The Weapon Of Language

Note: There is a new post up at Taki. This week the topic is a written version of the podcast from last week, slimmed down for space reasons. There is a review of the 1960’s classic Easy Rider up behind the green door. It is also available to those who buy me a beer. Finally, Sunday Thoughts, a half hour podcast recapping the news of the week, is also up behind the green door. There is also a post up on American renaissance by from the weekend, for those who missed it.


In a world where the end always justifies the means, even when the end is not achieved, truth must always be a secondary consideration. In fact, the truth is often the enemy, as it serves the interests of your opponents. By attacking the truth of something, or even the concept of truth itself, you take away the legitimacy of the opposition to you and your schemes. When morality is determined by who wins, rather than by some objective standard, partisanship is the new morality.

This is the modern age. You see it in the language. The public space is full of people juggling neologisms that have a nice ring to them as a replacement for old words or labels. They sound better and the best people always love hearing new ways of saying old things. It makes them feel smart and sophisticated. The intellectual in a liberal democracy is primarily concerned with appearing to be unconventional and heterodox, so the new words and phrases quickly become popular.

George Orwell said political language is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, which is almost always the point of the new words and phrases that come to dominate the discourse. The people introducing them are not trying to clarify some point, but rather to obfuscate. The game is to undermine the truth of some concept in order to put something long settled up for debate. The new word changes the old meaning in a way that makes it less settled.

The popular phrase “social construct” is a good example. There is no such thing as a social construct as currently understood. Into the 20th century people would have laughed at the idea of it. There are customs and institutions, for sure, but those are things that evolved within a people over a period of trial and error. The reason a custom has been passed down may have been lost to time or turned into an amusing bit of mythology, but the custom came into being to address a problem.

The social construct, on the other hand, takes the custom or institution and recasts it as an invention, a thing that is true only because of a set of rules. Further, it smuggles in the idea that it was deliberately invented. Men, and it is always men, sat around dreaming up the new social conventions to serve their interests. This strips the custom of legitimacy by casting it as just a partisan interest. The people wishing to change it are just as legitimate as the people who invented it.

The new term for custom disconnects it from truth by shifting the thing from the domain of things that are true on their face to the domain of things that are true only because of a set of logical rules. Humans come in two sexes, male and female, is a thing that is true on its face. The term social construct shifts this from the world of fact to the world of logical rules by insisting gender, another new word, is determined by society. They now claim gender is assign at birth based on antiquated concepts of gender.

What the phrase social construct permits the partisan to do is to smuggle in the idea that something like sex was an invention of men, and it is always men, to serve the interest of the inventors. On the one hand, the roles assigned to those with a uterus served the interests of the patriarchy. Now we are told that those same men made gender binary in order to oppress the non-binary. The concept of the social construct turns objective reality into an intergenerational conspiracy theory.

One of the ways the political neologism smuggles in lies is that it creates a false dichotomy in the minds of the audience. In the case of sex and sex roles, things are either purely nature or purely nurture, with nurture always assigned the default position in the comparison. Sex roles, for example, are either a social construct or a universal fact of nature. Since few things are the latter, the former becomes the default position, as if by magic. Suddenly, the natural world is up for debate.

This happened with homosexual marriage. It was first detached from its natural meaning to be a social construct, rather than an ancient custom. Instead of being defined by the biological necessity of reproduction, it was just an invention to suppress women and manage property rights to the favor of males. Once that transformation occurred, opponents of homosexual marriage were forced make the affirmative argument for something that had been the default for eons.

The truth is, few things in human society are purely the result of nature. Even things like hair color or eye color in Europeans have a cultural angle. Over time, females with striking hair and eyes found better mating prospects. This naturally led to customs in which women tried to show off these features. The environmental conditions made diverse hair and eye color possible, but custom made it desirable, thus striking hair and eye color were selected for over time. Nature and nurture.

This is the deceit of new words and phrases cooked up by partisans. The point is to assault the truth, strip it of its legitimacy. The partisan is at home on the battle ground of “who? whom?” so they naturally seek to shape the ground to fit their need. It traps the bourgeois objectivist into the either/or trap. Once they accept the false dichotomy, they accept the weaker hand, and the results are inevitable. The Left wins every battle by first destroying the weapons the opponent can use against them.

This is why there is no reasoning with a partisan. That lefty aunt thinks what she thinks because she sees the world in binary terms. She greedily adopts the new language because it reaffirms her world view. The partisan sees the truth in the same way the vampire sees a mirror. It’s not the reflection that terrifies the vampire. It is the lack of one, a reminder of a truth of their existence. Facts and clear language have the same effect on the partisan, which is why they hiss at them.


The crackdown by the oligarchs on dissidents has had the happy result of a proliferation of new ways to support your favorite creator. If you like my work and wish to kick in a few bucks, you can buy me a beer. You can sign up for a SubscribeStar subscription and get some extra content. You can donate via PayPal. My crypto addresses are here for those who prefer that option. You can send gold bars to: Z Media LLC P.O. Box 432 Cockeysville, MD 21030-0432. Thank you for your support!


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.


218 Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Vetrani Sui Sunt Circuli
Vetrani Sui Sunt Circuli
3 years ago

So what are our Ends, and what are our Means?

We are all Kosh
We are all Kosh
Reply to  Vetrani Sui Sunt Circuli
3 years ago

I won’t presume to have all the answers, but maybe something that has been missed: I think we have severely neglected is to make the enemy fear us. As long as we argue with their premises, we validate them. Today’s Z post is on point here. What do they fear? Exposure. For being frauds. If every interaction with us was a gut punch of shame, they would learn fear. It can be done. Never argue their premise. Cut them off at the knees, personally: Them: “Global warming Globo Homo bla bla bla”. Simple answer: “You’re a fraud.” More direct: “Your… Read more »

FeinGul
FeinGul
Reply to  We are all Kosh
3 years ago

There is no sign they fear the truth, or fear us.
None.

The only fear we’ve seen from them is January 6, and that was micro aggression compared to what they dished out in 2020. Never mind any decisive aggression.

The Truth shall set you free is probably the biggest lie in history, and yes I know who said it…

James J O'Meara
James J O'Meara
3 years ago

“Facts and clear language have the same effect on the partisan, which is why they hiss at them.”

“Reality! We hates it forever!” (apologies to Tolkien)

TomA
TomA
3 years ago

I sometimes struggle with the limits of clarity that I am comfortable with, but here goes nonetheless. We are in a WAR presently, not a civil debate, not a shouting match, not even a fist fight. It’s a bloody fucking war that’s raging. And most of the country is still sleepwalking to the Starbucks for another soothing latte.

