after a generation or two. That of course means they become crazy liberals generally as well. But it weakens their inherent ethnocentrism, and we can work with that.

      • The five blacks who work in Compton are livid over immigration. If only they all worked they would be screaming bloody murder about this. Sorry guys, looks like you were sold out by your wonderful Maxine Watters as she sits there in her fake ass wig. She’s no Barbara Jordan.

      • >>but then the immigration activists bought them off<<

        You mean (((immigration activist)))

        “In the 1990s, the Club came across a deep-pocketed donor with an interest in the environment, one David Gelbaum, a Wall Street investor who had made hundreds of millions of dollars. He was willing to be a generous funder to the Sierra Club, but with one stipulation. As he was quoted in a Los Angeles Times article (‘The Man behind the Land,’ 10/27/04), ‘I did tell [Sierra Club Executive Director] Carl Pope in 1994 or 1995 that if they ever came out anti-immigration, they would never get a dollar from me.'”

    • Immigration is by far the most important issue. And look where we’ve gone under Trump, where even bringing it up is raysiss. We’ve gone backwards. The only thing that will stop immigration in its tracks is the buckling of the welfare state and an economic meltdown. The reason we put in immigration restrictions in 1922 is precisely because there wasn’t yet a welfare state and the lower class saw their wages going nowhere as these unwashed immigrants were working for nothing. It’s also why unions developed to begin with.

      • Exactly. You took the words out of my mouth. I was gonna follow up my first comment with that sentiment as I thought to myself “what if Trump wins, how will it be any better?” You are too right, White America’s subconscious racial awakening under Trump has been counterproductive for us because it put Lefty’s cockles up, but that’s ok, because it was necessary and all part of this process. This is why the right needs to stop being a bunch of sensitive pussies collectively, and embrace identity politics for minorities. The dissidents can help push normie cons in this sense by not feeding into their gripes and energy about looting joggers, BLM, antifa and minority identity politics. Those are distractions that are too defensive. If we embrace looters, joggers, BLM and Antifa, with a smile and a hug, even if it’s 4d chess, that gets us closer to freedom of association, and turning the spigot off for new slaves for the plantation. We need to move racial awareness from the subconscious into the conscious, by making the first gesture of goodwill, and embracing those we hate.

        • True, that’s likely the best way for whitie to get a clue. I don’t even like the “all lives matter” stuff. Actually, if you want to be brutally honest, no lives matter. You have to make your life matter, and even then, it only matters mostly to you and your immediate family. And when the entire Fortune 500 signs the open immigration memo, including Walmart and Target, do I really care that their stores are being pillaged? Nope.

  19. This is an apt explanation for why democracy will fail, as explained by John Adams. “Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide.” Our current democracy is now about 117 years old. I date it to the 17th Amendment in 1913, which was a bad year for all kinds of other things as well. I think Adams would have been astounded that it lasted so long, and it only has because of the complex systems developed to service debt that could never have grown to this level in his day. The debt bomb is under our feet, ready to go off. All it needs is an event in which the politicians of our country, in the face of an emergent crisis. This maskism may very well be the trigger event. I’ve watched countless small businesses go into ruin over this. The entrepreneur is the backbone of the country and they’re getting hit with a shovel. Some businesses, mostly in the e-commerce sphere, are getting a windfall, but anyone depending on physical bodies in a certain place is suffering. Only monetary speed injections like PPP are keeping this going for the moment.

    • All empires collapse under their own weight. John Glubb did a great job of documenting how they typically last 10 generations (200 to 250 years).

    • Perhaps it wasn’t the best idea to allow people who can barely manage a checkbook or their children to have a say in the operations of a society

      My feeling is that democracy was only ever going to work in perhaps rural or semi-rural societies of people of northern European stock, and of those mainly the English and perhaps Scandinavians. Sometimes I think even Germans are a bad idea for a democracy. My family is from Italy and I would be the first to tell anyone they’d be crazy to let Italians run a democracy. But at least life would be entertaining.

      But letting blacks have a say? Or men in little hats? That’s bridge way way too far and is pure madness. And we know where it leads and are learning the had way.

      • I totally agree. It doesn’t even function in high population counties. And the fact that Shanequa’s vote counts the same as mine is total madness. There are certain laws of nature, and humanity is part of them, and human beings are not hard wired for it beyond a village level.

        • and now they want to give Shanequa’s felon boyfriend the same vote as you, as if his opinion on how society should function is equally as valid and meaningful as yours and mine.


      • It can work on a small scale like a town – where people know they are talking about their own taxes, nobody else’s. Also works for a while with limited suffrage – i.e. only men who have done their military service honorably or paid a certain amount of taxes allowed to vote.

        • “only men who have done their military service honorably”

          Absent actual physical invasion, people who sign up to murder strangers for politicians should be disenfranchised for life,

          • Exactly this.
            The requirements need to be 21 years old, married with children and own a house at least 51% paid off before you can vote or hold office.
            On top of that if you move to a new country you lose the franchise for a year and a new state five.
            Throw in precinct style voting that heavily favors smaller towns and you’ll fix most of the problems outright.

      • My ancestors come from the Mediterranean as well. My grandfather, who was third generation here, made the point that any descendants from that region worth a damn were from the families that got out during the Ellis Island days. He could not stand those in the present day who were from the old country, nor did he care to be associated with those who had been here for 50 years but still acted like they were fresh of boat. Looking at the present state of that region, he was not wrong.

        • If my grandfather uttered a word in Italian, and mind you he was born there and was his first language, my grandmother would chastise him loudly “You are in America now, speak English.”

          Different era.

          • Because his grandmother realized that America was a unique, special nation for a reason, and that her family was lucky to be a part of it.

          • Same reason I get physically sick, based on where I live, when I hear families speaking Spanish and looking at me like I need to learn it, which is typical.

          • My husband’s maternal ancestors were Italian (his great-grandparents immigrated in the 1880s) and while his grandparents may have understood Italian, his mother and her siblings never learned a word. I manage to translate the old records well enough (a bit of high school Spanish and college Latin) but now we both wish we knew the language.

      • people who can barely manage a checkbook

        It’s so bad out there most Ameritards can barely get through the checkout line anymore.

        Even the ones with a teller.

  20. ”Those more concerned about truth and reason than the welfare of genuine people” is a good description of the National Review crowd and most of the GOP.

  21. Z’s “Age of Covidian” shows up on today. First time I’ve seen one of his posts there. Spreading out.

    • LOL

      Let me know when the libertarians at Lew Rockwell start freaking out over Zman being published there

      But congrats to the big Z for getting his art out there to a wider audience.

  22. I said many years ago that when the Boomers were in full control the stool would hit the fan big time. Here we pretty much are. A very few old folks running out of fingers to plug the holes.

    • I have to stay I have always felt the same, that things would not go back to normal until that generation is bye bye. Ans I do not include the decent individuals of that age in that group but the mass of pigheaded boomers who fukked up pretty much everything since the 1960s

      • Not Boomers again. When we go, you’ll have nothing to bitch about. None of the upcoming cohorts coming on will rescue you, for one simple reason: demographics. As bad as we are/were, we were White. When we are gone, less than 50% of the nation will be White. Half of that most likely race indifferent, or worse, race mixing. Normal ain’t coming back—whatever that is.

  23. These people fervently believe these things, it’s not just a tactical pose for them. Thus, no amount of explanation or observable evidence will sway them. You cannot reach some sort of compromise with someone who doesn’t believe anything you might produce for their inspection.

  24. the objectivists have become more certain that reality will step and do the job they refuse to do.

    Very good!

      • In the last 20 years or so there’s been a huge influx of delusional progressives, feminists, and gender benders in Oregon. They have actually come to outnumber people born in the state. They all settle along the I-5 corridor and seem unaware of the existence of the rest of the state. Most, of course, end up in the fetid, sodden latrine known as Portland. California has a reputation for Lefty lunacy but it’s also got a long history, real industries (yes, they’re destroying them all now), and lots of agriculture. There’s been no large influx of population in the last generation, quite the opposite in fact. The long term effects of Leftist rule are also quite obvious there now and are only just now becoming so here. The result is that Oregon politics are, if anything, more detached from reality than those in CA.

