One of the most important things the Left in America does in the culture war is convince their opponents to play the role of devil for them. The American Left operates like a religious movement, but one without an inherent purpose. That purpose must be supplied from outside the movement. It is like a beehive without a queen, always searching for a queen that will define the threat for them, so they can act on their nature and attack the enemy in what they believe is defense of the hive.
That is what these causes are for the American Left. The cause itself is meaningless, because that is just a plot device in the story. It is why they can be so callous to the people they claim to be championing. The Left is now attacking feminists who oppose allowing men in dresses to play girls’ sports. Progressives used to talk about girls playing sports like it was the most important thing ever, but men in dresses are now providing the devil, so trannies are what matter most.
This is something right-wing people of all types have never been able to accept, because right-wing people are wedded to bourgeois objectivism. There must be some practical reason for why the Left is doing something. Alternatively, in the case of the tranny-feminist conflict, the Right starts hooting about hypocrisy, as if that has ever mattered to the Left on anything. If facts and reason mattered to the America Left, the American Left would not exist.
What the American Left is all about is the devil, the great tempter. That last bit is the important part, because it gets to the heart of the matter. People join causes out of necessity, self-defense for example, or self-loathing. The former is a temporary condition forced on people by circumstance, like an invasion or some terrible natural calamity like an earthquake. The latter is a permanent state of mind. The true believer is always running from himself.
You see this in the latest left-wing fetish for disinformation. They have created a new form of shaman called the disinformation expert. The job of this shaman is to point out targets for the Left to attack. Disinformation, of course, is false information issued by an institution, like the media, which is intended to mislead. To be an expert in this craft is to have been in an institution practicing it. In other words, the point of this disinformation fixation is to shift the focus from the people responsible for it.
That is another thing that the Right has always missed. The reason the Left is always accusing others of things they are doing or have done is they desperately want to avoid having to even think about themselves. They are expert at deflection, because the Left is composed of people riddled with self-loathing. These are people who have organized their lives around avoiding any conversation about their nature. They instinctively shift the focus from themselves to others.
This is why a rich guy comfortably ensconced in the system can go on jihad against a 22-year-old young man on Twitter. Wajahat Ali issuing fatwas on Twitter against a kid working from his basement is ridiculous on its face. Ali works in Hollywood; he writes for the major broadsheets like the New York Times. Fuentes, on the other hand, is a kid working from zero institutional support. Yet, Ali and his wealthy audience are sure Fuentes is powerful and they are weak.
Now, Ali is just a grifter who should never have been allowed in the country, but his marks in the ruling class are true believers. They are rich and powerful people, holding positions of authority in the managerial class. His patrons, who use him like a shaman to direct these people, are also true believers. These people need an enemy, a devil onto whom they can focus their gaze. Otherwise, they are left to contemplate their loathsome selves, which is a fate worse than death for them.
This is why the tech platforms seem so incoherent in their censorship. They ban some people but leave others alone. It never makes a lot of sense until you realize that they want their enemies coming back on the platforms. They need their enemies in the same way normal people need oxygen. They keep creating new versions of their platforms in order to get more devils to attack. The chat site Clubhouse is the latest example of a site created to manufacture more devils to fight.
The reason our side keeps losing is our guys are stupid and keep playing the role of bogeyman for the Left. “They are going to call us [fill in name of bogeyman here], so we may as be [fill in name of bogeyman here]” is the mantra of the perpetual loser. It is the fuel the Left needs to survive. Whether it is responding to left-wing media or playing the role on their platforms, the right-wing response to the Left has been conditioned to feed into the innate desires of the Left and give them purpose.
Counterintuitively, the best weapon against the America Left is to speak clinically of the Left and about what motivates them. It seems like these lefty scolds want attention, but in reality, they fear the spotlight. The last thing they want to do is defend their motivations and actions. Alternatively, the best defense against these left-wing provocations is to ignore them. If Fuentes had not taken the bait, Wajahat Ali would not be flying around on his carpet right now as the coolest djinn on Twitter.
That is the thing the successful right-wing movement will accept. The currency of the Left is the attention from the Right. The Left needs an enemy, a devil, in order to have purpose to their lives. These are starving souls looking for grace, which comes in the form of attention from their enemies, real and imagined. The successful right-wing movement uses this reality to turn the tables, putting the leash on lefty’s neck, using his desire to be a good boy to its advantage.
A new year brings new changes. The same is true for this site as we adjust to the reality of managerial authoritarianism. That means embracing crypto for when the inevitable happens and the traditional outlets are closed. Now more than ever it is important to support the voices that support you. Five bucks a month is not a lot to ask. If you prefer other ways of donating, look at the donate page. Thank you.
Promotions: We have a new addition to the list. Havamal Soap Works is the maker of natural, handmade soap and bath products. If you are looking to reduce the volume of man-made chemicals in your life, all-natural personal products are a good start. If you use this link you get 15% off of your purchase.
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 sales@minterandrichterdesigns.com.
I had the most delightful time last weekend. My sister-in-law and her husband were in town using our ski condo for a family trip. They are hard-core Atlanta liberals. They believe so much in “science” and public education that their kids go to private school. lol
What is infinitely enjoyable to me is simply challenging their assertions that they are driven by science and the rest of us are knuckle-dragging yahoos. My wife was kicking me in the knee under the table trying to reign me in. I did a good job, and there was no yelling and screaming.
What was endlessly entertaining to both of us was how they would use the words “science” and “but the experts say” as their talisman from having to actually THINK CRITICALLY about any topic. They don’t have to think about why masks are stupid because Dr. Fauci and the CDC say so, and SCIENCE!
When my idiot brother-in-law brought up that he now wears two masks, I teased him if he puts up two chain link fences to keep the mosquitos out. He retorted that the CDC said it might help, so that was enough for him. My wife, not missing a beat, quickly replied, “Then why not wear three?”
The next morning walking down main street in the local ski town he was wearing his two masks, and I do not wear one outdoors. Ever. On the sidewalk was a sign from a local eatery that said, “Masks are like bras,” it continued, “They’re uncomfortable, but when you don’t wear one in public EVERYONE NOTICES.”
The point about the masks, therefore, isn’t public safety. It’s about compliance and peer pressure. They like putting that sign out because it says that anybody not wearing one is basically Satan.
I pointed at it, and asked, “Does anybody remember when bras were supposed to be burned?”
The idiot brother in law took off his two masks at some point, and I smiled and winked at him. But, since he’s a cuck, his wife reprimanded him, and he put it back on.
I long ago stopped trying to argue with people. I just tell them their ideas are stupid and crazy. If you can’t look between your legs and tell what gender you are, you’re a freaking lunatic. If you think math is racist, you’re just bat&&it crazy.
Over dinner the two of them kept asking why schools are so bad. This hurts their sensibilities. With two young kids, they have seen the disaster of public education first-hand. They cannot explain this away by blaming people like me. This is a program run by “their people”. “My people” already know the schools are awful, and many of us get outside help or just homeschool. So, they have no Devil to blame.
The husband kept asking me, “But why do they keep doing this? Why can’t it be based on ‘SCIENCE’!” I just looked at him and said, “You think science isn’t political. I can’t help you if you think ‘SCIENCE’ doesn’t have an agenda. You have to ignore everything you see and know. I don’t.”
The chainlink fence analogy makes no sense. The latest theory is that COVID rides on droplets. It’s not really under debate that surgical masks do stop some of those, that’s why medical personnel has been using these for over a century. All societal and political aspects aside, I find it quite sensible to wear masks inside public spaces like stores, even if it only decreases your chances of contracting the virus by less than 50%.
That’s not to say that how some liberals see their masks doesn’t defy all reason: something like a magic talisman and, naturally, a chance to publicly state their virtue. If they would really apply some serious thought to it, they would be kitting themselves up with gas masks and goggles. The charcoal used in gas masks absorbs almost everything in the atmosphere and daily filter expenses would be lower than what they used to throw away at Starbucks. But there’s no “expert” pointing them to this possibility.
Another great article! One caveat: I believe, due to the methods allowed to be utilized to discredit candidates in today’s political arena, we have been left with candidates that have little morals or ethics and therefore can survive the dragging through the mud and that is both parties! Our system is broken, many in office are working only for themselves and the theater you describe is just that, a show for us. The left and the right have slowly taken control of our country away from us and we were too busy just living life and let them. So, it is very much as you describe but the right is doing their part to drive the narrative as well. Way too many come out much richer after their time in office. Pray for grace and mercy🙏
I have nothing personal against Fuentes except that the f@gg@t blocked me on Twitter even though I have never interacted with him or his tweets. He must be employing some guilt by association blocklists. I read that a lot of people claim he has blocked them.
I have found that the attack that most drives the left nuts is to calmly point out that they are religious zealots and are members of a cult. They lose it or freeze when you point that out.
Doing so goes against their core self image which is a compassionate believer in science and facts.
Fuentes 👍👍
And I don’t follow him, don’t need to.
As for leashing the left that will require actual leashes ie chains, which means victory, which means force.
Ignore them they sweep the field.
Interesting article on OPT visa in Bloomberg (see link):
Describes how this visa was setup (illegal executive action by Bush II). Describes how this class of visa exploded in STEM job market (US student graduates BTFOed). Followed by C=complete failure by Trump admin to fix/regulate this issue.
tldr; Republicans politicians working super hard to cut the economic throats of their voters.
https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2021-opinion-optional-practical-training-problems-stem-graduates-deserve-better-jobs-opportunities/?srnd=premium
Pingback: DYSPEPSIA GENERATION » Blog Archive » The Lefty Devil
” … in the case of the tranny-feminist conflict, the Right starts hooting about hypocrisy, as if that has ever mattered to the Left on anything.”
The word hypocrisy should be drop-kicked out of the DR vocabulary. Using it against the woke titans is worse than irrelevant. Claiming radicals are hypocrites is to reduce the charge to a traffic-ticket offense.
Elite lefties live in gated communities protected against the black tide! Yes, but that’s a minor issue; it implies that everything would be good and plenty if only the ruling class were more democratic. The real crime is allowing joggers to rob and riot the rest of us without hindrance.
Lefty politicians demand we all wear facial shrouds but are spotted going maskless! But such hypocrisy is trivial compared to their guilt of exaggerating the toll of Covid and enforcing social isolation.
Shouting hypocrisy is a dud weapon and a way of avoiding essential confrontation.
If you’re not a bad person just be yourself, to hell with what they say. The problem, I suspect, is some people are hurt by the slurs and end up playing the role, thinking it’s the punk thing to do (which it is, in the other meaning of the word).