The Wild Geese Howard
The Wild Geese Howard
Reply to  TomA
3 years ago

We are living in strange days.

It’s too late to reform the system from within.

It’s too early to get fedpoasty.

TomA
TomA
Reply to  The Wild Geese Howard
3 years ago

Tell that to 4 year old Cash Gemon.

LineInTheSand
LineInTheSand
Reply to  TomA
3 years ago

Preach!

(Discreetly and in coded language until the time is right.)

SidVic
SidVic
Member
3 years ago

Fancy way of saying red-headed women are attractive.

Hollywood Insider
Hollywood Insider
Reply to  SidVic
3 years ago
Bill Mullins
Member
Reply to  Hollywood Insider
3 years ago

Makes sense to me. Rebooting a role originally played by uber aryan, 6′ Brigitte Neilson with a 5’6″ half jogger. Think I’ll wait until it streams for free – if then.

Whiskey
Whiskey
3 years ago

It is interesting to compare the growth of Christianity in the West vs. Paganism with worship of black people today by the upper class woke. In the first part, Christianity such as it existed during Imperial Times was weak, thin, and largely wiped out save in some of the Celtic Fringe and Italy / Iberia. It took dedicated missionary work and the deciding factor was that Christianity could give a pagan king who converted lots and lots of … literate monks who would be clerks that COULD NOT EVER inherit his kingdom or make a claim to it. The blessing… Read more »

Hollywood Insider
Hollywood Insider
Reply to  Whiskey
3 years ago

Hollywood has all but killed itself. Over the past decade, they’ve chased out all the White male writing & directing talent and replaced it with “diversity” (blacks). The result has been an inability to create anything new or interesting because White men are, by a HUGE margin, the most creative American demographic (87% of best selling novelists, most award-winning directors and screenplay writers, etc). Thus, the endless focus on remakes and reboots because that’s the low-hanging fruit that doesn’t require any real talent or innovation — both lacking in the diversity hires. Writing, which is hard and rarely pursued by… Read more »

usNthem
usNthem
Reply to  Hollywood Insider
3 years ago

Amazingly enough (or maybe not so), most of the hollywood/musical asswhites seemingly lap up and love their dispossession.

Frip
Member
Reply to  Hollywood Insider
3 years ago

Man that was a long comment Hollywood Insider. The only guy with that level of autistic energy is Whiskey. I think you are one and the same.

B125
B125
Reply to  Whiskey
3 years ago

Christianity gives people a community, a wife, a sex life, a family, and a concrete (and simple) path to salvation. Obviously it’s not always perfect while carried out by man. You can love it or hate it but it’s been an integral part of our people’s identity for almost 1000 years. It can’t be all wrong. The woke religion causes depression, self hatred, atomization, low fertility and inceldom (unless you’re a chad). Not only are you evil, there is no path to salvation except suicide or further efforts to debase your own people. It is a slightly better deal for… Read more »

Bill
Bill
Reply to  B125
3 years ago

There’s a lot to be said for Christianity: a person attempting to follow it’s precepts— to love his neighbor as he does himself, to put the needs of others ahead of his own, to treat people he encounters with charity, forbearance, and good will, to be honest, generous, forgiving and kind— will probably do well in life, and be well-liked by his fellows. And to believe that the Universe is ruled over by an all-powerful, perfectly-loving, perfectly-merciful God who knows you intimately and has your best interests at heart— that’s gotta be a source of comfort and hope. No doubt… Read more »

JohnWayne
JohnWayne
Reply to  Bill
3 years ago

So go to church anyway.

The theology is just one reason. Being among people whose values and traditions you share is another. Koinania, community, fulfilling the need for belonging and meaning.

The God part? Be honest. No one really knows. So participate anyway. Good for you. Good for your family. Who knows, God may be watching you! I always feel better after having gone to church.

We are all Kosh
We are all Kosh
Reply to  Bill
3 years ago

Bill, I followed a similar path. I never lost my respect for Christianity, but I stopped believing. Someone else responded to you that church was still the best place to find community (if it isn’t woke) and that is likely true, though I’ve haven’t been back. I got something amazingly useful out of a lecture series on Genesis a couple of years ago. It was about 35 hours long, so I won’t try very hard to summarize much. One attempt I’ll make is that all myths have as their primary and possibly sole purpose to articulate in story form the… Read more »

David
David
Reply to  We are all Kosh
3 years ago

He has hundreds of hours of interesting insight into religions, evolutionary psychology, philosophy and neuroscience on youtube for free. He defended the systemic assault on boys in his books and debates communists. If he’s not truly christian or right wing enough, he’s close enough for a nice break from the same old black pills.

LineInTheSand
LineInTheSand
Reply to  B125
3 years ago

B125, all true brother. I’d believe if I could and I wish you well.

Ed Dutton says that he wants to be an agnostic living among Christians. I sympathize. You guys are definitely on to something, or at least you were. Respect.

karl mchungus
karl mchungus
Reply to  B125
3 years ago

like the Duggars!

Frip
Member
Reply to  Whiskey
3 years ago

“Hollywood — out are all the White male Jewish (and non Jewish) actors, writers, producers, directors etc. save for a few stars, and to a lesser extent actresses.”

Yeah, no. Not even.

acetone
Member
Reply to  Frip
3 years ago

Roman Polanski directed his last movie in 2019. At least one of the jewish directors/rapists is finding some work.