        These people vote their feelz every time and this is how we got our insane and crooked governor Kate Brown. She’s the reason for the lockdowns and mask rules here. Unfortunately the usual political process here won’t work. Even people who acknowledge what a disaster she’s been won’t vote Republican. Conservative people here have been forced to rely on the recall efforts. The most recent one failed by only a few thousand signatures and that was even with the handicap of being unable to get signatures the usual way during the scamdemic. In short, the state is ungovernable as currently defined. In the sense of having a rapid recent influx of troublesome and unassimilated new people it’s America writ small.

  25. Applying an historical parallel, sounds like Julius Caesar & the Populares (Partisan) vs. Cato the Younger & the Optimates (Objectivist).

    Who came out ahead in that battle? The objectivists have no chance.

    Of course, Caesar met a brutal end, but his legacy triumphed.

  26. “The fact that there is no such thing as a gun show loophole does not matter. It sounds good.”

    Another common trope goes something like “2nd Amendment rights only refer to a well regulated militia”…DUH.

    Love to raise my eyebrow in withering condescension and point out that District of Columbia v. Heller (2008) definitively concluded without ambiguity that 2A rights refer to individuals NOT state/federal militias.

    (then watch the cognitive dissonance go off in their heads)

    Ultimately, it makes no difference anyway. The Constitution doesn’t mean what you or I think it means, it’s what five of nine freaks in robes think it does.

    • For the umpteenth time, I refer to Sarah Palin’s coinage of “death panels” as one of the rare instances where the right scored a direct bulls-eye. It had the left completely ruffled. We need to take control of the narrative in a way that makes the left (i.e. the feminine side of the culture) appear immoral and/or ignorant. For example, I’ve noticed it makes them twitch when I refer to masking as “voodoo science”.

      • Good one. We need more pithy/catchy phrasing. Trump is fairly good at it…like “Hidin’ Biden”. It’s the verbal/conversational equivalent to the Internet meme.

  27. Blacks are playing this game well as are other groups. The objective truth is that blacks commit crimes and misbehave at a higher rate than other groups. It takes very little provocation to set off mass violence, Philadelphia being just the latest example.
    But it is virtually impossible to discuss the disfunction among blacks in any reasonable way.
    Their leaders and the left in general ignore any objectivity around the issue. To Blacks it’s about what is good for MY people. MY people meaning black people not the nation at large.
    For the political forces behind all this it’s about power, not objectivity.
    We are not allowed to discuss the issue objectively in our democracy.
    The partisans will win.

    • IMO a lot of the partisans know exactly what they are doing, objectively. They do it because it works. They are mau-mauing the flak catchers, because it is effective. Trump is a huge threat to them because he obviously gets their game, and throws it right back at them. There is the thought that, to be on the Left, you need to forget a lot of things. It’s not forgetting, it’s ignoring, for tactical reasons.

    • If you internalize that blacks naturally lean toward mysticism and voodoo, it all will start making sense

      Instinctively, they believe there are spirits out there affecting them. Bad juju. And the tendency is to give the bad juju a name or a face. Our opponents, very cleverly understand this and have made the bad juju into the face of the everyday white man. Please do not expect there to be a rationale or a logic behind it other than the logic that this is how they function mentally and spiritually.

      southern whites know this all too well.

      Blacks can be rather easily swayed, and a different face can be put onto the face of the bad juju, but notice how the media and left works non-stop from letting this happen. The constant reinforcements that “white man is bad.” Some are trying to change it. Trump, for example. I think liberal white Karens could easily be made into the face of the bad juju. We should be working toward such a goal.

    •  To Blacks it’s about what is good for MY people.
      do indoctrinated leftists actually believe blacks will start seeing whites as their own after america elects 44 african presidents and it frees all africans from prisons? How dumb can a leftist be? Not joking, how dumb can white leftists be?

    • Come November 4, regardless of the election’s outcome (will we even know that soon? Seems unlikely.), Trump has absolutely no reason to not unleash National Guard and any other authoritarian actions he might desire. What’ll happen is anyone’s guess, of course.

  28. The truth is, there is no reasoning with a partisan. There is no way to reason with someone who will not stipulate to the basic facts of life. They exist beyond reason.” True. Thus the necessity of imposing and defending reality-based culture, mores and, ultimately, civilization.

    • Why should a partisan stipulate to the basic facts of life, when stubborn and absolute refusal to stipulate works to his favor? This is all about smash-and-grab these days, from stuff in the stores to emotional jollies. The so-called partisan has figured out it all works well for him by his playing the partisan game, so why should he change his thinking? In the real world, the only way to change it is war, all the way to his capitulation (or ours).

    • As to the necessity of imposing and defending reality-based culture, it always ends up coming from the point of a gun, when the objectivists have had enough and finally get off the mat. The partisans lead with the gun, and the objectivists eventually get there, too. But when the objectivists wait too long, and don’t respond quickly and aggressively enough, one ends up with Stalin’s Russia or Mao’s China.

  29.  The truth is, there is no reasoning with a partisan. 

    Once you have accepted that, the subsequent course of action becomes clear.

  30. In other words, to the partisan, their violence is speech, while your speech is violence. The objectivists are stymied by this sleight of hand, so they have remained dumbstruck by it.

    The problem is the objectivists have no other thought of how to respond. They stay in the “game”, muttering “but, but, but….” ad nauseum.
    Certainly the fruit of this Lucy’s Football Feedback Loop is that Charlie Brown is no longer tempted to attempt the kick. Hopefully he’s off to the range instead. We will win, and rebuild, likely to repeat the sins of our fathers. So let’s get walking through the valley, I’m sick of the current game.

    • To beat a dead horse, Charlie’s first mistake was agreeing to let Lucy play football. How quickly she became the keeper of the ball and the maker of the rules. Charlie walks off the field. Lucy cries foul. Though she is hard to hear through her mask. I will be at the range with Charlie tomorrow AM to zero my rye fulls. Stoked. Time for Charlie to stop playing with (getting played by) the mean girls and get back into shape. He is kinda pudgy, after all.

  31. They imagine a time when the partisan suddenly realizes the truth of his situation, throws down his weapons and embraces the objectivist as a brother in logic. For the objectivist, reason has become escapism in order to avoid what must be done.”

    in fairness to objectivists, some things are inevitable. If someone is, say, driving fast towards a brick wall, they’re inevitably going to hit it, unless they stop before they hit it. The thing is, they are stopping either way.

    Consequently, if you can’t convince someone to stop before they hit the wall, all you can really do is walk away and let them hit the wall. Jumping in the car to stop them is loser’s errand because if you succeed, they hate you and try to resume at the next possible opportunity. If you fail, you die with them. Therefore, the only thing you can do when someone refuses to be reasonable is to keep as much distance as possible between you and them.

    • Consequently, if you can’t convince someone to stop before they hit the wall, all you can really do is walk away and let them hit the wall.

      The situation changes a bit if you’re in the car with them.

      • Sure, maybe try jumping out. Ultimately, this points back to the fundamental flaw of the constitution, in that it’s a bad idea to make alliances with people whose vision of direction is radically different from yours.

    • As an admirer of Ayn Rand, at least parts of her philosophy, allow me to give a quick book report about her best effort Atlas Shrugged. Of course, it’s not a perfect analogue of the real world. In her story, the Good are highly competent and industrious, called Producers. The Evil (Rand’s Looters; we could call them Woke today) are delusional and incompetent. If only the real world were as clear-cut. But returning to the novel: the Producers resisted as long as they could. Yes, they did retreat to their Hidden Valley and you could call this “giving up”, or more accurately in my opinion, you could say they were letting the fever burn itself out, waiting for a future time when “men of the mind” would be welcomed as an asset, not as a consumable good, in the larger civilization.
      Rand also gives us the concept of “witholding one’s consent.” You may not be able to fight the evil, but you should be able to refuse to subsidize, enable, or speak in favor of it, in detriment to everything you believe in.
      Finally, for all the imperfect philosophy of Rand and her followers, and how people criticize the philosophy for not being real world, I would argue differently. Exhibit One: as far as I know, none of the Looters is won over to the Producer’s side. The novel emphasizes, indeed, the travails of the “scabs”, those who still worked hard, productively, not only unrewarded but with ever-increasing demands from the parasites, but hadn’t yet seen or accepted the systemic rot of the world they inhabited. Exhibit Two: note how Atlas Shrugged ends: as good as the philosophy of the Producers is, they must remain in hiding as the Looter’s temporary triumph comes at the expense of civilization falling apart.