Lefty is being a bully, and ignoring bullies is a fine thing until they push too far.
You can be who you want. But you also can’t let other people define what you are called, especially if the name has moral implications. These two positions aren’t mutually exclusive.
Speaking as someone who was bullied growing up, there are more persuasive things than words, and if you practice patience until the insults become intolerable, others will see your ‘persuasion’ as justified and let it be— within reason, of course.
Painter, I feel sympathy for those who are bullied for their physical features. For example, when the TRS guys bully Johnny Monoxide for being short, my heart breaks. Or laughing at really homely girls.
But, do you think there is a healthy kind of bullying? I believe that bullying oversensitive people, fat people, or effeminate boys, while it is painful to the bullied, is overall beneficial to society.
Thoughts?
It helped me in the end, but I was bullied for being shy, and fighting actually built my confidence.
Yes, I think there’s a place for bullying. Some people are missing something that makes them incapable of taking social cues, and some low-level bullying when they’re being obnoxious is a language they can understand. Otherwise you get Revenge of the Nerds on society.
For many boys, it lights a fire under them to get tougher and be better, which is also a positive.
As long as nobody gets hurt and others will check the bullies when they take it too far, I think it can be good, but I think we’d need to rebuild a lot of the social capital we’ve lost.
Painter, I feel sympathy for those who are bullied for their physical features. For example, when the TRS guys bully Johnny Monoxide for being short, my heart breaks. Or laughing at homely girls.
But, do you think there is a healthy kind of bullying? I believe that bullying oversensitive people, fat people, or effeminate boys, while it is painful to the bullied, is overall beneficial to society.
Thoughts?
Z advises us not to play the devil for lefty. But what else is there to do? Locally organize, I guess.
At some point we have to occupy physical and cultural space or else all this talking is just talk. One can’t win by forever retreating and hiding.
Ultimately we must redact the people who control our media because they indirectly control our society.
It’s fairly direct, the control they exercise. Does any of the hysteria of the past 12 months gain a toehold without the daily firehose of panic porn?
We’ll have to purge the republican party leadership if we want to win anything (even if they can’t win nationally, we can still use their party organization for local efforts). They are corrupt imbeciles and cowards. What are they busy doing now in the Senate? Anything for their voters? Nope. They’re trying to cut the estate tax. Incredible. That tax affects a tiny percentage of mostly leftist and corporate billionaires. It doesn’t benefit 99% of their voters.
Nothing on censorship. Nothing about defending the honor of their smeared base. Nothing on anything the base wants. Just more fake theatrics on issues republican leaders don’t care about — all to get elected so they can serve the Left while their base languishes in misery. Just more tax cuts for leftists and corporations which overwhelmingly donate to democrats and push this cultural (and economic) poison on our society … and letting Joe Biden take all the credit for popular economic policies while they lose winnable elections as a result.
These idiot buffoons lost the Senate because they didn’t want to hand out one-time checks to their constituents (but voted for 3x that amount for corporations) and ended up with the checks anyway. Morons. Let’s see: A) pass checks, keep Senate OR B) don’t pass checks, lose Senate, get checks anyway. They need to go before they end up costing us everything (ex: Texas Senator John Cornyn is selling us out to the Left by co-sponsoring their domestic extremism legislation. They are worthless traitors).
This editing system is total shit. I’ve lost more than one long post, no error messages, no warning, no nothing. If you’re composing anything longer than a few sentences, I suggest you do it in a reliable word processor and paste it here.
Also, the system tends to label anything with a lot of links in it as spam. I’ve had a couple of really long, but interesting, takes on some subjects only for them to never make it through. I personally like well-written, longer takes. Having some kind of “more” function like Unz does would allow the people who want to read longer takes to do so without clogging the forum. Perhaps one day Z will migrate his blog to Unz, at least on occasion for certain articles as he does with Taki. Some subjects deserve in-depth commentary.
Z: “The Left is now attacking feminists who oppose allowing men in dresses to play girls’ sports. Progressives used to talk about girls playing sports like it was the most important thing ever, but men in dresses are now providing the devil, so trannies are what matter most.”
The whole paragraph that quote came from was good. But I don’t understand what “providing the devil” means. Is it a typo, or a phrase I’ve never heard? Maybe it’s a typo for “provoking the devil”. If so, it’s not just any typo, and must be fixed to top off an excellent passage.
“The Left is now attacking feminists who oppose allowing men in dresses to play girls’ sports.”
the left isn’t about promoting women’s rights, the left is about making icons out of degenerates.
The devil is the person who doesn’t like men in dresses. The ‘bigot’. At least that’s how I read it.
Clarification: providing the devil the left needs to exist. Get what you mean by ‘provoking’ though.
I hadn’t read the first paragraph which visits the theme of the Left needing a villain. So yes, Z obviously meant, “providing the devil”.
I think he means that the men in dresses are causing the devil to emerge in the form of anti trans critics thus giving the left something to attack.
This article doesn’t make much sense. Everything the Left does is logical if you look deep enough. If you think the Left is stupid, then why are they about to implement a permanent 1 party reign in spite of never winning a debate or championing causes that were popular with most people? If something is stupid but it works, it’s not stupid.
The Right could run Bernie Sanders for president, and he’d suddenly become a neo-nazi white supremacist who wants to put children in electric cages. Changing our tactics, or anything for that matter, because of what the Left might say or do about it is precisely why what the Left does is logical: weak people conform themselves to the insanity rather than face up to it. If ignoring Leftist mania while trying to debate them calmly worked we wouldn’t even know the Left existed, as that is what the boomers have tried since the start, with no success to show for it.
Well, there’s the ((Left)) and then there’s the Left. The ((Left)) most definitely has a plan, isn’t stupid and doesn’t need to create an enemy. The already have a permanent enemy: Us.
However, the Left is made up of people just as Z describes.
Yes, but the Left follows the lead of the (((Left))). The (((Left))) made us the enemy because they need an enemy too, far more than the Left does. Look at their history. As even (((they))) joke about, all of their holidays take the form of “someone tried to kill us for no reason, they failed, let’s eat.”
Before Trump it was Hitler. Before that it was Haman. There are many others in between that aren’t quite as famous, which shows they need an enemy to coalesce against. Else (((they))) fight each other, and vampires can’t feed on vampires.
If something is stupid, it’s stupid. I agree only that it may work in the short term, but can not be sustainable in the long term. An underlying theme here and elsewhere is always that the system being created by the Left *can not last* and must eventually collapse under its inconsistencies. What we seek, if not an end to this inward and downward spiral, is at least to escape it.
When is it simply going to collapse then? What if it doesn’t or what if the left continues on in control after it does collapse?
The USSR lasted about 70 years, collapsing mainly due to trying to compete with us and our subversion of their system through propaganda. It’s people knew there was something better.
Unstopped, what is coming is a global USSR that will have no competition or outside influence. The people will know nothing except what they are told. Even if it collapses in 200 years that is 200 years too long. And what arises from its ashes likely won’t be very pretty either…
The point about Leftist projection is a particularly good one, and the most obvious example is the matter of racism. Going on 60 years now, the most played card in the Leftist deck has been the race card. The Leftists, with increasing shrillness and absurdity, have been painting the white race as racist, particularly with regard to blacks. Indeed, as anti-black racism has become vanishingly scarce, the racist rhetoric has reached an increasingly febrile pitch.
The response on the Right, when not groveling mea culpas, has been to call Leftists “the real racists.” The Right pulls out some dull butter-knife like “the soft bigotry of low expectations” or some other pathetic tommyrot. The correct response all of these decades should have been to point out the bloody obvious–namely that Leftists are flagrant anti-white racists. Indeed, anti-white racism is far more common on the Left than anti-black racism is on the Right. Alas, the Uncle Calebs on the Right dare not go there even still. It is only on the DR where folks are finally grasping Leftist AWR and the projection correlated with it.
What happens when white people entertain both the notions that they are inherently and irredeemably racist (racist meaning against black people–because that’s what the left really means) and that blacks seem to be on the whole a net negative for any society that tolerates them?
I think there are going to be a lot of people that will be moving over to the race realism side.
I think this is gradually happening. What that portends for blacks is anybody’s guess. Best case scenario for them is that the Power Structure formally enserfs whites to prevent us from acting upon that racism in any way. Middle case, racist whites manage to create their own separate nation, and that means less gibs for the nuggras. And I don’t think I have to explain the worst case scenario.
I don’t believe there ever was wide-spread racism against blacks. I think segregation and other things were done mostly for reasons of practicality..
“The best defense against these left-wing provocations is to ignore them.”
That’s exactly what most people are saying about the two royal grifters. If Piers Morgan had followed your advice, he would probably still be employed.
In your vane, Karl, the Queen’s reply to the “interview” is nothing short of magnificent.
In the palace’s statement, the royal family said they were:
“…saddened to learn the full extent of how challenging the last few years have been for Harry and Meghan. The issues raised, particularly that of race, are concerning. Whilst some recollections may vary, they are taken very seriously and will be addressed by the family privately.
Harry, Meghan, and Archie will always be much loved family members,”
A Royal response worthy of a Queen!
Instead, when the diversity hire, mulatto weatherman threw Piers a bone by saying, “I know you’re not a racist,” Morgan was childishly giddy at this pat on the head and even volunteered that he’d be “very happy!” if his son married a groid. Really? What if she were a four-flushing cunt like Piers’s bête noir Meghan? It wouldn’t matter, you see, because she’d be his four-flushing cunt; a shield against all future arguments and a token of his goodthink status.
This is where I disagree with Z. We ignored far too much for far too long, and look what that’s got us. Silence is, functionally, complicity.
Ignoring his enemies REALLY worked well for Bush 43, didn’t it? He thought he was above politics, and exited office beneath contempt in the eyes of many. I prefer to deal with our leftist enemies with ridicule, which is certainly not my unique contribution. I don’t mean gentle humor; I mean sneering, scalding, eviscerating ridicule. I don’t know whether this will tip the balance in our favor, but it might galvanize those on our side and maybe even make some enemies see the light. At any rate there’s at least the visceral satisfaction in exacting retribution.
as someone who is lefty (or anti-conservative) on a lot of issues I can confirm this. I view the sort of Claremonster “American Greatness” type of conservatism as a sort of devil to fight against. But I’m still ideologically ambidextrous to the point where I like a lot of Z, TRS, Hunter Wallace etc.
I think the greater theme is a dislike of the sort of earnest “carelord” type of politics and someone who has an affinity for cranks, no matter what there ideology is.