SidVic
SidVic
Member
Reply to  acetone
3 years ago

Yeah, and jew admits to harvard remain around 25%. The tribe maintains.

imbroglio
imbroglio
3 years ago

The point seems to be that customs and institutions evolved over time in some sort of natural, organic way. But could this, too, be a false dichotomy if customs and institutions are the socialized expressions of the will of the dominant? Gender, as progressives use the term, isn’t merely a woke synonym for sex. The former term refers to roles, the latter to biology and, I’ll add, spirituality. “Social justice” is a true neologism as is “climate change” while “my pronouns are…” is pure pretension. Still, can you effectively refute the assertion that all evaluative language is, by nature, partisan?… Read more »

Falcone
Falcone
Reply to  imbroglio
3 years ago

It’s not partisan until someone makes it so, and it’s usually with adjectives which by their nature may be subjective Calling a tree a tree is not partisan and does not require a dominant player. It just is. Saying the tree is green carries some subjectivity with it because people may interpret or see greens differently, but a tree is still a tree. Yes, a scientist may see a tree and call it by a deeper more specific name, but it’s still a tree. Etc etc Seems that the left mostly deals with adjectives. And/or it twists the meaning of… Read more »

JR Wirth
JR Wirth
Reply to  Falcone
3 years ago

You touched on democracy. I think democracy is itself the underlying religion of all these things. “The left” is the essence, or zeitgeist of democracy itself, which is why the Democrats have been the dominant party since, you could say, 10 years after the 17th Amendment was ratified, making this a nearly pure democracy with the patina of a Republic. And also, look at how quickly this new religion, “democracy” supplanted and even co-opted the ancient religion Christianity. After all the saints, all the Martyrs, all the intellectual firepower embedded and constructed over 2000 years, within two generations it was… Read more »

McB
McB
Reply to  JR Wirth
3 years ago

Kipling’s “Gods of the Copybook Headings” comes to mind. A century old, it reads like it was written for today’s woke culture.

KGB
KGB
Reply to  Falcone
3 years ago

There’s probably something akin to a Laffer Curve when it comes to the franchise. If you have a nation of many millions but the decisions are made by a very few at the very top, it’s all too easy for just a handful of those people to go off the deep end and drag the entire country with them. On the other hand, the near universal suffrage that we currently endure allows for hysterias to infect the voting public, like so many Salems writ large. If voting rights are limited in such a way that arrivals at the polls are… Read more »

Dinothedoxie
Dinothedoxie
Reply to  KGB
3 years ago

Yeah, I don’t know about that.

Our problem is that the woke are a small fragment of the population that are able to dominate the whole with technology and power.

We are all Kosh
We are all Kosh
Reply to  Dinothedoxie
3 years ago

Dino,
Someone else posted this. I found it profoundly useful. It gives direction to how a movement, even if small, can change everything.

https://medium.com/incerto/the-most-intolerant-wins-the-dictatorship-of-the-small-minority-3f1f83ce4e15

Ben the Layabout
Ben the Layabout
Reply to  imbroglio
3 years ago

There either is, or isn’t, a false dichotomy 🙂

American Citizen 2.0
American Citizen 2.0
Reply to  Ben the Layabout
3 years ago

That’s a pretty black-or-white-thinking way of presenting the issue, Ben.

We are all Kosh
We are all Kosh
Reply to  Ben the Layabout
3 years ago

hahaha! love it!

Bill
Bill
3 years ago

That last post wasn’t meant to offend anybody, and my sincere apologies if it has.

My only intention was to point out that what we’re talking about here— our topic, if you will— is:
‘What’s true, and what isn’t’.

And however beneficial it may be in some ways to believe a falsehood, in the end I think we’re all better off with the truth.

Bill
Bill
3 years ago

So much of what we’re talking about here comes down to a question of Reality: of what can be shown to true. Race-realism is preferable because it’s demonstrably true. Male dominance is preferable because it accords with the facts. The things Liberals believe in— egalitarianism among racial groups, the equality of men and women, the normalness of homosexuality and ‘transgenderism’, the possibility of achieving equity of outcomes, the purported ‘strengths’ of diversity— are undesirable for the sole reason that *they aren’t true*: they don’t accord with reality. They may be nice ideas, it may be that the world would be… Read more »

JohnSmith
JohnSmith
Reply to  Bill
3 years ago

“…science has given us the answers to those questions…”

See comment on the “Humanist Manifesto” below. Note that Carl Sagan was “Humanist of the Year” in 1981, and a member of the globalist Council on Foreign Relations (CFR). No dogmatic beliefs, no self-serving motives. Just pure “science”…

Bill
Bill
Reply to  JohnSmith
3 years ago

Yeah, I’m not saying Sagan was right about everything, I don’t think he was. There’s plenty he believed that I disagree with him on. But his insistence that the strength of the evidence has to be commensurate with the strength of the claim, makes a lot of sense to me. Someone making an extraordinary claim— that a person who was actually dead (not just seeming to be dead, but actually dead) miraculously came back to life after three days in the grave; which is what the Bible claims about Jesus— a claim which is by all known laws of science… Read more »

The Wild Geese Howard
The Wild Geese Howard
Reply to  Bill
3 years ago

This is exactly how Covidism should be questioned by alleged sophisticated moderns.

It’s not happening.

We are all Kosh
We are all Kosh
Reply to  The Wild Geese Howard
3 years ago

Famine Fauci says it’s so!

KL
KL
Reply to  Bill
3 years ago

There is a lot of very well reasoned Christian apologetics that people neglect to look at before declaring Christianity unbelievable. John AT Robinson, a biblical scholar and very liberal Anglican bishop (he supported women clergy) wrote a book arguing that the entire New Testament was probably written before 70 AD, i.e within 40 years of the events discussed, in most cases by the traditionally attributed authors going by first or second hand witness testimony. If this true it is very difficult to believe that the biblical authors were operating under some form of collective mass hallucination. There is universal agreement… Read more »

Falcone
Falcone
Reply to  Bill
3 years ago

Reality is always going to be an iffy concept simply because people interpret the world around them through their own personal prism. For anyone who likes literature, you can really see this with great clarity when you read a great writer versus a journalist or a hack. A journalist can provide all the essential details, “It was 10 AM on a Sunday morning, cold and misty, and the people were gathered on Broad Street to express their outrage over a cop hurting an unarmed black man” but the image or impression doesn’t stick because they don’t have the talent to… Read more »

Bill
Bill
Reply to  Falcone
3 years ago

Yes: there’s a sense in which each person’s ‘reality’ is unique and personal.

But there’s another way of defining and understanding ‘reality’ that’s not the least bit subjective:

When scientists can launch a spacecraft from the Earth, slingshot it around the Moon, send it 5 billion miles to Pluto, and send back videos— I’d say that shows they have a pretty good grasp of physical reality.

Ben the Layabout
Ben the Layabout
Reply to  Bill
3 years ago

Incisive comments. If I may add one more: despite many centuries of the progress of science, it’s depressing for us secularists to recall what a large fraction of the CURRENT population still believes in religions. Or do they? Trying to be fair, a large portion of “believers” are probably otherwise rational people just going along with a tradition, for conformity’s sake. Or put another way, we can all agree that Christianity exists. Rightly applied, it can be, and often has been, a viable moral system.

Bill
Bill
Reply to  Ben the Layabout
3 years ago

That’s true: when you see people picking and choosing from “God’s holy word”— heeding what they feel like heeding, and ignoring the parts they don’t like— you’ve got to conclude that they don’t really believe it’s “from God”.