      • Another aspect of Rand that I have recent reference to is the “Virtue of Selfishness”. One can not be required to sacrifice oneself for another. Mask wearing mandates is of that ilk.

  32. “their violence is speech, while your speech is violence”

    Thats great.

    The honorable person is always handicapped in dealing with the dishonorable but still sometimes wins. Other factors are in play

  33. Interesting then that the educated have gone left while working people are going right. So Joe Sixpack is more reasonable than Professor Woke.

    • It takes an incredible amount of academic conditioning to disbelieve what your eyes watching the real world tell you every day.

      • Academic conditioning, and financial interest. “It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends on not understanding it.” -Upton Sinclair

      • It takes a tremendous amount of fanaticism to override vast warehouses of contradictory evidence and data. The Partisans are fanatics to the core.

  34. The right needs to realize it’s in a war and act like it. Circling the wagons will never be enough to stop the “ends justify the means” team. A defense may slow down an offense, but it doesn’t score as many points.

    • Issue wedgies and see what happens. Don’t take the wedgie off the table. War might still be avoided. 🙂

  35. This is an important post about how and why “objectivists” are struck dumb by partisan Leftism divorced from reality. (How can that BE? we ask.) So? Is it time for objectivists to become more “partisan” themselves? After all, it is historically true that “reality” must often be imposed and enforced. That’s where civilization comes from.

    • I have recently been reading the works of Sir Isaac Newton, and nowhere does he renounce white supremacy. Naturally, I burned the treatise and immediately reported Sir Isaac for a historical hate crime.

      On a more serious note, it is already here with regards to genetics. I will be very surprised if all of our latest discoveries in this field miraculously end up agreeing with the woke world view.

    • They won’t need to go to war with science. As with global warming, they will just claim their emotional beliefs are science.

  36. >> Just as their violence is speech, while your speech is violence, the logic of the situation is being turned on its head.
    Quote of 2020 right there. You better tweet that out or gab it or whatever. You’ll live forever in meme videos.

  37. Nice summary of the insane arguing with the autistic elements of the elite leadership of the country. The result is predictable chaos. I like to think one can exist in the predictable chaos tribe–which means you see that norms and rules are gone, which also means you have more freedom to interpret things your own way and to your benefit. Screw ’em. There’s opportunity in the distraction.

    • There’s opportunity in the distraction.

      This is definitely true enough in my field of work. Many opportunities exist and are opening up. A technical type job (IT guru, System Admin, Programmer, Engineer) or trades person can rest assured that they will, in all likelihood, still be valuable.

  38. Not only are objectivists limited to facts and reason, but are limited—TERRIFIED—about being called a racist. (gasp!)

    • b/c there are real objective repercussions to being called that

      A situation where one’s objectivity is used against him.

      We need to find a way to use the partisans’s powers against them. And objectively speaking, the only real way is to leave them alone and watch them suffer their delusions when life falls apart around them and there isn’t a man around to fix it.

        • Perhaps their localized destruction prevents them from expanding their reach? I suspect that small, quiet pockets of resistance will direct the purple city mobs to low hanging fruit and bypass harder targets.
          When the water and power stop flowing, the Orcs will feel the real test of their convictions.

        • It’s the option we are living with

          True, blacks won’t suffer. They thrive in a burned out urban landscape because they thrive in the jungle. It’s home away from home.

          What we, rather, should put our efforts toward is making white women feel the pain. I think any man who has dealt with a troublesome spouse or female in his life knows that sometimes, for their own benefit, you have to let women suffer for their delusions. We don’t jump in and save them. We let it happen. Insofar as this battle of partisans vs objectivists is a battle of the sexes, which in my view is maybe 90% of it.

          Put another way, the partisans seek attention and will do or say anything to get it. When men simply ignore women the men win.

  39. In the recent interview with Alex Jones Joe rogan been fact checking every single statement Alex made.

    But when lefties come to Joe rogan podcasts they are not being scrutinized like he was.

    & when you see khazarian leprechauns like Shapiro have the audacity to say facts don’t care about feelings you realize fact checking is for simps.

    This is war and in war It’s important to know who is your ally and who is your Enemy.

    If the leftist or some Other Enemy says something that is true or something that you agree with that doesn’t turn him into an ally.

    • I don’t think Joe was checking Alex in an attempt to challenge him. He was attempting to legitimate Alex, which I think he did.

      • He needs to fact check those lefists as well and to stop obsessing over that One wrong name Alex Jones mentioned, unless he does the same with Bernie sanders whenever he invites him on.

        • I actually think it’s more useful to prop Alex up as legitimate than to attempt to debunk every leftist bullshit. As per Z Mans argument, it’s actually not that useful to refute their narrative.

          • I actually think it’s more useful to prop Alex up as legitimate
            depends on your view of israelites and africans, alex jones never blames them and he wants to retire, what’s the point of propping him up? If Alex jones won’t mention the enemies, he ain’t really on the white side is he?
            returning to my initial argument, to play the facts game makes you look like a simp, alex jones didn’t even care about rogan’s questions at the end, he got drunk and started talking gibberish.

          • AJ makes a fair point that not all globalists are Jews, but he does name Soros, Rothschild, and the ADL, which practically nobody with his reach will do. Calls out black racism too. Some CivNatery is tolerable for that.

          • i like alex jones, but he ain’t white nationalist, he has the same ideology as trump, which is make civic nationalist america great again, there’s plenty of those around.
            anyhow, jones will retire so it does not even matter at this point.

          • I just can’t see him retiring. I could see him dialing it back to the Sunday show but he seems to live for the fight. Besides he’s in so deep they’d probably destroy him if he walked away.

  40. Remember when liberals and conservatives fought for the same things but disagreed about the process. Big government and small government, socialism vs. capitalism, that sort of thing. With the woke thing going full bore and anti-white pogrom all going forward, that’s all gone now.

    Sprinkle that with demographic change, full corruption of mass media, low iq and distracted populace and you see the present results. The west and the U.S. in particular have been on this downward path for decades, Enoch Powell, James Burnham, Sam Francis, Pat Buchanan being the first to warn and describe all of this. Inevitable when considering a prosperous and satiated society. WE NEED TO FIGHT LIKE NEVER BEFORE. Tuesday is just a small part of it.

    • Seeing the side-by-side photos of the Chik-fil-A CEO shining the shoes of the black guy and then the scene of the vandalized Chik-fil-A restaurant in Philadelphia is a reminder that for Whites, no matter how much you virtue signal about being “on their side,” ultimately you’re the enemy, and they’re coming after you next. It’s now all about race. Race, race, race.

      • South Africa is 99% christian, yet whites are murdered there with impunity. Race is the most important.

        • i have my doubts about sub saharans being able to become true christians, ethiopians have different genetic makeup.

          • We’re supposed to believe that when they’re dancing and throwing themselves all over the place and wailing in church they are celebrating the same God as us

            Ok, normie civnat, sure

          • if we judge based on iq alone then sub saharans including ethiopians can’t become christians.
            can you call a white mental retard a true christian?
            they can’t really distinguish between right and wrong, they are like animals, that’s why i can’t see them being able to become christians.
            Can dogs become christians?
            Though at the same time if you love Jesus then I guess God finds a way.

          • Reminds me of arguments I used to have w libertarians.

            “Let people make the decisions for themselves” idea

            I would ask, ok, can a mental retard who can’t feed himself or tie his shoes without assistance be in a position to make decisions like that?