“These are starving souls looking for grace.” – BINGO. The left is a works righteousness, Pelagic based religion, not a reformed one. It’s why they’re such busy bodies. And it’s so obvious where this came from, which is that first wave Methodist awakening in the early 1800’s. By the mid 20th God was replaced with the state. The modern left is a creation of a deformed version of Christianity. A now secular religion of busy bodies looking for salvation. The same scolds named Emily and Abigail are at work today. Only at least today they have empty wombs and cat condos in their living rooms. It’ll be the last generation that causes trouble. I guess we can thank feminism and birth control after all.
christianity grew into a weapon against whites the moment it abandoned all its pagan roots and chose to focus on the bible instead.
That fucking bible will be the death of us, it teaches kids to turn the other cheek and to love thy jogger as thyself…I meant neighbour .
Back in the days the bible was meant for the priestly class who used it to entertain the masses, manage their miserable lives and give them some hope.
That book is a god damn story, only a monk who dedicates his existence to studying christian theology(which is older than christianity and its pagan) and performs its esoteric rituals should follow it, not the attendees of Joel Osteen mega-church who carry the book and proclaim they speak for Jesus.
Pagans invented pelagianism long, long before Christianity came around. And as Christianity dies, we’ll be back to the same old human sacrifice of ages past. The Vikings were not what you see on Netflix. My own state will be ripping out the hearts of white people in an Indiana Jones style Temple of Doom scenario:
https://www.city-journal.org/calif-ethnic-studies-curriculum-accuses-christianity-of-theocide
being a christian heretic makes one a pagan? that could be a christian’s idea of heretic i guess.
sure, human sacrifice will make a comeback, talmud and hoodoos are all about that.
At the risk of putting too fine a point on it, this really reminds me of good/bad vs. good/evil. Bad can be reformed, mitigated, dominated, but isn’t really a mortal threat. Evil must be destroyed because it can destroy you.
The right has tolerated what it’s seen as bad ideas and behavior, although that’s changing. The left has long been on a crusade against evil.
I’d guess the grandparents of today’s lefties were the most pious and subverted Christians. You become like what you fear because you worship what you fear. Fearing evil (or an evil, transvalued god), as the weak would, instead of God (Who is truly strong and good), might’ve been the instrument of Christianity’s and western civ’s subversion. Just a hypothesis.
At any rate, it looks like we’re necessarily headed towards some kind of confrontation. As long as the right sees this as distasteful but necessary business, we’re good. If the right goes in fearing the left, we’re in trouble.
If you’re not a Nietzsche reader, it’s a great coincidence. You use several terms that are specfiic to his writings. I’m only a fraction through reading his books, but he has some controversial ideas, to be sure! Heroic, superior man (Zarathustra) or sheep-man. Master vs. slave religions. I can’t yet speak with authority on any of his points. Much of his writing would seem anti-Semitic, yet elsewhere he claims (or at least the writer of introductions claims) that he was pro-Semitic, or anti-anti-Semitic.
One claim I WILL make here, however (not sure if this came from Nietzsche): Good and bad, righteousness vs. evil, are purely human creations, in terms of a purely atheist, existentialist, or secular world-view. To be able to choose good vs. evil implies the existence of free will. Its existence is very much debated by philosophers. But consider the case of the animal kingdom: When a lion kills a gazelle, no rational human would term it “evil.” It is just part of the balance of Nature. Lions prey on gazelles, which eat grass. The herbivore browsings the grass is no more guilty of a sin than the carnivore killing the gazelle: they are just following the instinct of survival, Nietzsche’s “will to power.”
Of course, if we imagine a point of view (pretend you’re the Lion or the Gazelle), you might judge the predation as “good” or “evil” respectively. It is only human beings that were able to devise the concepts of “good” or “bad,” “righteous” vs. “evil,” “God” vs. “Devil,” and so on. As a non-theist, I claim that an Theistic claim of “pure” Good or Evil, all of which require supernatural entities (Gods, devils, demons, etc.) to be invalid, purely creations of the human imagination. But even if you disagree, it changes nothing. Call yourself “good” and me “evil,” and use any justification you like. It’s still an arbitrary standard, based on one you choose.
Yes, I agree that conflicts exist and will continue to exist.
Yep, Nietzsche has had a big influence on me, and current events have me thinking he got a heck of a lot right.
the predation as “good” or “evil”
Rather, one should use “good” or “bad”
“Evil” is a priest class reframing.
“Evil” is a slave’s reaction to their own impotence.
“Evil” can be a useful term to tar an enemy.
Perhaps. Nietzsche specifically distinguishes between “bad” and “evil.” I leave it to you to find the distinctions.
Bad can harm you, evil can destroy you. The difference is a feeling of powerlessness in the face of it. In other words, one man’s bad can be another man’s evil.
If I understand Nietzsche, the strong man has a well-founded belief he can overcome, and that powerful, life-affirming belief is what makes him see himself as good.
He’s talking about confidence and insecurity when you get down to it.
Unreason is not the sole property of the Left. The fundamental divide affects all human beings to one degree or another: Idealism vs. Realism, the world of the mind, or inside our minds, vs. the objective world, the world outside our minds. Clearly, both the of these “exist” in the sense that we think about them, are affected by them, and even can manipulate them. E.g. mathematics is purely an intellectual enterprise. Yet many branches of it model the real world to an uncanny degree. But man “discovered” its laws. We “discovered” that 2+2=4. Math works very well if we obey these laws (of arithmetic, in this case). Problems will arise if we begin to insist that 2+2=5.
On the other hand, for comparison choose one of the Left’s latest head-scratchers (e.g. claiming that a transvestite or even “transgendered” genetic male who now identifies as female should have full legal rights as a female) is poorly based on objective reality (ther presence of two XX chromosomes, the marker for a human female), and largely a mental creation, any hormone or surgery notwithstanding. Even the term “rationalism” allows for interior thoughts – emotions, feelings, etc. Problems arise when an individual or group assert their make-believe mental world shall be imposed upon the exterior world. This only works if the mental model (think of a scientific theory, or at least practical rules of thumb) closely describe and predict how the physical universe works. Alas, our ruling elite each day gets more unhinged from Reality. We can’t damage Reality, but we can certainly create much unhappiness in the process of attempting to overthrow her.
Correction: should be “XY”, “genetic male.” Please add back the edit feature if possible.
You nailed the difference between Left and Right. The Right accepts the fallen nature of man, and that we are sinners in need of repentance. We judge others for sure, but we also judge ourselves. The Left believes they are gods, and thus have nowhere to turn for salvation. Thus, they project their sins onto others, and seek to force their version of salvation on the others, rather than themselves.
You clearly believe that man is sinful and that he can be “saved” via religion (Christianity, I assume.) Unfortunately, religion is entirely the creation of man. Virtually all its claims and assertions are at odds with how the observed universe works. Nietzsche had this aspect right about Christianity: it demonized the strong the successful; it claimed to protect the weak, the failed. These may well be civilizing values, but ultimately they run counter to what Nature demands and pervesely, lead to a weaker people.
Yes, the Left has their madness. But is your version any better? Now, by no means am I saying that there are no rules, no standards. But the the worth of any rule or law can only be judged by evaluating how well it works in the real world, not by an appeal to authority, or to tradition, or to what we simply wished were true.
By all means, judge me, and judge others. Nature (or, if you prefer, God) will certainly judge by her/his standards. I can only speak for Nature. She is completely fair, but also indifferent. We will all get exactly what we deserve, on her standards, not by our wishes.
Christianity if observed correctly can be a benefit to white civilization. If not it is a scourge.
If the apostle Paul had preached that the Visigoths and the Huns must not only move to Rome but Rome must embrace them and deny “ Roman privilege” I don’t think Paul would have been accepted or would have lived long.
Christianity has been perverted in the modern age.
Now whether that is a built in danger of Christianity?
I would say maybe yes.
But Christianity can be beneficial in its non perverted form.
Since you speak for Nature, you should probably stick to that, because you clearly don’t understand Christianity. You have one thing correct, that religion is a creation of man. And like anything man created, it is an imperfect attempt to explain the sense of a God we have all around us.
It’s amazing to me how those who claim to speak for nature and science overlook the fact that Darwinian evolution failed to stamp out a belief in God, when those same people believe it makes us weaker as a species. Yet this belief persists in every culture that has ever been found. And if you can show me one place in the New Testament where Christ demonized the successful, merely for their success, I will eat my bible.
Matthew 19:24: “Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.”
Bon appétit.
The problem with Christianity is you can make it support almost anything.
To Line in the Sand: Clever, but no. He is talking about the love of money corrupting souls. Your quote only supports your position if you think the only way to be successful is to be monetarily rich. It is very difficult to be rich and maintain a humble spirit, putting God and others before yourself. Look around at most rich people and then tell me he is wrong.
Human beings are not gazelles or lions. Murdering defenseless men, women, and children is evil. Failing to show up for work on time is bad. Nietzsche, who appealed to fascist/Marxist technocrats(with catastrophic results), is dead.
This is why we lose. Do you want to win?
I suspect this is the dividing line over religion. Do you want to lose on Earth by fighting with your hands tied behind your back to please God or do you want to win on Earth? I want to win on Earth.
I don’t see a resolution to this divide, although Christians in the past were quite brutal. I assume that lots of “innocent” muslims and j3ws were slaughtered during the defensive Crusades and I don’t regret that in the least.
What you (and every other theist, idealist that ever existed) overlook is that Man IS an animal, a creation of Nature fully subject to all the laws of Nature. Now Man is special, in the sense that we have this thing called a brain, intelligence (religion would call it a “soul”) that gives us advantages over other beasts. Civilization has been described, accurately I’d say as a rebellion against Nature. As such, Man says it’s “bad” or “evil” for example, to use your example, to kill innocents. In general animals don’t do that (exceptions exist). Many higher animals are quite intelligent. Not as much a man surely, but intelligent enough to show surprisingly complex behaviors. We normally don’t ascribe human ingenuity or evil motives to other animals.