Dinothedoxie
Dinothedoxie
Reply to  Bill
3 years ago

You may not believe in god or heaven. But you absolutely should believe in religion. Because something deep in human nature craves it. And when society loses its organizing religion, as ours has, it does not believe in rationalism or science but all manor of primitive superstitious crap. Beyond that, there are a number of reasons and ways that organized religion, specifically Christianity provide a long term competitive advantage to the cultures that believe in them and incorporate those beliefs into cultural norms. No offense to you Bill, but a lot of contemporary atheists are obsessed with proving how smart… Read more »

Severian
3 years ago

Re: The Taki piece, can we all agree that the official state religion of America In Name Only should be called “Dinduism”? It’s got a caste system and everything — we’re the Dalits.

JohnSmith
JohnSmith
Reply to  Severian
3 years ago

The official state religion is Humanism / Socialism, as promoted by John Dewey, the Rockefellers, and the “secular” education system since the 1920s. Modern sects including “Dinduism”, “Feminism”, “Environmentalism”, etc. are offshoots of the mother church: “Today man’s larger understanding…requires a new statement of the means and purposes of religion… To establish such a religion is a major necessity… Religious humanists regard the universe as self-existing and not created. [We] believe that man is a part of nature and that he has emerged as a result of a continuous process… [We] are firmly convinced that… A socialized and cooperative economic… Read more »

Bill
Bill
Reply to  JohnSmith
3 years ago

Beliefs are all over the map. Beliefs supported by facts, not so much. Does the Humanist Manifesto give reasons for why they believe that “the Universe is self-existing and not created”? Scientists who believe that the Universe as we know it originated in the Big Bang can give evidence as to why they believe that to be true. Beliefs unsupported by evidence are no different from superstitions. In many cases, the ‘reasons’ people give for holding them come down to ‘It seems true’ or ‘It feels good to believe it’. > For so many questions, the only honest answer is… Read more »

KL
KL
Reply to  Bill
3 years ago

The existence of the monotheistic/Abrahamic God can be known a priori without “evidence” in the form of miracles or some other directly observable novel phenomena, which is probably what you mean by evidence. The existence of God is a philosophical proposition. This is actually an official teaching of the Catholic Church. The converse view, that the existence of God can only be known via Divine Revelation (miracles), is considered a heresy. All that Divine Revelation tells you is whether you should be a Christian monotheist, Muslim monotheist, Jewish monotheist, or whatever the Romans were trying to get at with the… Read more »

The Wild Geese Howard
The Wild Geese Howard
Reply to  Severian
3 years ago

There is a commenter on Unz who regularly posts the Ten Commandments of that church.

I’ll have to see if I can find them.

trackback
3 years ago

[…] ZMan takes a look under the covers. […]

JR Wirth
JR Wirth
3 years ago

I have a serious question. How much longer can a society go when its population can look at itself naked in a mirror and still be confused as to their gender? Do you have a prick or not?! Even at the height of decadent Rome, with all its pederast Caesars, etc., I doubt they were confused by this. And if so, doesn’t that mean that Christianity, after 2000 years, ultimately failed? If the religion of your civilization is so weak that it can no longer uphold the community standards of even genital sets, will it not be marked out of… Read more »

The Wild Geese Howard
The Wild Geese Howard
Reply to  JR Wirth
3 years ago

Looking at what has happened in the world, it seems that there are elements of Christianity that have sown the seeds which are undoing the Western world.

Take the tale of the Good Samaritan, which has been perverted into something that aligns with socialism.

Heck, the core story of Jesus himself is an issue because from that tale too many have internalized the idea they should sit around waiting for someone to save them rather than taking action.

What happened to, “the Lord helps those who help themselves?”

Bill Mullins
Member
Reply to  The Wild Geese Howard
3 years ago

What happened to, “the Lord helps those who help themselves?”

It went the way of the dodo and great auk. Didn’t you get the memo? Today’s world reviles self sufficiency as a racist, eurocentric male-originated social construct. The result from one point of view is a population of voters willing to vote for whichever pol offers the most givs-me-dats. The result from a contrasting point of view a population of baby birds, perpetually with their mouths open demanding to be fed.

Dinothedoxie
Dinothedoxie
Reply to  The Wild Geese Howard
3 years ago

Wokism is a perverted Christian heresy. Marxism was too and wokism is a post economic derivative of Marxism.

sentry
sentry
Reply to  JR Wirth
3 years ago

“As I follow the far right, I’ve noticed more than ever in the last few years a lashing out at Christianity. Is this not justified given the circumstances in which we find ourselves? Humanity is naturally repelled by things that are dead and used up. It’s a law of nature.” To me it’s obvious christianity is at its end(in the west at least), unless Christ performs a deus ex machina where he appears out of nowhere to save the west, then christianity is ova’. Russia(& some of its satellites) is the only region where christianity is being protected, the rest… Read more »

KL
KL
Reply to  sentry
3 years ago

Christianity has had huge growth in the third world. As for the west, it will become increasingly difficult for the non-wealthy to start families as living standards fall. Other than the affluent, the only people breeding will be people willing to go out of their way to do so–this will generally mean the religious. Liberalism will loose its appeal as a religion replacement as soon as the US loses global dominance, which will happen by mid-century, and the Chinese have shown no interest in spreading Marxism as a religion replacement. The future of world religion will be Christianity (mostly Catholicism… Read more »

BTP
Member
Reply to  JR Wirth
3 years ago

Well, in fairness, didn’t the Christians always say that the religion would ultimately fail? St. John didn’t see blood up to the horses’ bridles because Jesus was in a good mood.

Captain Willard
Captain Willard
Reply to  JR Wirth
3 years ago

I’m not sure Christianity failed. We’re right back in the Garden of Eden and the Serpent is ahead by three touchdowns. But there’s a lot of time left on the clock.

The Serpent has convinced these knuckleheads that they can change God’s decision to make them men or women and that a bite of the modern “philosophy” Apple has given them some special Knowledge about the nature of humanity not found in the Bible or preached by Jesus. It’s bitter fruit.

B125
B125
Reply to  Captain Willard
3 years ago

Idk, I look around and see white druggies, childless and depressed white women, wine moms, random foreigners everywhere, weak beta white males. A lost, sad, and confused people and nation.