            You never get an answer

    • What we’re seeing now is the result of Marxists taking over the education establishment some 50-odd years ago & brainwashing students into “new think”. Used to be the “politics stopped & the water’s edge”. No longer unfortunately.

  41. The truth is, there is no reasoning with a partisan.

    Yes. Exactly, and when things get even worse the only solution is to become partisan yourself. Truth and reason – whilst highly vaunted – are just not really useful tools in today’s white world, at least not in the political and social spheres. It takes a high trust society to use the tools responsibly; and we do not have this now.

    • Well said. If the GOP is to survive, they must lust after power just as much as the Democrats. No more beautiful losers. That’s where Trump comes in. He would rather die than lose.

      • We saw what the GOP was made of when they controlled the Presidency, Congress, and Senate for two years and wouldn’t even act on their own platform issues. We can argue about who they serve, but it isn’t the working- or middle- classes.

    • The problem is that the lefty media and hollywood are extremely effective at mocking conservatives who try to play the same game they play. They can make partisan righties look crazy to the broad population, while their own 180 degree swings in reality are simply ignored.

  42. I would guess that what is fueling this phenomenon is 75% to 90% based on sex — or gender more precisely

    Women = Fantasists (aka Partisans)

    Men = Realists (aka Objectivists)

    Does anyone know whether this sort of thing was as prevalent before suffrage?

    • The War of Northern Aggression would be the first example that springs to mind. All of the statements of secession read just like the Declaration of Independence, yet we celebrate the one and denigrate the others. How hypocritical of Lincoln to suspend habeas corpus, exile dissenting legislators, censor the free press in pursuit of his preferred government structure against those who, just like the DoI says, have tried all other means to reconcile their grievances and must finally resort to dissolving those bonds which have tied them to other governments, etc.

      Republicans are the real imperialists.

        • Don’t totally fault the Abolitionists. Only fairly late in life (my 50s) did I learn that many Abolitionists advocated repatriation (hence, Liberia). I didn’t even read Uncle Tom’s Cabin until about age 55. I must concede those foaming-at-the-mouth Puritans at least a grain of common sense: they didn’t want the newly-freed living in their lily white State any more than the disgraced defeated Southern man did.

        • If we’d left well enough alone, slavery would have passed out of existence of itself. It was non-productive in face of industrialization. We should have financed the purchase of slaves and repatriation when purchased. The South & North both would have been ahead of the game.

          • Americans hate paying taxes and fought multiple civil wars over them.
            The kind of tax regime needed for repatriation would be too expensive for the political system to tolerate so it was scrapped.

    • Lots of local advert placards/billboards proclaiming mostly women running for local control. They’re so oppressed and hand maid tailed yet have most of the local and much state control in Utah. The local school board is being scrapped over by one Big Tessa Boom Boom, with two large obvious gun emplacements and big caboose, and a guy who manufactures Ag equipment. Told Basic Husband I’m not voting for women anymore. Done! I don ‘t effing care if the Ag guy grills kids on his Weber kettle. Will vote for him and done with raging woo-woo-feelings chicks. Shocked a gal telling her if I could repeal the Vote for women, I would.

      • I do this when voting for judges, 99.9% of whom no one knows anything about except their name. I never vote for women, jews or minority sounding names. I am not anti any of them, but just playing the law of averages on how they will judge.

      • Yep, men have to take a stand and call a spade a spade. This is women gone crazy b/c no man is there to rein them in

        A simple Bond-like slap across the collective face would do wonders

        • Back in the 1970s, Dad was involved in local politics. Once he used the phrase “call a spade a spade” to a new acquaintance. The man replied, “Where I come from we called them….” you can guess the rest 🙂

      • Back before I stopped voting (which rule I broke in 2016 but have subsequently reinstated), my husband and I were agreed that regardless of purported political position, we’d vote for any male over any female and any one with a White name versus Han/Hispanic/pajeet. And watch for secondary dog whistles. Any sign with green/red/yellow is for pajeets; any with white, light blue, and dark blue is for jevvs.

      • A woman running for local office where I live advertises that she favors People Over Politics. Don’t anyone tell her that politics IS people – just like Soylent Green.

    • Used to think women were the romantics and men were the steely eyed logical realists.

      Talk to any man who’s been married for awhile (or worse, divorced) and you’ll learn that statement is exactly backwards.

      Women are a hell of a lot more pragmatic than men give the, credit for.

      • Their romantic side is probably just another act.

        And they say they love poetry, but a man wax poetic and they look like they want to puke in his face

        They are just pains in the ass.

    • Just a friendly reminder that the establishment of the Federal Reserve; the Income Tax (16th); the direct election of Senators (17th); and Prohibition (18th) were all enacted before the franchise was extended to women (my theory being that that was a reaction to mass immigration from incompatible cultures.)

      • But the special lunacy we see today in all likelihood is an outgrowth of extending the franchise

        Men will do stupid things, but there is always a reason behind it that can be articulated

        What we see now is just plain madness

    • Granma was born in 1885, Mom was born in 1916, so from personal experience, I’d say… nope.

      Those ladies were as grounded as they come. Independent as all get-out, too.

      They knew the men might get disappeared for whatever reason, so they had to be able to stand on their own, and keep the kids and elderly fed.

  43. The main problem I have with Trump is that he keeps straying over into the Partisan camp without knowing it. The entire alphabet soup of perverts is a case in point. There is simply no way to have a “big tent” party. You can’t sharpen your focus in such an environment. And, of course, this is precisely what the Chamber of Commercial Horrors wants. By getting their party-of-preference running off in a dozen directions at once, nobody sees what the C of C weasels are doing off in the corner.

    Having said all that, Trump is the only choice for our side at this moment.

    • Having said all that, Trump is the only choice for our side at this moment.

      General Franco is not going to walk through that door.

      Pinochet’s ghost is not firing up the Hueys.

    • A “Big Tent Party” may be possible, but not when you’re talking about hundreds of thousands of people from disparate cultures and backgrounds.

  44. The Objectivism of the ‘truth and reason’ crowd is, at it’s core, just as weird, hypocritical, and partisan as the partisans.

    A great example are the literal Ayn Rand Objectivists. Reading through Reason magazine (clown horn) even ten years ago or listening to the shenanigans that happens in their conferences, one is struck by the purges, petty squabbles, and resilience to basics of biology and sociology that would fit more with a radical LGBTQIALPHABETSOUP activist than your cold, calculating arbiter of truth. It’s all a virtue signal for cold objectivity of a man with no roots and no community. It’s a virtue signal for something that would be hard to even call a virtue.

    Like Z implied, The ideal is a person who admits he’s a partisan for the sake of his own people, and can look at reality in a way that tells him what can best benefit his own people. We don’t like masks because it goes against the reality of the virus and hurts us as a people. We don’t want immigration because it changes the character of the country where our people reside in a negative way for us, regardless of how much it helps GDP.

    The only reason we have the truth and logic cult is because we’re not allowed to explicitly vouch for white people, so the best the intelligentsia could do on the right after getting routed in the 60’s culture wars was to pretend to be ‘facts and logic’ people in a way that implicitly benefits white people. Of course, a ruse like that is easily subverted to become just as anti-white as the other side, and it has been.

    • LGBTQIALPHABETSOUP activist.” I like that nomenclature! And suggest an alternative: “LGBTGOULASH activist.” (Open to further suggestions.)

    • Well said. Yes, the avoidance-cope of constructing an alt-reality of Reason and Evidence descends into the absurd and petty just like the leftist death cult it claims to “fight” (through well-reasoned dialectic of course, wouldn’t want to violate the NAP).

      There can be only one dungeon master in the fantasy so much of the fantasy is simply a function of status among the various players in the realm of magical thinking. Meanwhile the explicit partisans take more ground.

      So much has been lost to our own self-imposed drift away from the explicit (active) to the implicit (passive). Intellectualizing concepts into oblivion that were plainly true and obvious a handful of years ago but now must be constantly relitigated to accommodate the other side taking ground in real life.