Your “murdering” the defenseless is an excellent example of the conflicts of moral values that Nietzsche brings up. In virtually all times and places, most, even the Super-man, might well agree that senseless slaughter is, well, senseless. But here’s where N. (and higher animals) must part company with the Sheep, the advocates for the weak: there are “rational reasons, in terms of genetics (favor one’s own offspring) to kill off competitors. This is precisely what happens sometimes with higher animals. A male defeats another male. He gains a female as a mate. He may kill off the young that his predecessor fathered. Gory, yes, but these being animals, man has no right to judge. You know where I’m going with this…there are plenty of examples in history where a victor made a point to hunt down and kill any of the old royal line. Another slightly different example, to me, less morally troubling: survival situations where there aren’t enough resources to save everyone, so some people must be left to die (lifeboat with not enough seats, etc.) In this second case, “murder” would be the incorrect term, “manslaughter” is more apt. But you still can’t escape the problem that, in exceptional cases, the choice may come down to half of us die, or everyone dies. Lesser of two evils, and all that.
Of course Nietzsche isn’t the last word on human ethics and morality. Many of his
observations are shocking. As they should be. He was setting out to attack what he saw as weaknesses in morality, religion, society and so on. “What is more harmful than any vice? – Practical sympathy for the botched and the weak – Christianity…” (The Antichrist, ch. 2)
“Mankind surely does not represent an evolution toward a better or stronger or higher level, as progress is now understood…the process of evolution does not necessarily mean elevation, enhancement, strengthening.” He then says that in isolated cases, “a higher type” will appear, and even “whole races, tribes, and nations may occasionally represent such lucky accidents.” (Ibid. Ch. 4)
[Christianity] “has waged a war to the death against this higher type of man, it has put all the deepest instincts of this type under its ban, it has developed its concepts of evil, of the Evil One himself, out of these instincts – the strong man as the typical reprobate…Christianity has taken the part of all the weak, the low, the botched; it has made an ideal of antagonism to all the self-preservative instincts of sound life; …” (Ibid. Ch. 5)
Earlier, someone says Christianity got corrupted. Others would say it can be twisted to whatever desired end is desired. Nietzsche would agree that religion got corrupted. A young vigorous nation has (creates, he’d say) a vigorous healthy god that upholds the values of the “higher man.” “A nation that still believes in itself holds fast to its own god. In him it does honour to the conditions which enable it to survive to its virtues…” (Ibid. Ch. 16). Eventually, the sheep people take over, gradually turning the god into the slave religion. Now the god is only the god of the “good,” which N. says are actually the “weak.” The culture has fallen into “decadence.” (Chs. 16, 17).
Here’s a bit that could applied to today’s essay: the make-believe vs. the real world. While N. is trashing Christianity, obviously his critique has broader applicability: “…it is of little consequence whether a thing be true or not, so long as it is believed to be true. Truth and faith: here we have two wholly distinct worlds of ideas, almost two diametrically opposite worlds…when faith is exalted above everything else, it necessarily follows that reasons, knowledge and patient inquiry have to be discredited: the road to the truth becomes a forbidden road.” (Ch. 23)
N. makes a colorful case about Christianity’s origins. Of course, it came from the Jews. He blames them for creating the original slave religion (but he doesn’t use that term here, Antichrist ch. 24) . He develops this idea more in his Genealogy of Morals. Later, Saul of Tarsus, better known as St. Paul, took the early Christian ideas, mixed in some Greek thought (Plato especially), and viola, something resembling modern Christianity.
“Was Paul crucified for you?” (1 Cor. 1:13) No, but he did write a good bit of the New Testament and is largely responsible for bringing Christianity to the rest of the world.
OK, this post has gotten entirely too long. And yes, you’re right, Nietzsche is dead. But so, he famously said, is God.
[Part 1]
What you (and every other theist, idealist that ever existed) overlook is that Man IS an animal, a creation of Nature fully subject to all the laws of Nature. Now Man is special, in the sense that we have this thing called a brain, intelligence (religion would call it a “soul”) that gives us advantages over other beasts. Civilization has been described, accurately I’d say as a rebellion against Nature. As such, Man says it’s “bad” or “evil” for example, to use your example, to kill innocents. In general animals don’t do that (exceptions exist). Many higher animals are quite intelligent. Not as much a man surely, but intelligent enough to show surprisingly complex behaviors. We normally don’t ascribe human ingenuity or evil motives to other animals.
Your “murdering” the defenseless is an excellent example of the conflicts of moral values that Nietzsche brings up. In virtually all times and places, most, even the Super-man, might well agree that senseless slaughter is, well, senseless. But here’s where N. (and higher animals) must part company with the Sheep, the advocates for the weak: there are “rational reasons, in terms of genetics (favor one’s own offspring) to kill off competitors. This is precisely what happens sometimes with higher animals. A male defeats another male. He gains a female as a mate. He may kill off the young that his predecessor fathered. Gory, yes, but these being animals, man has no right to judge. You know where I’m going with this…there are plenty of examples in history where a victor made a point to hunt down and kill any of the old royal line. Another slightly different example, to me, less morally troubling: survival situations where there aren’t enough resources to save everyone, so some people must be left to die (lifeboat with not enough seats, etc.) In this second case, “murder” would be the incorrect term, “manslaughter” is more apt. But you still can’t escape the problem that, in exceptional cases, the choice may come down to half of us die, or everyone dies. Lesser of two evils, and all that.
Of course Nietzsche isn’t the last word on human ethics and morality. Many of his
observations are shocking. As they should be. He was setting out to attack what he saw as weaknesses in morality, religion, society and so on. “What is more harmful than any vice? – Practical sympathy for the botched and the weak – Christianity…” (The Antichrist, ch. 2)
“Mankind surely does not represent an evolution toward a better or stronger or higher level, as progress is now understood…the process of evolution does not necessarily mean elevation, enhancement, strengthening.” He then says that in isolated cases, “a higher type” will appear, and even “whole races, tribes, and nations may occasionally represent such lucky accidents.” (Ibid. Ch. 4)
[Christianity] “has waged a war to the death against this higher type of man, it has put all the deepest instincts of this type under its ban, it has developed its concepts of evil, of the Evil One himself, out of these instincts – the strong man as the typical reprobate…Christianity has taken the part of all the weak, the low, the botched; it has made an ideal of antagonism to all the self-preservative instincts of sound life; …” (Ibid. Ch. 5)
[Part 2]
Earlier, someone says Christianity got corrupted. Others would say it can be twisted to whatever desired end is desired. Nietzsche would agree that religion got corrupted. A young vigorous nation has (creates, he’d say) a vigorous healthy god that upholds the values of the “higher man.” “A nation that still believes in itself holds fast to its own god. In him it does honour to the conditions which enable it to survive to its virtues…” (Ibid. Ch. 16). Eventually, the sheep people take over, gradually turning the god into the slave religion. Now the god is only the god of the “good,” which N. says are actually the “weak.” The culture has fallen into “decadence.” (Chs. 16, 17).
Here’s a bit that could applied to today’s essay: the make-believe vs. the real world. While N. is trashing Christianity, obviously his critique has broader applicability: “…it is of little consequence whether a thing be true or not, so long as it is believed to be true. Truth and faith: here we have two wholly distinct worlds of ideas, almost two diametrically opposite worlds…when faith is exalted above everything else, it necessarily follows that reasons, knowledge and patient inquiry have to be discredited: the road to the truth becomes a forbidden road.” (Ch. 23)
N. makes a colorful case about Christianity’s origins. Of course, it came from the Jews. He blames them for creating the original slave religion (but he doesn’t use that term here, Antichrist ch. 24) . He develops this idea more in his Genealogy of Morals. Later, Saul of Tarsus, better known as St. Paul, took the early Christian ideas, mixed in some Greek thought (Plato especially), and viola, something resembling modern Christianity.
“Was Paul crucified for you?” (1 Cor. 1:13) No, but he did write a good bit of the New Testament and is largely responsible for bringing Christianity to the rest of the world.
OK, this post has gotten entirely too long. And yes, you’re right, Nietzsche is dead. But so, he famously said, is God.
Lincoln, for all his faults, understood that a common religion (Christianity, and Protestantism in particular) was one of the draws that kept a nation like the US together. “Mystic chords of memory”…very evocative of a deeper spiritual meaning.
The Left is creating a new religion with an ever changing old scratch. But I’m fairly certain our thing is going to need something similar.
“We are not enemies, but friends. We must not be enemies. Though passion may have strained, it must not break our bonds of affection. The mystic chords of memory, stretching from every battlefield and patriot grave to every living heart and hearthstone all over this broad land, will yet swell the chorus of the Union, when again touched, as surely they will be, by the better angels of our nature.” — Abraham Lincoln
I wonder how his words resonated in the South after 1860?
A New Tomorrow (cont)
The power in one.
Election 2020, an estimated 160 million votes cast, epic & fatal fraud, and any single voter was vanishingly trivial at best. And in a bygone era of government mediocrity and muddle-through civic indifference, that reality would not amount to much. But those days are gone and the race to the bottom has begun. So what can be done? Everyone possesses the power to control his or her own thoughts, decisions, & actions. There is no ambiguity about that; only choices to be made. And the wiser the choices, the better the odds of achievement and survival. When the time comes to get your ass off the couch, choose wisely.
Yes, is it to the fridge for ice cream, or to the pantry for pretzels?
Fortunately, because the left goes from crisis to crisis, we get lots of chances to practice not responding within the framework they’ve set up for this. You see this with the smart fraction of conservatives shrugging off Republican electoral losses, and now with the same people shrugging off the Royal Racism story. Officially approved conservatives will go with the “Dems are the real racists” like they have a million times, for the same reason some con will stand up for the new fish in prison being extorted by the heavily-tattooed psycho demanding one-hundred percent of their commissary. The good con and bad con are working together against the mark. Don’t vote, don’t argue, don’t comment, don’t donate, except where you think it can do good, which is definitely outside of the traditional media ecosphere. The correct response to every political subject broached by a leftie you know is, “I don’t care what you think and I have no hope or desire to convince you of anything.”
Normie Con stops bringing us this crap (and hopefully starts thinking) when these kinds of conversations take place:
Normie: Did you see where Mark Cuban wanted to end the National Anthem?
Me: It makes sense. It’s not his country. But it’s not ours anymore, either. Let’s end the anthem and the country.
Normie Con: Did you see the crap about the royals being racist? Man, look at how much charity work they’ve done!
Me: I don’t think they’re racist. They lack the pride and dignity of their forebears who recognized the greatness of the Anglo Saxon race.
I’ve weaned at least one friend away from Dinesh D’Souza and onto Jared Taylor, which is a step in the right direction. Initially he had to start every progress report on his reading with the disclaimer, “Man, this guy’s smart but he’s racist,” but he’s discontinued the charade after recognizing I’m not his enemy.
“Normie Con: Did you see the crap about the royals being racist? Man, look at how much charity work they’ve done!”