At church, we have many white families, obedient women, people with peace and purpose. I don’t believe we are wrong, even if 95% of society is against Bible believing Christians. I’m not saying modern Christianity is perfect at all, but if you go, you will see a marked difference. You will see what and why made whites “great” in the first place.

acetone
Member
Reply to  JR Wirth
3 years ago

JR Wirth, you shouldn’t blame Christianity for our current bad circumstances. The religion has been around for 2000 years and served humanity well for most of this time. Now that things are bad and people are looking to assign blame, I think majority of blame should fall elsewhere. I blame enlightenment philosophy that elevated interest of individual over group, proposed the perfectibility of man and eroded authority of traditional institutions (monarchy, aristocracy, church). Individual over group aspect of enlightenment philosophy is particularly harmful as it prevents in group protection against harmful outsider groups and interests (e.g., libertarians, peoples with “13… Read more »

JR Wirth
JR Wirth
Reply to  acetone
3 years ago

I absolutely blame Christianity. The religion of the realm (whatever it is) is supposed to guard a society against the violations of the laws of nature. In this respect, Christianity has utterly failed. And if we’re depending on some latin mass millennials to re-boot it that’s not going to happen.

SidVic
SidVic
Member
Reply to  JR Wirth
3 years ago

Yeah, where the hell are my crusaders? my warrior monks?

American Citizen 2.0
American Citizen 2.0
Reply to  JR Wirth
3 years ago

Now that the Israeli’s control the US government, they don’t need to stoke the Christian ideology as a way of getting Americans to support them anymore. For the most part the strategy of differentiating the US Empire from, say, the Soviet Empire by means of Evangelical Christianity failed. But it was only ever a tool for developing fanatical adherents who would die in our Military for the sake of our overlords. They did the same exact thing with Islam, ISIS and other terrorist groups. In short, it’s all just another example of the Deep State brainwashing complex. But they have… Read more »

La-Z-Man
La-Z-Man
Reply to  JR Wirth
3 years ago

Survey the people with all these cockamamie ideas about gender fluidity and race as social construct and all the rest, and report back on % of them who go to church on the regular. Over under at 0.75%.

JR Wirth
JR Wirth
Reply to  La-Z-Man
3 years ago

I’m talking about the religion of the land, Christianity, having any kind of impact on society in 2021. It currently doesn’t.

Drew
Drew
Reply to  JR Wirth
3 years ago

” If the religion of your civilization is so weak that it can no longer uphold the community standards of even genital sets, will it not be marked out of history along with its adherents, or even former adherents?”

But is that the point of Christianity? If Christ, the founder, is to be taken at face value, then the point of Christianity is to reconcile man to God. Whether it upholds community standards would be, at best, a tertiary concern.

JR Wirth
JR Wirth
Reply to  Drew
3 years ago

A Christian from even 50 year ago would laugh at that statement.

Rwc1963
Rwc1963
Reply to  JR Wirth
3 years ago

Christianity lost it’s martial aspect and with it, it’s moral backbone. It has for the most part degenerated into the feel good crap of Joel Osteen(who ripped off Tony robbins) I read Gab a lot and it’s full of gutless Christians who are waiting for God to fix things. This is is not the Christianity of Charles Martel, Pope Urban II, or the Poles at Vienna in 1683. Heck even into the early 70’s Christianity still had a back bone. As to why it’s moral, martial spine is gone. It is because it was infiltrated by Leftists, feminists, gays and… Read more »

JR Wirth
JR Wirth
Reply to  Rwc1963
3 years ago

I totally agree, and it was allowed to happen. It was allowed to be co-opted, and continues to this day to be coopted and in decline. Even evangelicalism is in decline. So my assertion is that Christianity may have been a robust system in ancient times, but, like a dodo bird, has no natural defenses against the onslaught of the liberal democratic era. And any future dictator post liberalism will likely be atheistic in nature. And may even violently oppose Christianity itself.

Dinothedoxie
Dinothedoxie
Reply to  Rwc1963
3 years ago

Historically, Christianity has been weaker longer than its been strong (in your terms). At its inception it was a religion for slaves and women. And remained so for centuries. After it became the dominant religion in the Mediterranean it certainly played a role in the decline of the Roman Empire. In the sixth century it failed completely in preventing the Arabs from conquering half of Christendom in short order. It also didn’t prevent pagan barbarians from over running France and Britain and the Balkans. The strong form you refer to was mostly poorly assimilated norsemen and their descendants who came… Read more »

Severian
3 years ago

Orwell wasn’t sure which came first — is our language bad because we’re stupid and foolish, or are we so stupid and foolish because our language is bad? — but I think the 75 years between “Politics and the English Language” and the Current Year have provided the answer: It’s the former. If language were prior, than the stuff Z and Orwell describe would’ve ended in the 1970s, with the abortion “debate.” The Left did their usual thing, framing the pro-abortion position as “pro-choice.” Who could possibly be against “choice”? So long as you don’t name the barbaric procedure —… Read more »

Aurelia Prima
Aurelia Prima
Reply to  Severian
3 years ago

So you think women should be forced to bring children into the world that they do not want? We have statistics on how those types of situations turn out. Wasn’t it Freakonomics that informed us that the crime wave decreasing in the ’90s was due to Roe v Wade (unwanted children not being born leads to fewer violent criminals). Per Duns Scotus, life is ALWAYS a potential, never a necessity. Will is always paramount. Hunter-gatherer societies (and all ancient societies) accepted infanticide. I agree it is not always pleasant (100 million little girls “disappeared” under the one-child rule in China).… Read more »

Dinothedoxie
Dinothedoxie
Reply to  Severian
3 years ago

It’s mostly forgotten today, but a key element of the Roe v Wade legal battle was that Roe had been raped by a black man – and who could force such a horror on her. It was. A provable lie as she had to forego the abortion for the legal case to move forward and it wasn’t a mulatto – she subsequently admitted that it was a long term boyfriend that impregnated her.

G Lordon Giddy
G Lordon Giddy
3 years ago

There are countless examples of language manipulation in our modern age “ consumer” instead of citizen…” gay” once meant a happy person now it’s associated with homosexuality…
“ inclusive” now means anti white…on and on it goes these rulers of ours in the modern age hate us.

The Greek
The Greek
Reply to  G Lordon Giddy
3 years ago

“Anti-fascists” being violent terrorists. If you’re against antifa, then you must be pro fascist.

Slick Willy
Slick Willy
Reply to  G Lordon Giddy
3 years ago

See Confucius and the Rectification of Names. A very long time ago. You cannot have a sound polity with a corrupted language.