      The “Its okay to be White” and other memetic silliness reveals many tombstones in the graveyard of a People becoming a proposition to be negotiated with intellectual terrorists. Many big brained sorcerers are still trying to reanimate the corpses with sacred parchments because reasons.

  45. This willingness to transcend the rules of language was on display this week as democrats threw a choreographed tantrum over Judge Barrett.

    I watched their hysterics at the hearing, the floor vote and after vote events and wondered who the hell do they think they’re persuading with this bullshit. The whole thing became a show decades ago. But the point of the show was to persuade people to vote for them. Then the show became a circus, still to persuade but with a large dollop of entertainment.

    But now, it’s more some kind of bizarre cathartic performance art. The progressive equivalent of Shi’a self flagellation parades.

  46. The partisan left with their willful (or maybe not) decoupling from objective reality is what makes them so unpredictable and dangerous. There’s more predictably in a cancer diagnosis. And as with cancer, they must be excised from the body politic as well as society in general – chemo, radiation and surgery might be apt metaphors. The only thing lacking at this point is the will to seriously raise the black flag and get on with it.

  47. The reason for this is war is a conflict between two sides, neither of which has a reason to see things from the point of view of the other side.”

    I would argue in this case that one side can absolutely see things from the other’s point of view.

    And whether it is Operation Barbarossa or The Gates of Vienna, the war will happen.

  48. Politics in a democracy is immediate, rather than deliberative, so that first impression counts for a lot. If in the fullness of time those initial arguments are found to be full of lies or simply wrong, it does not matter as everyone is onto the next thing. It is rare in a democracy for the debate to circle back and address an old argument or have a do-over.”

    I would add that the speed and nature of the modern mass media and news cycle doesn’t allow or – in many cases – is unwilling to re-examine those initial arguments. Whether it is a chicken/egg question regarding politics and media, or a natural evolution of a synergistic pairing, it is academic at this point. The two are conjoined and any way forward must address the issue.

  49. If there is ever going to be a force to topple the current Left, their first task will be to eliminate those more concerned about truth and reason than the welfare of genuine people.

    White people suffer from Pathological Honesty as much as Pathological Altruism.

    • I don’t know about that. It’s white liberals who change their view of reality from moment to moment. Minorities are not smart enough to gaslight. Blacks believe in magic racism, but that’s more in line with superstition than being knowingly deceptive.

      • Changing your concepts of reality moment to moment is good policy and in fact is normal, desirable behavior — if such revisions adapt to new information, to update your models of how the real world operates. “Truth” is well defined as the best descriptive (and ideally, predictive) model of reality, given all available information.
        On the other hand, if you need “5”, and you only have “2 + 2 = ?” to work with, then yes, denying reality suddenly shows up as a delightful escape from your dilemma. This example well demonstrates the magic thinking so many humans engage in. Never underestimate the power of fantasy. If you’re cornered, all you need to do to escape is to run into your own rectum 🙂

    • The only force that currently exists is the Left. That and their captive, sullen state apparatus.

      For people to choose to fight the Left instead of just survive, there must be a force, an infrastructure, an organization for them to join- and there is none. Nor do they simply materialize on game day.

      Even cheerleaders don’t just show up on game day. They may have tits, but they’ve got more brains and more balls than the Right.

    • Honesty’s a good thing. So is integrity, honor and courage. That’s how Whitey got to the top. That’s why the jews hate us, none of these principals apply to them.

  50. If there is ever going to be a force to topple the current Left, their first task will be to eliminate those more concerned about truth and reason than the welfare of genuine people.” An infelicitous turn of phrase: Can we stipulate that the first task of the vital beneficial force will be to “bypass those more concerned about truth and reason” in order to protect welfare of genuine people?

    • It takes too much time and effort to bypass. That is a luxury we won’t have. They have made themselves an enemy of our people, so they must be eliminated. It is necessary for our survival.

      • “[T]hey must be eliminated.”
        Well, then, prepare for Idiocracy. Seriously, only imbeciles would want to live in a world devoid of truth and reason. Imagine the most gynocentric, feminist hell hole possible, then double the wine-soaked emotional shrieking that ensues, unattenuated by the merest whisper of fact-based logic.
        Jim Smith correctly realized that Zman was arguing for the need to set aside philosophy and employ other means to prevail over partisans. His “elimination” was not your genocide. In your haste to engender the Revolution, perhaps you should familiarize yourself with what happened to Robespierre.

        • maus, about that niggling over nothing…

          The fate of Robespierre was decided by LEFTISTS, as is ours.

          We need not worry about being Robespierre, we need to worry about being exterminated like the Vendee.

          Although at least the Vendee fought.

  51. Gonna go out on a limb again.
    Trump wins by a decisive majority.

    The lefties will piss and moan as they always do, but they won’t move to Canada nor will they start a civil war. They may burn and loot their own cities – and I am just peachy with that.

    • When are American leftists going to realize that, with a few exceptions, most Canadians don’t want American crazies coming into their country. Under the current Winnie the Flu outbreak, Canadians want the border sealed tight. If the election madness leads to more disorder after Nov.3, the calls to keep the crazies out will be even louder. Genuine refugees will be welcomed, troublemakers will be allowed to freeze to death as they attempt to sneak across the border in sub zero temperatures.

      • I love the assumption by the usual suspects that they’ll be welcomed with open arms into Canada. A sizeable portion of Canadians don’t like Americans. Period. One thing I’ve always noticed, living on the border, is that the Canadian flag flies all over the place here in the States — at marinas, shopping centers, hockey rinks, anywhere that a Canadian might be reasonably expected to visit — but when you get to Canada, American flags are as rare as hen’s teeth.
        It reminds me of a joke that I believe originated in Scandinavia: What’s one thing Canadians have that American’s don’t? Good neighbors.

        • I love the assumption by the usual suspects that they’ll be welcomed with open arms into Canada

          I have an acquaintance like this. He and his wife constantly to Canada to buy the weird potato chip flavors, he spells words in Canadian English, loves the CFL, took up curling to a near pro level, hates the US, and wants to see it burn because Orange Man Bad.

        • 10 years ago I visited America for the first time*. We saw American flags everywhere and being British we were inclined to scoff somewhat at what we considered to be childish patriotism. However,a few days later we soon changed our cynical tune and realised just how warm,friendly and welcoming Americans were and how great America was and that Americans were fully justified in the great love of their country. I felt sad that I just didn’t feel that way for Britain.

          • Good spot. As my grandfather would say of a ‘coloured’ referring to themselves as English:

            ‘He ain’t English… He’s British‘.

            One is usually born English; one usually becomes British. At least, this distinction means something to me and mine.

          • That distinction was made very clear to me during my time living in England, and with my subsequent English friends elsewhere. Too many Americans don’t realize how true Englishmen refer to themselves.

          • I’ve dealt with them in England, in Jamaica, and in the US. There are a number of obvious tells. I hate liars and fakes, and parasites.

          • I am British but I am NOT English. I am a Scot born and bred. Americans seem to have great difficulty understanding that England is only one part of the UK/GB and not the whole country.
            I wouldn’t pay much attention to ‘OrangeFrog’ he strikes me as being an Alf Garnet* type. Lol
            *Archie Bunker was the very much watered down version of Alf Garnet.

        • A sizeable portion of Canadians don’t like Americans

          A sizeable portion of the world doesn’t like Americans. Including many of our so-called allies.

          • Much of the dislike is justified, and the rest is rooted in envy. If we hadn’t invaded/invited the world, neither would be a problem.

        • When I asked the Yukoner if Canada had nuclear weapons, he replied, “Sure we do. And they’re all on the border, pointed at you.”

      • Northeasterners in the States are particularly guilty of this presumptuousness. They move to the South or West and promptly demand everyone conform to their ideals. They live self-satisfied lives until they happen upon locals, unaware of their presence, talking about how much they hate the guts of the newcomers. The Great White North, should seal its border and boot out any American Visa overstays.

        • You’re right, but it’s a particular kind of NEer. We regular northerners suffer by them too.