I just had this conversation with someone, someone who ought to know better. My answer was “She should be glad she’s not living in a mud-hut and that she wasn’t shot the second she entered Great Britain”
Who the hell cares if they are racist or not? No non-British should even be in their vicinity. If they would just go the hell home, then the royal racism couldn’t affect them, now could it.
YouTube has been suggesting tons of nig channels to me, and I have enjoyed marking them as “do not suggest”. I agree with your comment 100%; there is no profit in engaging a leftist, and you run the risk of muddling your own thinking.
U-tube has noticed that I’m an evil right wing devil. They use this knowledge though, to do two things: 1) Find me new and interesting DR and DR adjacent videos, 2) On rather rare occasions they try to slip in some Lefty videos (for “balance” I suppose). I just chuckle and mark them “do not suggest this channel” too. It feels good to do that. I like the satisfying feeling of clicking that option. Another blow struck for freedumb!
In fact, I sometimes wonder if the tech giants are playing all of us, Left and Right with their cancel culture games. Cancel culture itself has become a giant soap opera. Who will get banned today? Who will get a second “strike”? Will they let so-and-so back on? Even this game of poking guys like me with Lefty videos in a way that actually gives me a little mental boost (when I reject the channel). Is it all just a giant psy-op based on the research of Pavlov and what’s been learned about how casinos keep people gambling?
Youtube banned me for hate (truth) speech.
I didn’t even have a youtube channel. I just had an account that allowed me to comment..
Welcome to the club. Last week in our community, one of the neighbors sent letters to everyone suggesting that we join the NextDoor channel. I wrote and dropped off a hand-written reply that went something like this: “Dear X, Thank you for your invitation to join NextDoor. Unfortunately, I must decline. NextDoor censors free speech and open debate. As a private platform, they of course have that right. And I have the right to refuse to participate, I refuse to give them my consent.”
“…something right-wing people of all types have never been able to accept, because right-wing people are wedded to bourgeois objectivism. There must be some practical reason for why the Left is doing something..”
Guillty as charged, however, once it dawned on me there truly is no practical reason for whatever The Left says and does on any given day of the week – it’s less frustrating and a bit of a relief to not be goaded into a further outrage ramp up.
That tomorrow’s fatwah will be more irrational than today’s may be amusing, but first and foremost to be ignored.
Modern life is easy.
Constant, hard, physical labor is unknown to most of the readers of this blog (except maybe Lineman).
Most “work” today for the upper middle class involves reading, staring at a screen and talking on the telephone. A woman can do all of those things. A woman LIKED doing those things. What does that make a man who does such work?
If we are not burning in the sun, freezing in the cold or covered in blood, we are not men. Our “equal pay for equal work” women KNOW this and reject us.
I think we have it worse than our ancestors. Divorce, porn, protestants, Unitarians, Liberalism, sodomy as a sacrament.
Its like we live in a SAT question with 100 wrong answered and 1 right one.
We were made for the Truth. Not for hard labor necessarily. If the truth is obscure, and lies promoted in its place, we are poor indeed!
That is a great post. We assume that because we are richer and healthier than those who have gone before, that we are happier than they were. But is that really the case? The vexations of postmodernity, while usually not fatal, make up for that non-lethality in their psychic harm, multifariousness and ubiquity. Life in 1821 may well have been better than life in 2021.
I have been building (in the first person) my retirement home for going on two years now largely because everyone who can swing a hammer is locked up by the big developers in the valley. And anyone who wants join me in this physical labor (hanging drywall next) is welcome to join me. Free food and opportunity to sweat abound. We’re not all wimps banging a keyboard and I run into hard men every day who do physical labor routinely on nearby ranches. And almost all of them are reticent, reserved, and not to be trifled with. And the local shooting range is top notch and free use. Americana still exists, just not in the big city.
During most of my working years, I fit that description to a “T”.
I’m currently reading Nietzsche: Church-goers will justly dislike him for his not very kind comments on religion in general and Christianity in particular. However, his many comments on women mark him as a world class chauvanist. The majority of our readers here are hairy, muscular, knucle-dragging macho males, am I not correct? I’d bet that you’d agree with 99% of what Nietzsche says about women. More broadly, he bemoaned the civilizing (taming) of Europeans, especially Germans, in the 19th century and the push for equality — including for women. All the more remarkable that he was writing this stuff a century and a half ago.
I’m looking forward to reading nietZsche. However I think the church knows better than anyone women s place. It raised them up from slavery, but has always understood their proper role.
I don’t see how how society can’t dimply discourage women from working except for rare exceptions. Its possible
Moe, if you only recognize “hard, physical labor” as authentic then enjoy your primitive serfdom. I kind of appreciate the light bulb and indoor heating.
I do agree that no man can be a man without having worked himself to physical exhaustion but you are saying much more than that.
How do you know what people here do?
Perhaps he’s one of our Fed “minders” and was so bored by today’s poasts that he started reading our dossiers.
I am reading about the English civil war in some of my spare time. The damn puritans needed a devil. Charles kept playing the role.
The puritan culture is still here and combined with secular judaism now they are very busy in 2021 looking for devils.
Avoid them, build up our own culture and movement, until we can banish them to the tower and not them banish us.
Oh, I think I’d settle for an Oliver Cromwell and a Newer Model Army.
Fun fact: The Puritans who went to the New World were so religious that even their fellow worshipers were happy to see them go. (Many went back to joint the English Civil War).
Of course we must build our own movement, but don’t think for a second it won’t immediately be painted by the Left as the Arch-Devil. And ultimately, that movement may indeed have to become the Left’s worst nightmare.
….which would be a dream come true
I never engage with leftist morons.
If they pull out the racism / sexism / any general idiotic card I just walk away. I don’t try and explain how I’m actually not racist. Without somebody to debate they’re alone with their miserable selves, yelling at the clouds. It’s the classic “so when did you stop beating your wife?” trick, over and over.
They also crave legitimacy and having what they see as the moral high ground. I patently reject any of that and again act like they’re a nobody and walk away.
I speak directly to my people and those on the fence. I do not waste time with aliens or those who want to destroy me.
Try arguing FOR racism.Look it up i the dictionary racism is good! That shuts them up!
Also, separation. “Sounds like we should live in different countries so you can have sodomy and abortion, and we can have our miniature flags and shooting ranges.”
As much as Rush was a Civnat, he consistently say that the left are experts when it comes to projection, that projecting what they are actually doing to what they claim the right is doing. The foreign government interference in elections for example (claiming Trump was a tool of Russia, while the Bidens and the left were/are actually tools of China). Same with 2016 election fraud on the part of the GOP. Bogus, but look what the left did in 2020 election. And of course the vaccines. For decades “my body my choice” has been the mantra of the left against the evil right trying to restrict abortion, but now the left is projecting the right as evil for even thinking about something so selfish and evil as thinking your body belongs to you. Quite remarkable actually.
“They can ban people if they want, they’re a private business”
I feel damaged. I want Zuck and Jack to bake my cake, then.
“putting the leash on lefty’s neck”
How about a knee?
Some clarification please, Z. Suppose I am challenged for being a ‘white advocate’ and that I am indeed a ‘white advocate’. Could I not just say to the leftist that I am a white advocate, so there. Or is this an example of ‘perpetual losership’ – it certainly is fuel for the leftist fire, but it is also correct. And feels good, because it takes courage.
My issue is that, whilst I agree about your method of turning the spotlight on the scum, at some point I would like to be frank about what I am. Especially as the leftist will always find a new devil. Even if I adopt your position (turning the spotlight on them), they will eventually find a new devil (‘So, you’re a dog enthusiast?’, ‘So, you’re a keen gardener?’)… it’ll go on and on. At some point, many of us (I have already reached this point, as has everyone here) just have to say: ‘I am X, go to hell!’.
I suppose that it could be argued that my approach indicates a lack of understanding of the leftist mindset. I don’t think so. I think it has more to do with the want of the right wing mind to want to proudly wear their convictions on their sleeves… for better or worse.
Anyway, I thoroughly enjoyed this essay, and will be forwarding it to a few people. It is a great primer on the leftist mindset.
Orange Frog – I totally agree that we must not deny our beliefs out of fear of leftist outrage. Deliberately provoking that outrage (i.e. dressing up like the SS) is unnecessary, while the best strategy is not engaging with the leftist at all. Fuentes chooses to be on Twitter, a platform created by and owned by the left. I don’t do any social media. I don’t have any leftist friends. I tend to go around with a glare on my face (due to all the damned diversity) so I haven’t had anyone approach me to strike up a conversation, political or otherwise. But if I were to be in a situation where the topic arose, I would never deny my beliefs. I won’t accept the vague term ‘rayciss,’ however, or any label chosen by an enemy. I would simply state that, in accordance with nature and God, I put my own children and people first. And never forget that the best defense is a good offense. If any sort of engagement is unavoidable, attack them first – not with wobbly words like ‘hypocrite.’ Call them unnatural, alien, cretinous – whatever seems to sting most (and I find using the richness of the English vocabulary, when most people are morons, irritates them immensely). Or simply eye their hideous physiognomy up and down, snigger, and walk off.
My dear, I agree with your methodology one hundred percent. I too try and avoid leftists like the plague.
This, from you, a joy:
“Call them unnatural, alien, cretinous”
The word ‘cretin’ is an excellent weapon to bear from time to time. I also like ‘Godless’ and ‘debauched’.
“I would simply state that, in accordance with nature and God, I put my own children and people first.”
Nice. By using “nature” you throw a spanner in the works. There’s an element of “Science!” to that word that will confound them.
This is a great point. Explaining family and loyalty i is hard to argue with
I agree with 3g4me. I now generally avoid Progressives or if in the same room, just don’t talk politics, which wasn’t true in the past. They’re hopeless and engaging them just gives them sustenance.
However, if asked directly about some topic, I give some variant of “not my people” and move on. It kind of unnerves people, especially when you’re very calm about what you say.
Having a clearly defined people makes so many discussions almost unnecessary. Immigration, crime, etc.
Progressions, of course, get angry that a White admits to having a people, but that’s there issue. I have a people, they don’t.
Yes. White race-traitors have forfeited their whiteness. They’re no longer our people. And they’re nobody else’s people either.
Rootless cosmopolitans: those without tribe or nation are prey animals in a herd of one, easy meat for the cooperating foreign predators.
The key point being that Leftists do not need us to play the part of the Devil; they are more than capable of conjuring him ex nihilo. See, for example, the White Supremacist panic.
Outstanding, Z.