Moss
Member
3 years ago

We must again practice with the Weapon of Language as an offensive weapon. It’s going to hurt. To bad.

Notice in pastor Doug Wilson’s discussion here https://dougwils.com/video/how-do-i-find-a-church-with-a-spine-doug-wilson.html
that “words” addressing the woman of a church identify with a “church with a spine”.

When white men with spines were the majority, they (we) failed to realize that discounting the power of words (ideas expressed) from the mouths of soft enemies over time would put us on the road to Babylon.

Moss
Member
Reply to  Moss
3 years ago

That would be Too Bad. Before the grammar Nazi’s get me.

Bill Mullins
Member
Reply to  Moss
3 years ago

Meh. I skipped right over it, figuring it was a typo.

Chet Rollins
Chet Rollins
3 years ago

We lost extremely effective words that ar eno longer permitted in polite society. Imagine how much easier life would be to cut through the nonsense if you could still say:

Sodomite
Bastard
Whore

There’s a reason these words were effectively outlawed, because they cut too deep into the primal realities of human societies.

Streets n San
Streets n San
Reply to  Chet Rollins
3 years ago

Well, as an actual bastard born pale, blonde-haired and blue-eyed into an ethnic, dark-skinned family from the mountainous Caucuses, I just laugh when I hear the word. Tabulations have our number at about 15% of the white population. I suffer no shame for an act beyond my control and I am damned glad to be here.

Bilejones
Member
Reply to  Streets n San
3 years ago

There are some bastards who cannot be named.

comment image

Streets n San
Streets n San
Reply to  Bilejones
3 years ago

If I had their funding, after the Apache career finale I would be at Cambridge working very small-level physics experiments for the rest of my life with winter break at CERN or Fermi. I would not be losing large chunks of my life to federal trials or haggling over patent rights. Harry was too stupid or vindictive to appreciate what he formerly enjoyed in support.

Captain Willard
Captain Willard
3 years ago

“Instead of being defined by the biological necessity of reproduction, it was just an invention to suppress women and manage property rights to the favor of males.” If only………..I don’t think any man who has gone to divorce court lately would see it this way. The modern “social construct” of matrimony is a very different beast from marriage of yore. That said, Zman’s valuable point that the Progs’ game is to gut or pervert ancient institutions is essential in understanding their MO. But thermodynamics are not a “social construct”. Weight lifted, work done, crops harvested, problems solved, machines fixed……….the fog… Read more »

Chet Rollins
Chet Rollins
Reply to  Captain Willard
3 years ago

Modern marriage is a man paying child support to see his children and his wife pinky-swearing not to divorce or lie about him, even though there’s literally no legal penalty for doing so..

Right to sex? What are you, a rapist?
Permanent marriage? What are you, a serial abuser?
Wife stay at home? What are you, a control freak?
Expectation that she follows your leadership? She’s a strong, empowered womyn. How dare you.

Also, better get cracking that housing addition, because you want her to be happy and be a good husband. Don’t want her to be unhappy, do you?

Ben the Layabout
Ben the Layabout
Reply to  Chet Rollins
3 years ago

Recently I saw (probably on a right wing web site, to be fair; that’s where I get most of my “news”) that the traditional word “Mother” is out; now it should be “birthing person.” While I doubt that medical science has quite gotten to the point where a transexual male (still with his XY chromosomes) can get pregnant, I would not put that past technology… 🙁

BTP
Member
Reply to  Chet Rollins
3 years ago

Guys. If a man’s dog misbehaves, it’s not really the dog’s fault. You see where I’m going here?

TomA
TomA
3 years ago

The intentional disinformation campaign being waged against binary sex is a symptom of a much, much bigger problem. It’s not simply about the deranged conduct of a small fraction of society leading everyone else off a cliff of irrationality, but at its essence is a social cancer that will eventually kill off our ancestral robustness and lead us into extinction if we just sit back and do nothing to remedy the disease. And by remedy, I mean excise the cancer cells. A woman diagnosed with breast cancer has a 90+% chance of remission if caught early when the first lump… Read more »

Bill
Bill
Reply to  TomA
3 years ago

And if the last Presidential election really was stolen: does voting even matter anymore?

Or is seeking change ‘within the system’ no longer possible?

Vizzini
Member
Reply to  Bill
3 years ago

The entire raison d’être for this site is that seeking change ‘within the system’ is no longer possible.

JohnSmith
JohnSmith
Reply to  Vizzini
3 years ago

Reveal the method, expose the players, tear down the stage. Offer a better model for society. This seems like the only practical defense against the fascist CFR/WEF/UN “Great Reset” agenda.

Rwc1963
Rwc1963
Reply to  JohnSmith
3 years ago

Neutralize the opposition permanently. Job number one. Unless we do that they will simply come back and infiltrate whatever we build.

There is compromise with these people, they are evil and destructive. Otherwise known as “goodwhites”

OrangeFrog
OrangeFrog
Reply to  Bill
3 years ago

To be fair, voting didn’t really matter way before the Resident Biden debacle. As is a constant theme of Z’s writing, whatever the system is doing, it is not going to be working for the interests of whites. Specifically whites-like-us. Every time I read about a new politician ‘making waves’, I do a bit a background reading (this isn’t even required these days) and imagine myself down the pub with xzhir. What would I talk about with xzhir? Would xzhir concede that the whole Covid business is an epic overreaction? Would xzhir concede that the government and a huge amount… Read more »

Maus
Maus
Reply to  OrangeFrog
3 years ago

Who would down vote this? If even a third of society were as measured and reasonable as OF is in this post, we wouldn’t be in this mess in the first place. But, tragically, men like OF are so few and scattered that hope for a better future is enkindled by the mere prospect of what is essentially a DR mobile home park.
When ordinary people with reasonable ideas are subjected to scorn, the rising tide of envy ensures that no good thing will escape being washed away. The movie Idiocracy was not an amusing fiction but a dire prophecy.

Bill Mullins
Member
Reply to  TomA
3 years ago

Sorry, Tom, but you’re assuming we’re not already at stage 4 – and LATE stage four at that. It’s like when my Mom died with cancer back in 04. By the time she was actually diagnosed she was already in late stage 4. She was diagnosed in May and I removed the nasal cannula from her nose at the hospice in early August. I suspect we are already past the point of no.return, no correction. We’are like those poor people in the twin towers above where the airliners impacted. We’re already dead, we’re simply still breathing. About all we –… Read more »

JohnSmith
JohnSmith
Reply to  Bill Mullins
3 years ago

Cheer up, Bill! It ain’t over till it’s over. Of the 3 main tribes (European, Asian, African), Europeans are already a minority.
Bur civilization still dominates, and has (up till now) set the standards for others to copy.