          And we talk. And it’s just as shocking to them.

          • Just for fun, Ep, shall we have a look at the Demographic makeup of NY since the first Europeans? Here’s the thing: NY never had “Puritans.” NY was founded by the Dutch and French missionaries. Even if you count Protestants, Most were non-conformists, not Puritans.

          • Yes. I know all that. It’s why Upstaters don’t like New England Puritan types. They have vivid memories of the Burned-Over District.

      • It’s payback! You inflicted Neil Young, Jim Carrey, Samantha Bee, and many other obnoxious lefties upon us.

      • Raymond said: “troublemakers will be allowed to freeze to death as they attempt to sneak across the border in sub zero temperatures.”
        We call that a win-win situation.

      • Canada learned their lesson from giving asylum to the Vietnam draft dodgers. On second thought, given their loose immigration policies since then, no they didn’t.

      • “When are American leftists going to realize that, with a few exceptions, most Canadians don’t want American crazies coming into their country.”

        Most Leftists “realize” than Canada=Toronto and/or Vancouver. I’d be surprised if any went there to live in the frozen sticks. It’s the same story everywhere, liberals taking over urban centers then vomiting dictats at the people who actually work the land.

        • Lots of shitlib Americans in Toronto.

          The lack of joggers really allows them to live a slutty lifestyle. I think their #1 achievement here is spreading their legs for Canadian men.

      • I have been wrong before. I didn’t think the Buckwheat Administration was going to pick up a second term, but they did.
        Who knows.

  52. The collective memory of people today is approaching zero. We all live in an eternal present with no past and no future. And I’m not talking about a lack of historical perspective, which has always been low for Americans. But actual memory. We don’t seam to remember arguments and facts from a week ago, let alone months or a few years. And we can’t forecast what the consequences of actions taken today will be tomorrow, next week or next month.

    It’s like we’ve woke up and find ourselves behind the wheel of a car going 60 on a highway with no idea how we got there, where were going or how the car is controlled.

    • The collective memory of people today is approaching zero.”

      That is mainly a consequence of living in an age of media saturation. Like a kid in a toy store, we are constantly throwing down one toy to grasp the latest one offered to us.

      • My Internet was out 90% of the time for the last 10 days and when it was ‘working’ SM and YT weren’t loading. I discovered that without the Internet everything in my world is normal. I saw clearly just how hateful,negative,savage,vicious and socially corrosive the Internet is.
        Not only did I get my peace of mind back my productivity level astonished me. To give just one example I read more in the last 10 days than I have managed in the last 18 months. It is depressing to realise that only an enforced absence made me give up the Internet as I had the deep desire to stay offline but not the discipline unfortunately.

        • Don’t mistake obliviousness for peace of mind. Certainly we all need to back away sometimes – the frustration of knowing it’s all going to hell while you can do almost nothing about it is maddening. But that feeling of ‘normality’ is the one ‘normies’ have – that of mindless ignorance and confirmation bias that everything will always be fine. You needn’t give up the entirety of the net – but you should have cancelled all social media years ago and you tube should be a limited, last resort.

          • In the Tom Cruise movie “Edge of Tomorrow” Cruise’s character is in a war fighting aliens. Every time he gets killed in battle (pretty much every day) the “game” is reset to the previous day and he starts over (kind of like Groundhogs Day). In one instance he decides to go AWOL and take a break. The aliens take over London and he is killed anyway.

      • That’s an excellent analogy. Candy is fun: but more than (perhaps) a single piece per day brings on more grief than good. Many wise people similarly advocate for a news diet. Reading a Z blog is, in my opinion, high quaity information. Sort of the equivalent of brushing and flossing at the end of the day 🙂

      • There is some decent neuroscience out there that suggests the neocortex rewires to assimilate internet based information–but at a serious cost to the ability to understand complex data in longer term context. Even worse for children that grow up on the internet.

    • That’s a terrific observation Dino, the explanation from nature of mind perspective is we have allowed our awareness to become so completely entangled with thinking, sensing, and perceiving, that awareness is hidden in the background, veiled by thought, sensation, and perceptions (seeing, hearing, tasting, smelling, touching.

      Untangle that egoic mess, recognize you are Awareness, you are that which is aware of all experience, but not made of thinking, sensing, or perceiving. Things exist, but you are.

      • Are you familiar with the teachings of Sri Raman a Maharshi,Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj on advaita vedanta? Have you read the “Ashtavakra Gita”? I found Vedanta too dry,or perhaps too advanced, for my taste and I have taken up Bhakti yoga. The sincere devotion towards a personally chosen deity is the quickest and the sweetest way towards Self realisation.I
        I mention all this because there is a spiritual vacuum in the West. Christianity is close to death in Western countries and while those trying to revive it are to be applauded for trying to restore a spiritual vision in the West their efforts will be for nothing sadly. I believe that Bhakti yoga can and should replace Christianity.

        • The discoveries of quantum mechanics of the last 15 years are discrediting matter, time, and space. Neils Bohr tried to tell us “everything we think is real is made of stuff that is fundamentally not real”.

          What I reject is the world’s fundamental religion of Materialism. It will be fully dis-credited just like the flat earth belief.

          God’s Infinite Being will be realized as the source of all being.

        • Sadly, sweet devotion to Jesus Christ has led me to to the self realization that your vision of yoga replacing Christianity is bat shit crazy. The West does not need the mumbo jumbo of a third world cess pit. I suggest you read something else when your Internet is down.

    • Collective memory is a quality of a People, not a hypothecated “nation of immigrants.”

      My own siblings have very different memories of our childhood. Normally its a sweet thing to reminisce about the olden days because they can offer up a different perspective and even unearth long-forgotten details of events. Many laughs.

      But it is also a reminder of the duress and chaos that we experienced as many of those disparate memories were due to being pitted against one another or as a defense and survival mechanism due to scarcity.

      Even with the kaleidoscope of time refracting our experience into very different individual plots and scenes we can come together to reconstruct a reality that we shared. Because, as we remind each other, we all have the same parents and grew up in the same house.

      Facts and truths have a way of eroding in time but what really serves the future is the shared belief in being a People. Now, that is mighty hard to reconstruct once it has been diluted by 70 million foreign siblings adopted in mid-life. Thanksgiving is a mess. In fact, its downright racist!

    • Regarding historical perspective, living in the present is often better than living in the past or future. Furthermore, history is not the study of the past, per se, but rather the study of present documents, which may not be complete or completely trustworthy. History is really only helpful if it can be used to alleviate current problems. Failing that, it simply becomes mental masturbation.

      • Tucker Carlson was hoping to study certain documents 🙂 Actually, this incident is, in my cynical opinion, a better example of how the real world operates. History may be written by the winners, but I’d suspect lot of the writings (or writers!) vanish before anyone read them 🙁

    • Spot on.

      How many remember the The rich dentist who killed “Cecil” the lion?
      That had the partisans -worldwide- in an uproar for a few weeks.

      • The list endless, but my favorite was probably that Koney…no, Kony guy in Africa somewhere. That feigned outrage came and went so fast I didn’t even have time to figure out what it was about.

    • I believe what you describe is a side effect of the Internet, smartphones, and social media.

  53. Let the genuine people carry the truth, honor, and decency in their hearts, while they accept the responsibility to act as a corrective force of the Universe.

  54. And the most glaring error the objectivists make, is to believe that partisans are like them.

    That they can live with them in a single country.


    1 The objectivists grow a pair of balls and start saying “No!”

    2 The objectivists separate from the partisans

    3 The objectivists prostrate themselves

    • Gotta be mostly based on sex

      Men trying to get women to like them, men pursue women, and women run until caught, but in this political drama the women do not want to be caught. Or maybe they do. Who the F knows

    • Yesterday I got stuck behind a Prius Hybrid going 17 in a 25 mph zone. Slow enough so I could take in the Harris/Biden, and other assorted local prog pol bumper stickers adorning the virtuemobile. When I was finally able to pass sitting behind the wheel was a grey-haired female, alone in the car, wearing a mask. I’m surrounded by partisans and under no illusion they can be reasoned with. They can, and should be, shamed. They really hate that.