It took me a lifetime to get that through my thick skull. I’m not kidding either. I was the family Archie Bunker for decades. Finally I wised up and just walked away. When some lefty opens up on me my response is “fuck you – go run your mouth at someone else”. There is nothing you can say, no argument that will work, no hope of convincing them. The only reason they will approach you is to smell your butt and see if you are part of the pack. They will accept allies, but what they really want is a fight.
It’s a load off, let me tell you! My shitlib family run their mouths, I’m sure, but they do it behind my back now. It no longer hurts, it no longer matters…and without the family bogeymen… yeah, those guys are stuck looking at themselves… and they don’t like what they see. We saw that yesterday
There are two kinds of lefty: the Crafty Cynic (CC), and the Perpetually Outraged (PO).
CC is the corporate lefty who wants his left wing idealism replete with mansions and private jets. He’ll do or say whatever it takes to be a cloud person. He’s the monster who greases the political wheels and keeps the gravy train running…the man behind the curtain. His core beliefs are progressive, for sure; but he’s willing to compromise if he can preserve his fortune. CC definitely does not want to gaze upon the societal wreckage he leaves behind. It’s a nasty picture.
PO has mental problems. Do not discuss anything with PO. Stay away from PO. PO will never be successful at anything in the private sector. He needs that government job or that pension. He’ll always bite the hand that feeds him.
Having worked in both the private sector, as well as a public labor union, I can attest to this. Although to be fair, I cannot use the construction union I was in as a barometer due to the fact that construction jobs are quite different than say the SEIU. On the job site, if you don’t know what you’re doing, you go home. There simply is no place to ‘hide” you and other guys on the job site will not carry your water.
Other unions are different. I was in during the ’92 election and although I kept my mouth shut about politics at work, I listened a great deal and very few people I worked with were going to pull the lever for Clinton. These guys wanted Buchanan and were royally pissed off at what the GOP did to him.
A year later I found a job in the private sector at what used to be Readers Digest and it was like night and day. Time is money and you had better not waste either. malcontents were sidelined and then fired. There was a janitor who was always wearing a tee shirt that had a picture of a statue of some Pharaoh, as well,as the pyramids and it had a caption that read, “Before there was U.S. History, there was black history.” Our nickname for him was “Homie the clown” because he was bald in the center of his head and had a ‘fro on the sides and back and he looked ridiculous. Anyway, one day he sidled up to a young woman at one of the vending machines, trying to make time with her, but she wasn’t having any of it. He got flustered and mouthed off to her and she kept very cool. She took one look at his shirt and said, “So you built the pyramids huh? If you’re so smart, why are you mopping the floors here?” and she walked off. He was gone that afternoon. Of course nowadays we all know that that woman would be ruined for life, but it does demonstrate how far we’ve fallen. At one point before that company went public, they were the #3 fortune 500 company to work for in the U.S., now I believe, they’re extinct.
Thats why I only go with self-rule. I dont argue with them that Jaun who cant speak 10 words of English has a “right” to be here.
I say, its time to go our separate ways. Lets get our own territory.
There’s nothing to say to that, except, “oh no you dont!” Then we have a real war, not trying to convince brainwashed psychos to our side…
The ghost of Nietzsche would approve! ‘self-rule” and “own territory” would be marks of the Hero, the successful man, who carves out his own destiny.
(The mysterious software wouldn’t let me post the “Part 2” of my lengthy essay above, but it’s allowing short comments. Interesting…)
Introspection is absent on the Left for any number of reasons, and while self-loathing is among them it is further down the list than implied here. Hubris and religious faith allow the Left to be hypocrites more than anything else. Believing things is much more important than doing things. Such a low commitment religion increases the need for a Devil. So believe things, hate a d blame the devil, and be oblivious to personal behavior a d a leftist is totes OK.
You are exactly right about ignoring the Left and limiting any response to a clinical, sterile analysis, though. Response is oxygen for the narcissist. Ignore them, separate yourself as much as possible from them. Gabe’s flaw is that it allows leftists to participate. Any forum that includes leftists should be avoided. Much like minorities always will follow Whites and ruin their environs because they are incapable of building a civil society, progressives are camp followers of the Right because isolated among their own self-reflection might happen. Previous religions recognized this for what it was: evil.
I do think the Leftists have a reason for all the shit they do. They want power. But not really in terms of political or institutional. They have zero internal locus of control, or agency, and have no idea how to get it. So they seek power from without, and that only provides a temporary fix, so they keep going from hit to hit.
Mens clubs, golf clubs, executive board rooms, the boy scouts, libraries, schools, the church, the US military: what has the Left created? Nothing.
What have they infiltrated and destroyed?
Everything.
What is my motivation to build anything?
My sons. My family. My friends.
It makes me think of the kind of communities we wish to build today. There are advocates on our side that believe in withdrawing to some extent and pulling the drawbridge up, but some of the examples you just listed show that success often comes from the other direction.
Prior to Vatican II – and it’s still true to some extent — a Catholic could walk into any church in the world and, language notwithstanding, take part in Mass. Similarly, the social clubs of the 20th century worked partly as a home away from home. I have an uncle who, 40 years ago, was state president of the Elks. Over the course of that year and beyond, he visited untold scores of lodges in our state, and always visits the local lodge when traveling out of state. Membership in churches and clubs conferred entree into groups of like-minded strangers. The DR would be well advised to maintain networks of cells along with means of inter-cell communications.
Dissident progress has to come through growth of our numbers and that requires an invitation to join us in a tangible aspect.
Crybaby noodle-armed goodwhites have been with us from the beginning. This is from The Journal by John Woolman. He was a Quaker abolitionist who lived from 1720 to 1772.
I still found myself in great Danger, having many Weaknesses attending me, and strong Temptations to wrestle with; in the feeling whereof I frequently withdrew into private Places, and often with Tears besought the Lord to help me, whose gracious Ear was open to my Cry.
And…
I cried to the Lord in secret, for Wisdom and Strength; for I felt myself encompassed with Difficulties, and had fresh Occasion to bewail the Follies of Time.
And…
Many were the Afflictions which attended me; and in great Abasement, with many Tears, my Cries were to the Almighty, for his gracious and Fatherly Assistance; and then, after a Time of deep Trial.
He mentions crying quite often in this book. Could you imagine a Muslim or Buddhist emoting like a teenage girl?
Jeepers, what was he upset about , slaves? I’m not convinced slavery is like abortion, that it is all bad. Its a form of employment. Its not ownership of a person, its ownership of a persons labor.
I think slavery in the US could be likened to eating too much sweets. There’s nothing wrong with sweets, but you cant have plate after plate of candy instead of regular food.
The other issue is that working for Whites may have good for blacks. They had shoes for crying out loud. Its not as if they were doing well in West Africa!
At best, “its complicated” is the answer. Certainly not from beginning to end evil, no. I don’t judge our ancestors like that.
I like how he capitalizes words. I think that was a style.
He wasn’t crying about slavery, he was crying about all the temptations and challenges he faced. The book goes on and on with his sobbing. Get a grip, man.
Well, its a free country.
Wait a minute….
For a full discussion get a copy of “A Defense of Virginia and the south”
by Robert Lewis Dabney.
It is EVIL from beginning to end. We are still suffering for it. It is not complicated. Slavery was and is an evil.
The presence of slaves in the US is responsible for anti-racism today. It is a major underlying reason for white guilt.
Slavery was just as evil then. It lowered wages for white men. The same super-wealthy who import the third world to work for slave wages today were the ones benefiting from slavery then while everyone else paid the costs and still do.
It is not “complicated” The men who imported the slaves should have been arrested and shot then. Do not defend this evil institution. Progressives can make the same argument about you today. That you are “better off” than you otherwise would be if not for globohomo. Besides, shoes are overrated. You don’t need them in places like SubSaharan Africa.
You make a good point. Blacks are like immigration now.
I guess the “its complicated” comes not from the original decision, but mess we were in as the 19th century wore on.
And they were compensated. Blacks were kept safe, they had cradle to grave assistance. I’m not seeing that it’s an absolute evil. But you’ve inspired me to look more into it. The 19th cent Dominican Dom Prosper Geuranger suggests slavery was an evil. I just don’t know when the evil occurs. In the buying a mans labor? We do that all the time. I’m sure there are some fair treatments of it out there somewhere…
Whatever happened to that colonization program JT talks about? That would have solved a lot.
Your points are well taken. Ryan Faulk and Sean Last did some original stuff on the well-being of African slaves in the US. By just about every major measure they were better off in many ways than the average Eastern European at the time. They were taller, weighed more, lived longer, worked fewer hours and several other measures. They were MUCH better off than 99.9% of Africans living in Africa at the time.
But you know how they were not better off? They could not make any decision about their own lives down to who could they could and would not sleep with. Even by the terms of “well being” as measured by these and other metrics, the total loss of creating your own destiny (for good or otherwise), slavery is and was evil. But from our point of view, it’s been (practically) nothing but downside.
Just save the fake-outrage. Slavery was/is practiced everywhere by everyone. By your logic all humans should have been shot..
Cogent observation. In other words as I often note, short term preferences without regard to long-term costs. In the slavery case, cheaper labor. In the immigration case, cheap labor. Do I see a pattern developing here? Some modern countries have no problems sending guest workers home, by force if necessary. The USA never had the balls, and we are paying dearly for the sins post past and present. The best answer, of course, would be as you suggested, to never let aliens in in the first place and to punish or exterminate anyone who tried.
US repatriated 1.1 million Mexicans in 1954 (see link below). Sending people home is a matter of political will and has previously been done in this country.
https://www.britannica.com/topic/Operation-Wetback
“This is from The Journal by John Woolman. He was a Quaker abolitionist who lived from 1720 to 1772.”
Did you get to the part where he busts into Area 51 and steals the alien corpse?
I was reading an old book called “The Philadelphia Negro,” a kind of history of African-Americans in America, specifically in Philadelphia. All the stuff we see today, especially with the chosenites existed in the 17th century in Philadelphia, only it was Quakers. They were forever trying to “solve” the problem. The Quakers tried to do it with religion while the modern version tries to do it “programs”
White people are always trying to save someone or some thing. Be it the whales, mother earth or the retched of the Earth. We need to get over ourselves.
TheFinn character over at Gab believes there to be a genetic component to this which would be interesting if that’s the case. Man can overcome his genetic tendencies, within certain bounds (for example, the person with an addictive personality might mitigate it by not drinking, but they’ll never be able to be a weekend binge drinker). This would mean that arguing with the devout lefty would be akin to trying to get a leopard to change his spots. The best that can be done is to call the leopard fat, ugly, and perverted and move on.