If we want to have a future, the irrational, self-destructive “woke” psychosis must be cured. Perhaps it is not yet terminal.

Bill
Bill
3 years ago

Experience has taught me the same thing: that attempting to reason with what Z is calling a partisan is a waste of time. This is so because these people are emotionally-wedded to what they believe: they have an intense emotional investment in their beliefs being true. If one questions their beliefs, it’s not just a question of competing interpretations of the facts; it’s tantamount in their minds to attacking them. Their beliefs are indeed like a religion to them, and they hold to their beliefs with all the fervor of a committed believer. It’s not just ‘correct vs. incorrect’, it’s… Read more »

Dinothedoxie
Dinothedoxie
Reply to  Bill
3 years ago

Even the “social-construct” meme fails on closer examination.

The proper response to that assertion is “so what”? It may be a social construct, but it’s one of my culture and anyone attacking it needs to provide overwhelming evidence of why it should be changed. Cultural relativity is not a reason to embrace novelty for its own sake. If all cultures are morally equivalent then stating that mine is inferior in some way and needs to change is cultural imperialism

Bill
Bill
Reply to  Dinothedoxie
3 years ago

It’s G.K. Chesterton’s point about the fence: before we remove it, we’d better understand why it was put there in the first place.

The ‘change for the sake of change’ mentality fails to acknowledge this fact about long-held customs: there’s a reason they persisted.

But in today’s Progressive ‘reasoning’, the mere fact that a custom originated with Old White Men— those racist sexist xenophobic homophobic transphobic misogynistic slave-owning bigots— is enough to demand it be thrown out.

Dinothedoxie
Dinothedoxie
Reply to  Bill
3 years ago

Yes, but why? For the sake of argument say that their line of attack is all true. So what? Why should any white person want to destroy a system that favors them to become equivalent to blacks under Jim Crow? What’s in it for them? There’s no answer to that point. I contend that the woke phenomenon is a perversion of Christian ethics that elevated the poor and powerless. But the thing is that doing so was a path to the Christian heaven. Jesus said that at judgement day he would say that people who helped the poor had helped… Read more »

Rwc1963
Rwc1963
Reply to  Dinothedoxie
3 years ago

Wokeness is a synthesis of PoMo and Cultural Marxism. It’s PoMo origins can be traced to Derrida and Foucault – both uber degenerates and sexual predators When Derrida came to the U.S. his teachings were quickly adapted by Yale and the other Ivies and it spread from there and poisoned the minds of countless mush brained college students who had no idea what sort of evil brew they were indulging. BTW the notion of the social construct comes from these scumbags. Right now we are in the incipient stages of a Maoist style revolution replete with Red Guards(antifa, BLM and… Read more »

c matt
c matt
Reply to  Dinothedoxie
3 years ago

“Diversity is our strength” is the ultimate social construct.

Ostei Kozelskii
Member
Reply to  c matt
3 years ago

It’s merely a lie.

American Citizen 2.0
American Citizen 2.0
Reply to  Ostei Kozelskii
3 years ago

We just aren’t included in the “our” and never were. Diversity very much is their strength. We are isolated, outnumbered, and old. They are young, united by a racial hatred for us, and numerous.

Evil Sandmich
Evil Sandmich
Reply to  Bill
3 years ago

Not to toot someone else’s horn but Sailer had theorized that a little while ago, that this is the last great racial power grab before science puts an end to the scam. Now Sailer being Sailer, he’s perhaps a touch optimistic on both counts (that it’s the “last”, and that more factual information will make much of a difference), however there does seem to be an effort to “crank the volume up” on leftist screaming rather than be serious about much of anything.

Citizen of a Silly Country
Citizen of a Silly Country
3 years ago

Chiming in on Z’s Taki Post, here’s a great paragraph from Loyola’s anti-racism department: “Ultimately, it is for People of Color to decide if one is actually behaving in anti-racist ways. When one finds that they are out of alignment, they need to do what is necessary and try to repair the situation. Being racist or anti-racist is not about who you are; it is about what you do.” Ironically, I’m all for this. I want POC to shove this stuff down the throats of Goodwhites and CivNats. I want them to grovel because it will wake up other Whites.… Read more »

Bill
Bill
Reply to  Citizen of a Silly Country
3 years ago

Yep! The “racial reckoning” is not about achieving equality and a level playing field; it’s about getting back at Whitey, at getting revenge for the wrongs they see as having been done to them.

As more and more White people realize this, some of them will find themselves on our side of the great divide.

Citizen of a Silly Country
Citizen of a Silly Country
Reply to  Bill
3 years ago

I realize that ~30%-40% of Whites are utterly hopeless. Another ~40% are CivNat fence-sitters hoping to ride this out in peace. But there are probably a good 20% to 30% of Whites who really hate this shit.

We have 200 million Whites in this country. Forty to sixty million is a lot of people. Hell, even if its only 10% of Whites, that’s 20 million people.

They just need to know that there’s no escape from this. That groveling to POC will never end. That’s when people start to say, hey, what do I have to lose.

Dinothedoxie
Dinothedoxie
Reply to  Citizen of a Silly Country
3 years ago

I’d say that most whites, everywhere, just go with the flow. Parrot back whatever will get them through the day with the minimum amount of pain. (This does not apply to Blacks, btw)

So the true believers are probably in the 10-15% range. Hardcore opponents may well be a large percentage of the population. The difference is that the woke believers control the power centers of our country: the government, big business, media, academia. They are using of those institutions to inflict their religion on us. Which is somewhat effective because of the overwhelming majority’s passivity.

Bill
Bill
Reply to  Citizen of a Silly Country
3 years ago

Bottom line, it’s a culture war, a war of ideas. If we’re going to prevail, it’ll be through convincing a majority of our fellow Whites of the truth of what’s happening. Convincing them to migrate to our side of the great divide.

Dinothedoxie
Dinothedoxie
Reply to  Bill
3 years ago

The best way of doing so is gaining control of power centers and then using those to make our way the path of least resistance.