      • Peabody, I think you’ve just won the war.

        They can, and should be, shamed.”

        The girlies are trying to get us to speak in their language, not ours.

        Guys throw a punch, but the girls don’t want to get beat up. They want drama and emotion, a hot relationship of attention and display.

        A courtroom soap opera. The verbal dominance display in bodice rippers, where she discovers she was wrong about his ardent passions.

        They seek the lion who roars; to choose who’s got a set.

        The punchery needs remain between guys. The rapery will happen behind her closed doors.

      • Prius Hybrid going 17 in a 25 mph zone.

        I don’t believe this.

        Prius drivers are the ones doing 30 over in a school zone and 20 under in the left lane on the interstate.

    • Zman has said for some time we in Our Thing need to place victory before building up a morality platform. That was hard to swallow at first, as a Christian. I see now, that he is correct. If we are to preserve Our People then we must make the shift from Objectivists to rabid partisans.

      We’ve reached many of the folks that can be persuaded by logic and facts and there may be more to be gathered but the time is coming to strike at the fear center of Our People. Jingoistic broadcasting of the myriad of POC crimes against whites, harrowing extrapolations of Our future displacement, and claiming martyrs for Our cause such as Cannon Hinnant and Kyle Rittenhouse.

      I’d love a strategy wherein cooler heads could be appealed to but emotion moves men. Anger, fear and love are the levers that move mountains. White men are already seeing the growing discrimination against them so making them feel they are not isolated will allow their anger to grow. Utilize a mother’s fear for her children’s future by painting pictures of how their white children’s futures will be dangerous and limited. Whites are already getting an unpleasant taste of what is in store for them with the rioting, gender dysphoria grooming, and loss of their trusted institutions and beloved celebrations.

      We must use exaggeration and hyperbole to further this awakening. The Left has already taught us that exacting truth is powerless when matched against repetition of message.

      As some have pointed out here in the past, we can use the Irish as a do and do not guide. In the negative column they stymied their movement with argumentative internecine conflict and ended up killing each other over home rule vs. independence vs. partial nationhood vs. all counties or nothing. Bogged down in objectivist arguments. In the positive column, they utilized propagandizing their martyrs, creating fear for turncoats, and appealed to love of their culture to combat what has always been a fractious people.

      We will have some difficulty getting the message out as MSM is fully arrayed against us but media trust among the American people is at an all time low so the time is ripe to begin pushing Our narrative forward and damn the hard facts.

      Metaphorically, I would love a standup confrontation between these forces of evil and Us. God is on Our side… but I dont think we get to choose the how of the fight. In a war to the knife, only jungle rules apply.

      When I think of my children, and your children, and what they will face in the coming years… I am willing to cast the niceties of logical argument and gentle persuasion aside and beg His forgiveness later.

      I apologize for my long wind.

      •  If we are to preserve Our People then we must make the shift from Objectivists to rabid partisans. 
        Exactly, who the f**k are the globalist leftists to have to justify yourself to them all the time, to always try to remain objective. How about headbutting(figuratively and literally) their smug faces from time to time.

        • You misunderstand my point, Sir. I am not interested in any intercourse with dedicated Progs, traitors and their POC pets. They have already chosen their master.

          Nor am I saying we should focus on justifying anything. Arguments to those that are persuadable by that means sure, but for the bulk I am saying appeal to their emotions: high moral points and Ben Shapiro “gotcha”facts be damned.

          Let’s also, as Z and many others here have said, not be bogged down amongst Ourselves with niggling arguments.

          Again, hyperbole, propaganda, anecdotal horror stories and appealing to love, hate and fear are the way forward.

      • We can keep our objectivity and still wield the partisan banner. For example, Lineman knows Trump isn’t really “our guy”, but his attitude is “fukkem, I’m voting for the guy”. Darn right. It’s a fight to the finish, use every tool and weapon at hand. You don’t need to give up what we know to fight the battle. IMO, keeping some form of objectivity in the mix is actually strengthening. We have a sound basis for what we are fighting for. Just don’t let the objectivity hold you back. When you go on, you go all in.

        • Exactly Dutch,
          On all fronts push for Ours. For those erudite few appeals to reason… but for most, a good firm hand on their necks to make them look at the horrors that are occurring and those that await us. With a dose of pride and support for them that are awakening and a realistic “what’s the least odious course” when it comes to politics.

        • This is my attitude to Trump. I actually don’t think Trump is as much of a degenerate as the Biden/Clinton/Epstein crew but hey, he was a NYC real estate developer and had a reputation as something of a playboy. He’s a typical alpha male, IOW. Talking to people here, I can admit his faults though. Trump isn’t THE solution but he’s part of it. It’s vital that we use his second term though to strengthen our positions, geographically and politically, and begin dismantling the Left’s power centers such as academia. I’d say we also need to take a page from the Jews and follow a policy of systematic revenge against the people who’ve wrecked our culture. Periodically throwing out some “red meat” to our lions keeps them strong and angry and boosts morale. It’s also helpful when key people in the media/tech/political machine are punished as it disrupts the enemy’s operations and effectiveness.

          The comment above about the Irish was also helpful. I see some of the same tendencies in the DR where people are fighting over what should be in the new Constitution, alliances with other racial/ethnic groups, etc… These are important questions but answering them isn’t needed to begin rolling back the Left and retaking territory or institutions. My handle partly alludes to this notion of “poz”. It’s vague isn’t it? yet somehow, like pornography, we know it when we see it, don’t we?

          As for the objectivity issue. It’s enough that we know that we have a correct view of human nature (HBD, sexual differences, etc…) We can use this knowledge to rally people to our side even without them needing to share that knowledge. Not everyone can understand the logic of the fight, but almost everyone can participate. Our side has the advantage in that we are at least giving people things to fight for that actually benefit them.

          • Trump is/was certainly not the same degenerate as Epstein. Nor is he a saint. He’s a product of his time. He’s done some good things and backpedalled on issues that might have made a difference to working people.

          • I’ll butt in Poz,

            Early Christians supported the pagan emperors Galerius and Maximian because they remembered the horrors of Diocletian’s pogroms against them. Pagans, but at least not Diocletian. Trump is not Our guy but he is a friendly or at least not a persecutor.

            As to Objectivity vs. Partisanship. They’ll always be a place for high minded speculation and eventually a time when creation will require objectivity. It should suffice that a watered down version can be used to help a greater number of Our People to awaken.

            Are the finer points of HBD easily digestible to masses of people at this point? No. But pointing out the endless examples of blacks choosing their deaths by cop because they threw a tantrum… well Joe Normal can understand that. He’s seen the videos. We can see the elements of HBD play out, the instant gratification need, risk/avoidance ratio, time preference, etc. We must learn to take the watered-down objective argument to more of Our People with simple applicable subjectivity.

      • I was raised Christian and while I am not active by any means, this took me a long time to overcome for similar reasons. Win first. Worry later.

        • Christ’s response to the pharisees and Pontius helped me bridge the hurdle.

          “Are you a king? Are you king of the Jews?”

          Jesus could have said “Yes, sure am. Your King too, Pilot.”

          He chose subtlety in order to prolong the process of his sacrifice to its necessary public display.

          “You say that I am.”

      • You’re absolutely right. Becoming “rabid partisans” will necessitate the development of a larger metaphysical vision separate and distinct from a drearily earthbound commitment to “facts and reason.” We’re not simply competing against alternative ideas and values; we’re up against a grandiose religion replete with saints and sinners. It takes romance to defeat that.

        • I like that. Romance. It implies passion. And passion above objectivity is what is needed here. Applied with a broad brush.

          • In that connexion, romanticism was, to a significant degree, a reaction to the Enlightenment.

        • The principal theme of Romanticism is suicide, and it works. We already have that.

          Its also how the Irish kept losing until a ruthless young banker named Michael Collins came along and said shoot them.

          They did, and they won- that way. That and decades of professional organizing by the IRB prior.