When they say “that’s who we are,” it’s not just a cute phrasing. It is part of their identity. Being a progressive good-white is a central part of their identity, which means it is guarded with emotions. You are not just saying they are wrong about some topic, you are saying their very existence is wrong.
“Retched of the Earth.” Heh. I hope the malapropism is intentional.
False equivalencies there..
The American left is just Puritanism without the lip service to Jesus. They are critics in search of an artist. Like the Pharisees of old, they can’t possibly define good, but they know evil when they see it. The solution, as proposed by the Jewish carpenter of yore, is to pay lip service to their pieties in public and live your private life according to your conscience. Deprived of a devil, they will either away.
Yes,,, but they are deadly. No , we can’t live with them any longer. Well, not this cracker.
Absolutely true that the attention from the “right wing” is the fuel that powers the Left. But “right wing” is a euphemism in the same way that “inner city” is. “Right wing” mean white men. You see this bizarre tension in all of the woke advertising we are subjected to constantly now. On the one hand, the white male gaze is oppressive and racist. On the other hand, practically every bi-racial ad on tv features a white guy with a black or hispanic girl. In short, they desperately crave being seen as having power by us. If we aren’t in the picture, they are stuck in reality with other non-white people merely stomping each other for tribal power.
Having spent a lot of time over the last year reading Leftist stuff trying to understand what is propelling this lunacy we are being subjected to, I ended up reading a lot of Slavoj Zizek, who is something like the intellectual leader of the academic Left philosophically lately. He made an interesting observation about Nazis in the 1930s, viz. the ideal they wanted to articulate about Aryan culture could only be defined by reference to their opposite, i.e. the Aryan can only be explained by reference to the Non-Aryan. I am trying to avoid content filters and modding for banned words and topics, so I can’t say anything about that idea in more detail even though it’s all legit academic writing that I am talking about so let me say this…
We have to stop talking about these people. We have to stop defining ourselves in opposition to other tribes and races. Once you start down that dialectical path of thesis/anti-thesis/synthesis you end up disappearing into the synthesis. The trap is that you can’t ignore the anti-thesis once you hear about it. A lot like how you can’t ignore the idea of sin once you hear the gospel. Even Paul said that he would not have known about a lot of sin if hadn’t read about it in the Law. In short, once you are exposed to the anti-thesis, you are on a path of no longer existing. Like the Aryans if you catch my drift.
Dude, you can talk about Jews here.
You used to be able to talk about J*was here
Lol, posted the second one when the first didn’t appear. Why is discussion of Jawas so forbidden? Is it because of how they buy and sell droids?
Yes but refuting arguments is good. You don’t always have to have a synthesis.
For instance, sodomy is evil and should be discouraged by society perhaps through law.
Thats the end of that. There’s no synthesis. While I don’t believe what we have been taught about National Socialism, its possible it was wrong in its exalting of Arianism. So then it would have to have a foil.
But the truth doesn’t need a foil.
The very essence of the problem, which is even mentioned by the apostle Paul, is that once you start explaining why Sodomy is evil, you open yourself up to the dialogue. The discussion. Pagan Roman and Greek perverts would not have agreed that its evil. And in the end you show you lack power by the mere fact that you have to talk about. The irony is that if the Law hadn’t mentioned Sodomy in the first place you probably never would have even thought of it. In other words, the reason that you have to say anything about it at all is that you want to tell people not to do it by explaining first what it is. In the end all the weirdos hear “sodomy” and say “oh please do tell me more”. They don’t hear the part about “evil”.
If something really is evil or bad, why would you be afraid to explain why?
Avoiding discussing something is done when the something in question won’t stand up to scrutiny..
Because you end up turning the taboo into a fetish.
Yes, non whites are incredibly insecure and crave validation from white men in particular. They want attention.
Immigrants to Canada are hyper aware of demographics. A “brown” area is bad, but so is an area that is “too white” (and by extension must be full of racism). They like an area with just enough white people to make them feel important, and like they’re white themselves. It helps them avoid falling into an ethnic ghetto where they only get to deal with each other. But in an all white area they feel out of place and they hate white group identity.
Essentially children crying out for attention, unfortunately it is very destructive for society. Non whites and white libs are the same – children and toddlers who are spoiled and immature.
Multi culturalism is pharisaical. It is a cruel and humiliating ideology. Its like a guy running around on stage desperately spinning plates.
What a horrible culture, a culture that wants to wipe out culture. Its an anti culture.
Individually, colours are nice. If you mix the whole palette together you get an ugly grey/brown mix.
That’s basically multicult. Around Canada the only culture for non-whites is Drake, weed, Mer-say-dees, and shoes. They say we don’t but again it’s another case of leftist projection. Low agency, low IQ non whites make the perfect leftists.
Personally, I will hold onto my Christian, Anglo Saxon heritage, thanks.
Yes, let them have their ahem, beautiful culture and we can have ours….
I don’t think ‘colors are nice individually’. You probably wouldn’t either if it weren’t for life-long indoctrination. You can have them all. There is more than enough variety in white people for me.
“Immigration and ethnic diversity tend to reduce social solidarity and social capital. New evidence from the US suggests that in ethnically diverse neighbourhoods residents of all races tend to ‘hunker down’. Trust (even of one’s own race) is lower, altruism and community cooperation rarer, friends fewer.”
from E Pluribus Unum: Diversity and Community in the Twenty-first Century by Robert D. Putnam.
By the way, Mr Putnam was so appalled by the conclusion of his research that he refused to publish it for several years.
The ‘ethnics’ bring all of that with them..
Nietzsche makes an interesting case: the Jews being very clever, were the first people to create a religion that inverted true survival values (yet was useful to the Jews themselves, to protect them against the “host”, adversary culture the lived in).
It’s “devil,” if you like, was Nietzsche’s Ubermensch, the super-man embodied as Zarathustra, who was a hero type, lived by his own code, a natural leader. In response, the majority of a population, the sheep-people, created a “slave religion” that demeaned the hero and his traits (violence, too much power, etc.) and glorified the weak, the downtrodden, the poor, the helpless. Later, Saul of Tarsus (St. Paul) cleverly repackaged this with Greek embellishments (Plato) as what would Western Christianity. Christianity is a Jewish creation! Yet another conspiracy to accuse them of. Where does Jesus fit in? Well, the literary Jesus (of the Gospels) is quite unlike who was — and still is — taught to you in church. To Nietzsche, Jesus was the protypical champion of the poor, leading a new religion for the poor and oppressed, against the successful Jewish religion of his time. It’s worth remembering that, yes they were under Roman rule, but the Jews had great autonomy, including to run their religion as they chose.
Anyhow, don’t know if I’ve recounted it correctly. But there you have another example of the need to identify an enemy. It can be master or slave, strong vs. weak, religious establishment vs. maverick prophet, god vs. devil, take your pick.
“Christianity is a J*wsh creation! Yet another conspiracy to accuse them of.”
no doubt it is, so is Superman & Batman, yet western writers took the characters and changed them, making them more interesting, turning them western.
What the initial church managed to do was turn christianity against the j*wus. Jesus was basically a proto-alt right symbol, this could be seen in the original christian cross prayer before it was converged.
Think of us today, we are being censored and unfairly persecuted by the israelites who are trying to stamp us out.
Same thing with Jesus, j*wus tried to destroy him using all their power, yet they failed miserably, what happened instead was Christ’s church took over.
Upvote button not working, but excellent summary.
(I’ll never have the time, so thanks.)
“Yet, Ali and his wealthy audience are sure Fuentes is powerful and they are weak.”
They’re not wrong. The people in possession of the truth are powerful and that’s why the left is afraid
I guess what Z means is that the left believes that since there is “institutional racism” that they are fighting this historical monolith. That way, although Fuentes is this pathetic thing, he is attached to all civilization because all civilization is White and evil.
thats how they make themselves out to be like Luke Skywalker against this huge Empire. They would even say that the institutions they operate within are racist, but they are just doing their best to dismantle things….
But in some way, you are right, the truth is dangerous.
Luke Skywalker was also a religious fanatic
The wicked flee when no one pursues, but the righteous are as bold as a lion. Proverbs 28:1
I’m also not totally convinced about this self loathing. I think the bizarre self sabotage is not on purpose, but because Good Whites believe in multi culturalism and equality.
Good Whites are trying to make the world into this equal multicultural fantasy, not because they hate themselves but because they really believe that our ancestors were mistaken and we have learned something new and need to start implementing the new equal, color blind world.
Also, they naively think there is no cause and effect, that there will be no downside for their children as long as they’re kids go to college.
The only reason to waste any time trying to work out these people’s suicidal motivations is if it were possible to do anything to change them. I’m surrounded by these knuckleheads (but not for much longer!) and can safely say there is not. And why is that our job anyway? The idea has a tinge of the busybody. Let them find out the hard way what happens when one thumbs their nose at reality.
Lets physically and politically separate from them. Get our own territory.
“And why is that our job anyway?” Thank you! I’ve been thinking that since my great grandfather said it to one of clients when I was twelve.
I think it is both. Some of these retards really do hate white people-which I believe is an extension of hating themselves..
The ghost of Eric Hoffer looms large in this piece.
Experts at deflection, like arguing with most women. They can turn it around on you in New York minute.
Bourgeois objectivism, I like that.
So the left needs attention from the Right and it needs an enemy. Kind of like your assement of Blacks.
Without whitey they can’t define themselves and if we moved they would just follow and continue.
Like Jacobins in the 18th century, the left is devouring all that is good but also will eat themselves.
That doesn’t mean we win a victory or the long term battle for the soul of the West, just maybe a few battles
and while saving some good for those that desire it.
“If we take the widest and wisest view of a Cause, there is no such thing as a Lost Cause, because there is no such thing as a Gained Cause. We fight for lost causes because we know that our defeat and dismay may be the preface to our successors’ victory, though that victory itself will be temporary; we fight rather to keep something alive than in the expectation that it will triumph.”
—T.S. Eliot
Despite the fact that 99.9% of the leftard bogeymen are make believe, the howling media amplifies the accusations. The result is the average normie watching the national or local propaganda channel hears it and while he/she may not buy all the invective, they absorb enough to think there may be something to it.
The mainstream propaganda media is the primary tool the left has to keep this charade alive and kicking.
“I want to hear both sides of the debate”, oof, one side is evil and wants us dead and the “other” side wants to negotiate with them. As you point out there is no “both sides” to be had within the propaganda machine.
I’m not sure fighting the left is worth it. However it happened, they have won, the right has nothing going for it.