          But hey if Romance gets you off the couch OK. The closers will be ruthless.

          • “The principal theme of Romanticism is suicide”

            Not really sure where you are getting that.

            I think Ostei is referring to the Romantic movement in western culture. In art it was a return to classical themes, chivalry, the nordic sagas, Celtic and Saxon themes, and and Germanic folklore. Much of it tied to the romanticized past of each people experiencing the revival.

            Not getting the suicide thing.

          • Somewaht simplified view of history: no mention of WW1 ,support from the US and Germany .
            Biggest factor is that the Left has always supported celtic nationalism to screw with Britain.The current IRA policy is to kick out the Ulster Scots and import diversity.

          • To clarify, I meant small “r” romance, as opposed to Romanticism. I was conceiving of it in a much broader sense. The problem with strict objectivity is that it tends to be cold and inspires few beyond the hyper-rationalistic. Objectivity has its place, particularly in formulating strategy, but it must take a backseat to the dreams, horror tales, and epic dramas of ultimate victory that we should employ when endeavoring to convert emotion-driven normies. Right-wingers often get hunkered down in the nuts-and-bolts of various issues while their progressive opponents construct Utopia in their own (deluded) minds. We have to offer something equivalent — the lone caveat being that we retain an objectivist perspective behind all the pomp and circumstance.

            P.S.: As Michael Collins did, we should apply ruthless objectivity when dealing with mortal enemies. Enlist romance for recruitment and brutal realism for battle.

  55. Re: court packing

    If somehow Trump is re-elected, the GOP keeps the Senate and regains the House (very, very unlikely outcome–ain’t gonna happen–but play along), Trump should have McConnell eliminate the filibuster and pack the courts to the rafters. The fact it ain’t gonna happen proves your point.

    • A similar example. The NormieCons were enthralled with Ted Cruz’s interrogation of the Twitter CEO regarding tech censorship. They said Cruz “killed” the CEO with his questioning and got him to lie under oath.
      The Twitter CEO and the entire Left know that they are being “unfair” and “hypocritical” etc. That’s their plan. The NormieCons should be pissed off that Cruz and the rest of the GOP aren’t going to do a damn thing about it. Instead, they are distracted by a meaningless “victory.”

      • Yep. Burning with righteous anger means nothing if you keep losing. The right is constantly satisfied with being factually correct.
        The truth is, the tech CEOs are not concerned with being hypocrites or even breaking the law. Despite Cruz’s accurate calling out of Dorsey yesterday, today Dorsey will still be rich and powerful, no courts are going to pursue him and his company, and his his army of censors will advance a few more feet on the battle field.

      • It wasn’t even a “victory.” It was meaningless pantomime; sound and fury, signifying nothing.

      • The right move would have been to have him seized from behind his camera mid testimony and arrested. Then turn to Zuckerberg and ask “…so you were saying about censorship?”

    • If somehow Trump is re-elected, the GOP keeps the Senate and regains the House (very, very unlikely outcome–ain’t gonna happen–but play along).” Is too gonna happen, Jack. The GOP needs to flip only 17 seats to take control of the House. It’s GOING to happen. ( And remember, you heard it here first. 🙂 )

        • Uh huh. And, according to Nate Silver, the Hilldebeeste had a 95% chance of defeating Trump.

        • Yeah I also bought Trump winning when PredictIt was 5-1 against. It’s not accurate, but you can make money if you bet against the mainstream consensus, which is overpriced.

      • Dems are gonna steal it.
        Just like they stole Az senate and the 5 California house races in 2018. They also tried Florida but stopped there.

        Trump will win on election night, and we will watch his lead slowly evaporate. The supreme court will eventually rule in the Dems’ favour and then we get our permanent lockdowns, gun control, immivasion, and great reset. Trump isn’t our guy but you’re gonna look back on the trump days fondly once Kamala is in.

    • The House plays no role in confirming judges and the filibuster has already been eliminated for judicial confirmations (thanks, Harry Reid!) as as long as Republicans keep the Senate Trump is free to pack the court.

      I have been arguing with Normiecons that Trump should pack the Court in his second term. On first blush they resist the idea, but the light bulb tends to click on once you point out to them that Democrats have made it clear that they intend to pack the Court if they win the Presidency and the Senate, and there’s no reason not to take them at their word. Better to get the jump on Democrats than to play the role of Beautiful Losers again.

      I think Trump could find broad support for a plan to expand the Supreme Court to 39 judges with the rule that each of thirteen appeals courts will contribute three judges to the Supreme Court. The 39 judges would break down into three separate panels of 13 judges, one from each Circuit, to hear cases, so litigants would not know in advance which judges will hear their case. This would provide a much needed geographic diversity to the Court and would drastically reduce the importance of the Court in political decisions.

      If Trump wins and Republicans keep the Senate the Democrats will be facing the very real possibility that Trump could appoint five or six Justices. The Republicans hold all the cards here. They should offer a plan like this as a compromise backed up with a court packing plan if Democrats refuse to compromise.

      • Expansion of the Court would require legislative action. The House indeed would have to be part of it.

        • That is incorrect. Expansion of the Supreme Court does not require legislative action. The President has authority under Article II to nominate judges for appointment to the Supreme Court. There is no constitutional requirement that there be a vacancy on the Supreme Court for the President to forward a nomination to the Senate, nor is there any limitation on the number of judges on the Court. If the President nominates and the Senate confirms, then the judge is lawfully appointed to the Supreme Court. Period.

          The current size of the Supreme Court was established by law in 1869 and has been faithfully observed as a matter of custom, but Congress cannot limit by statute the President’s constitutional authority under Article II.

          • The original enabling act established a six-person USSC after the Constitution supplanted the Articles of Confederation. That enabling act originated in the House and was also adopted by the Senate. In 1837, to make certain there could be no tie, the House originated and the Senate also adopted an enabling act to expand the number of justices to nine. In the middle of the Civil War, the Court was packed to include ten members. The enabling act originated in the House and also was adopted by the Senate. The number was lowered back to nine after the Civil War. Again, the bill originated in the House and was then adopted by the Senate.

            The theory of a unitary executive who can use his Article II powers to change the number of justices has never been tested and probably would result in a second civil war.

          • Jack, with all due respect you are barking up the wrong constitutional theory tree. This is a straightforward separation of powers case; not a unitary executive theory case.

            Article III establishes the Supreme Court and the Appointments Clause of Article II explicitly allocates to the President the authority to nominate judges to the Supreme Court. Congress has no role in either of these functions. Congress cannot limit by statute the explicit constitutional authority of the President to nominate a judge to the Supreme Court. The constitutional check here is that Senate can, of course, refuse to affirm the nominee.

            Unitary Executive Theory would come into play in cases relating to the nomination of judges to lower courts precisely because these courts are creatures of statutory creation. Hence, Congress has a role to play and there can be disputes about the relative scopes of authority between the legislative branch and the executive branch.

            That this has not been tested yet has more do do with the fact that the U.S. has been a functional Republic throughout most of its history. Those days are gone. There’s no reason to play by the old rules anymore.

          • As to your last paragraph, no argument.

            You persuaded me to a large degree. Viewed strictly from a separation of powers analysis, you are correct. A president could announce he wants X number of Supreme Court justices, send them to the Senate, and there would be an up or down vote to confirm. Check, that. Enabling legislation has been used to determine specific numbers, as I think this through, because a future House could refuse to fund the additional expenses for the additional justices because the executive unilaterally decided to expand the court without funding considerations.

            But, yes, your point is right and additionally you are right about the unitary executive theory applying solely to the lower courts. The political considerations are the brakes, including the funding standoff I mentioned above.

      • It will never happen. SCOTUS is expressly designed to eliminate regional decisions. The aspect of decisions from a court subset, comprising only 1/3 of top judges would seem to violate that understanding. Additionally, you’d be taking on say 3 times the cases. Who the hell needs that? Finally, to screw with the Court breaks all understanding. The next political turnover it will be changed around again. And after a couple of go arounds lose any respect/credibility it may have once had.

Comments are closed.