Except secession. Secession talk, self rule, like in Ireland 100 years ago, may be time well worth spent.
The Left is trying to change us by force, bend to their will by different means. We are incapable of fighting back, pointing out their errors is funny to them.
But if we say, “sounds like we need to separate for a while, see how things work out” we have some ammo. Ann Coulter’s new piece in Vdare shows that we are two nations in one territory, maybe, by proposing a separation, we can start to move things along.
No blacks.
The rub would be convincing normie…
“Normie” is a placeholder quickly losing its relevance.
It is already a generosity extended by our side to afford an unearned benefit of the doubt for ignorance that is rapidly moving beyond our ability to rationalize its existence.
Separation that matters is not a matter of convincing.
If for no other reason than to forge such – and maintain it under constant duress from a determined enemy, requires conditions precedent that render the binary self-evident.
“Normie” becomes what he must or he is one of them. I do not want any normies in my foxhole any more than an I would marry a feminist or forge any other oxymorons of convenience. Thats part of how we got here.
Secession is a cuck move. I won’t concede the cities and coasts.
Furthermore, when you say “no blacks” you understate the depth of the problem. The Wajahat Ali types are legal immigrants that earn high incomes, pay taxes and absolute hate heritage Americans. Any solution needs to address this problem.
Better move IMO, is repatriation. Anyone that immigrated to US after passing Hart Celler immigration act of 1965 needs to go back. Anyone who was coercively imported to US should be returned to their homelands too.
SOunds good to me!!!!!! Lets roll!
“Secession is a cuck move. I won’t concede the cities and coasts.”
Thank you. It is wearying to hear people talk as if the Left would be happy with what they’ve currently stolen and would never double down just because they’re on a winning streak.
They will never leave us alone. They will take everything we own, then destroy us, then raise monuments to how selfish we were.
People think that somehow compromising (you can have California, we can have North Dakota) will be acceptable to the left. It won’t be acceptable. So if we are in the position of having to advance an unacceptable position, I don’t want it compromised. I want everything. I want California, NYC that way it was 100 years ago, Detroit the way it was 70 years ago, Baltimore the way it was 150 years ago, the Pacific NW, all the land in all the states. And I want Europe to be Europe again too.
Cuck conservatives shirk from this idea. They say what about democracy? How can we undo laws that were passed? And our legal system, these court decisions that are precedents, how can they be undone?
I say the courts never had the authority to make these decisions. Politicians wrongly abdicated responsibility to them and gave them powers the never should have been able to exercise. This wrongly abdicated responsibility can be retracted. And democracy in this company has been shown to be a sham. Biden didn’t win a fair election. Its foolishness for anyone think there will be any fair elections moving forward. Conservatives have no reason to continue to abide by the rules of this broken system. We have to come to the left’s understanding of authority. The point is to seize and exercise power to achieve the outcome we want. Nothing more.
This is just big talking. Those things have already been conceded.
There is no way enough people would go along with deporting 100,000,000+ fake legal people. There is no way the illegals will ever be deported even..
I don’t concede them.
“Enough people go along with”? Current president didn’t win his election. What do voters have to do with any decision moving forward? Left has shown us the way. Take and exercise power.
And logistically, 90 million flights happen/month in US. We can get rid of 100 million people in 5 weeks.
We could empty Lake Michigan by scooping out all the water with Dixie Cups. All it would take is about a trillion of them and a few hundred years. Completely doable. /s
“Take and exercise power.”
Translation: vote harder.
“Secession is a cuck move. I won’t concede the cities and coasts.”
Pretending you haven’t already lost is the cuck move. Running into a machine gun nest doesn’t make you brave, it just means you’re stupid. Sticking around this place all but guarantees your loss. You’ll live in a totalitarian state where every book is banned or censored, where even the slightest infraction will ruin your life. Secession means we get a home of our own and the freedom to decide our own destiny — make our own laws, build our own culture. There isn’t even a choice here if your IQ is above room temperature. It’s obvious.
European Jew, 1936: “I won’t surrender the continent!”
Israeli Jew, 2021: “Sucks for that guy. I’ve got my own exclusive country dedicated to my tribe where I’m the majority and speech attacking my people is banned. I’ve got a future, and I feel great about myself. I have basically nothing to worry about in life.”
Besides, millions of people on those coasts think it’s THEIR coasts. What makes you think they’re giving it up to you? What makes you think this side of the political aisle has the ability to take it from them? I don’t see anything. This side looks feckless, weak, and devoid of cognitive talent.
I’ve encountered hundreds of variations of your comment. It’s always the same. Some guy who’s afraid to admit the truth (or isn’t so bright) pretends there’s still a chance, then implies it’s other people who are the cowards for pointing it out. They never have anything practical to offer. Nothing they suggest is even remotely realistic.
“Better move IMO, is repatriation.”
That will never happen. Claiming otherwise is delusion. Explain to me how you’re going to repatriate 40 million blacks against the combined weight of the majority of the voting public, thousands of lawyers, the military, the courts, dozens of NGOs, every corporation, the banks and entire finance sector, the media, and all the federal law enforcement agencies. I’m betting not a single person here can offer a realistic scenario.
It’s just embarrassing that so many people liked your comment. This side is hopeless. It’s almost like there are people deliberately trying to shunt right-wing efforts into fruitless projects ….
First, thanks for laying out your position.
“vote harder.” Voting harder didn’t work last November. Not sure it will work moving forward.
“Secession means we get a home of our own and the freedom to decide our own destiny — make our own laws, build our own culture.” That sounds good. The problem with your position is that the issues you identify with repatriation are the same as those with succession. The complaints you make, that it will be really hard to do this, are the same for these two scenarios. The thing that is clear from your senario is that you immediately lose half the land, which I don’t like. If you can explain how I am wrong, please do.
“I’m betting not a single person here can offer a realistic scenario.” Big changes are hard and take time. Typically they happen after bad depressions or lost wars. All the same, opportunities always exist to change things fast. Here is one example:
Epstein and Maxwell look like they were running an intelligence operation on top echelon of US political system. Trump admin could have setup a show trial of Maxwell (think Soviet style show trial) where she confesses her crimes and indicts US political system (Dem party, Rep party, Gates, NYT, supreme court, top of FBI, CIA, state department, ect). Done correctly, this event could have been used to wipe top of US political/media/legal class out. New leaders, new laws, repatriation/succession becomes possible.
Now you may say, “Impossible! No one can clean out a political system like that.” Not true. This stuff happens all the time in other countries. Xi Jinping did exactly this when he took office in 2012 when he conducted a big anti-corruption campaign. Of course, all Chinese politicians are corrupt, but he used his anti-corruption campaign as a pretext to wipe out political enemies and consolidate his power following his election to general secretary of CCP.
You are correct. Before we get to political separation we have to engage in personal separation. Leave any social media or civic organization that includes leftists. Shun leftwing family. Disavow leftwing friends.
Move to areas where the Left is hated. If you have to work in a leftwing environment maintain distance and explore a job change.
These are things that must be done before we even begin political separation. Even so, that process is well underway with internal immigration and states distancing themselves from the Imperial Capitol
Good point. There should be a solution already in place, or well on the way.. I think there is now to some extent.
I don’t care about the cities. I use to , but not anymore. Let them have the cities. There’s to many of them for us to take over.
Jack Dobson: Precisely. Don’t do any favors for leftist neighbors. Don’t allow your children to play with theirs. Don’t have a friendly chat. Learn the lost art of socially cutting someone dead. Don’t play the IKAGO game. Do not be tolerant or open to ‘conversation.’ Shun evil and its acolytes. Live, socialize, and engage only with your own people. Make as much as your daily life as possible proudly White, and teach your children to love and continue their heritage.
We have to learn to be rude
and the right has a pathological need to be seen as “cool” (or something along those lines). it’s mutual dependency. both sides are cut from the same cloth, so make of that what you will. Fuentes has no more business being here than the rag head does.
That attitude will get you exactly nowhere. Fuentes is at least doing something. Sometimes with mistakes, but in general in the right direction.
totally agree. Is that “punching right?” I think Fuentes is great.
is “Fuentes” Norman, or Anglo-Saxon? I can’t quite tell….
I don’t get the Fuentes hate. I know why the alt-right types hate him. It’s petty jealously. Otherwise, I don’t get it. Yeah, those young guys are often very annoying, just like all of us were at that age. They’re supposed to be cocky little shits who think the world is their oyster. That’s normal.
Just tell him not to pick his nose and eat his boogers on a live stream again.
Lets not ask for the moon!
It’s all relative. Is eating your boogers actually, technically, gross? It’s not my cup of tea. But to each their own.
It’s funny Z, in WWII it was guys who were Fuentes age who did all the heavy lifting while the old farts just sat around reading the Saturday Evening Post.
People forget these kids flew the fighters, bombers, were the infantry that stormed the beaches in Sicily, Normandy, Okinawa and bleed at all those places.
As a movement, the DR needs their energy.lest we becoming of grumpy old men.
Yeah lol. Today the 55% non white Gen Z is triggered when somebody steals a picture of her therapy dog called “Clark Kent Martinez”.
https://www.freep.com/story/news/local/michigan/detroit/2021/03/11/wayne-state-students-rally-after-dorm-vandalized/6945408002/
Age is not solely chronological. We had “youngsters” back then (WWII) with work experience, marriages, and children. They knew need and often hardship. Compared to today’s youth they were old in life experience. We also had a pretty good mixture of chronologically older persons in the service—folks being more patriotic back then and not as quick to let “the other guy do it”.
Today’s youth—with notable exceptions from the heartland—are not yesterday’s youth.
I personally don’t care about him, but a lot of the people here are remarkably blind to their own racial inconsistencies. They talk about white this and white that, but seem very ignorant about who is white, and who isn’t. Would say that your audience here is at most 50% white, in a sense of the word with any meaning.
Love the magic carpet line!!!! We come for z’s racism, we stay for his zingers….
Dead wrong. The Right doesn’t have a need to be seen as cool. The Right is very much the opposite. In regards to Fuentes, he may not meet your murky standards, but at least he’s doing something and not hiding on a blog.
This is hate from the DR is digusting and shows just how petty and nasty they are. Though I suspect half of the critics are Fed plants or stooges working for the SPLC.
Leave Fuentes alone. Who cares if we don’t like his style or whatever?
He is not my style but I see him doing some good out there.
We have to get over picking people apart.
Unless they are in danger of doing us damage and Fuentes is not doing any damage.
Leave him alone.
He’s fine… Good grief….