B125
B125
Reply to  Citizen of a Silly Country
3 years ago

This is one reason I don’t really lose any sleep over the declining % of whites. Clearly being 90%, 80%, 70% white didn’t actually help us out because the demographic change never stopped. It’s about our side growing, having lots of kids, building communities. Normiecons have the standard 1.7 kids, religious whites have 2-2.5 kids. It’s really the liberals who are having 1 or fewer kids. The problem is somewhat self correcting, though they’re after your kids. Whites are the fastest growing demographic of Honduras (Mennonites) and Mormon / Mennonite communities are growing in mexico. In a corrupt dysfunctional non… Read more »

Vizzini
Member
Reply to  B125
3 years ago

I welcome our Mennonite overlords.

JohnSmith
JohnSmith
Reply to  B125
3 years ago

Even the Mennonites have succumbed:

“Albuquerque Mennonite Church have announced [2017] that they have called Erica Lea to be their pastor — the first openly LGBTQ person to serve as a lead pastor in the Mennonite Church USA, a denomination that claims more than 70,000 adult members in the U.S…”

https://sojo.net/articles/erica-lea-become-first-openly-lgbtq-lead-pastor-mennonite-church-usa

Vizzini
Member
Reply to  B125
3 years ago

“Even the Mennonites have succumbed:”

Wow, that’s depressing.

Vizzini
Member
Reply to  B125
3 years ago

It seems the Mennonite Church of the USA is really only representative of the liberal (pozzed!) wing of the Mennonites. There are Conservative and Old Order Mennonite groups that have no truck with them. Those are the ones that are visibly Mennonite — plain dress, etc.

MCUSA seems like the same group of Satanists that have taken over the other mainstream Protestant denominations.

Bill
Bill
Reply to  B125
3 years ago

Back a few years ago, when I worked at a daytime drop in homeless shelter in northern VA, I knew two Black crack whores. One had had 13 kids, the other had had 11. ALL the kids had been taken away by the System. Now if every one of those kids goes on to have 11 or 13 kids of their own…. That’s not likely to happen, but you get my drift: in today’s Welfare State societies, the least-capable among us are not only surviving, they’re thriving: reproducing much faster than the rest of us. The same thing is happening… Read more »

Ben the Layabout
Ben the Layabout
Reply to  Bill
3 years ago

A rarely-noted aspect of the oppressed minority (tradionally the Negro in the American version of this ongoing drama) is simply this. While they certainly had legitimate claims to having suffered various types of oppression in the past (sometimes very distant past), well intentioned Whites have rectified all, or nearly all, that can be fixed. At present, they have very little to legitimately complain about for the past few generations. What they’ll NEVER ADMIT, perhaps, is the subconscious realization that as a group, they can never equal the Whites. This is pure envy (in the “obsolete” definition: “ill will”). They know… Read more »

Bill
Bill
Reply to  Ben the Layabout
3 years ago

Even that “oppression” charge fails under close scrutiny:

Today we know that Blacks commit crimes at a rate way disproportionate to their numbers: they comprise 1/8 of the population, yet routinely commit over half the crimes.

So…. if this disproportion has existed from the beginning, since Emancipation— and there’s good reason to believe it has— then the “oppression” and “discrimination” and “prejudice” Blacks and liberals complain about, was merely a reasonable reaction to reality.

American Citizen 2.0
American Citizen 2.0
Reply to  Ben the Layabout
3 years ago

They just want the reparations check. They don’t want to be evaluated as being as good as whites. They generally completely reject anything white people do. But the idea that the only thing white people have going for them is money is practically universal. There are a lot of really stupid rich white people who can’t do math, inherited their money, and never really do anything productive. Black people can definitely do that job just as well and they know it. They just want the cash. And as we have seen over the last year, they are here to get… Read more »

Maus
Maus
Reply to  Citizen of a Silly Country
3 years ago

When confronted by some cretinous POC giving vent to a perceived “racist” failure on his or her part, I am convinced that most actually want to say, “STFU Ni***r!” But they won’t because they fear that Loyola will expel them and ensure their status as a pariah. Our first goal should be to encourage them to explore the deeper question, which is why they care what Loyola or the Wokerati think of them. A further goal ought to be offering something of equal or greater value to the illusory promise with which Loyola beguiles them. If we cannot achieve these… Read more »

B125
B125
3 years ago

Language / micro aggressions are literally violence / racism now. That’s why Africans think it’s ok to murder somebody for using the dreaded “n word”. I have another example. An acquaintances wife went shopping in an area “where there aren’t many Asians”. She returned distraught and said she was facing racism at the store. I asked him what happened and he said that people were “looking at” her and the cashier was “rude” to her. To me it sounds like awkward eye contact that happens on a regular basis in a public area, plus a regular rude grocery store employee… Read more »

B125
B125
Reply to  B125
3 years ago

I should also add that it will be easy to weaponize all these victims of racism into the perfect anti white tools, even to the point of violence. After all she literally faced violence and racism just going to the store, so why wouldn’t whitey get it in return?

OrangeFrog
OrangeFrog
Reply to  B125
3 years ago

That’s the thing: crummy-ass customer service, cock-eyed looks from other people (including other races), being shoved in the street, being ignored, being mocked &c, happen all the time. To everybody. Used to be we accepted some aspect of the struggle, but in today’s world a certain selection of people see offence/bigotry/racism/other-ism everywhere. It really is crazy when you stop to think about it, this is no way to run a country. And these sorts of people now have positions of power, so can indulge there hysterics upon the rest of us. In my experience woke whites are of course the… Read more »

Ostei Kozelskii
Member
Reply to  OrangeFrog
3 years ago

Offense is a consequence of living in a free society. Since offense experienced by preferred groups is no longer allowed, society is in chains. And whites are being led to the dungeon.

OrangeFrog
OrangeFrog
Reply to  Ostei Kozelskii
3 years ago

Nicely put, Ostei.

Bill
Bill
Reply to  B125
3 years ago

B125,

Indeed! Convince a POC that racists are everywhere, and they’ll be ‘finding’ racism everywhere they look; even where it isn’t.

And when they react with hostility, as if racism has occurred, then whatever racist assumptions their interlocutor may have, are confirmed and amplified.

It’s the worst thing one can do to a young POC, to convince them that racism lurks behind every bush and every cash register; condemning them to a lifetime of paranoia and alienation.

Ben the Layabout
Ben the Layabout
Reply to  Bill
3 years ago

All the better to advocate total separation of the races. “Since we white folks are all incorrigible racists, why the hell would you want to be around us? 😀

Judge Smails
Judge Smails
Reply to  Ben the Layabout
3 years ago

Why do they want to be around us is the eternal question. I am sure there are at least 3.5 billion people on the planet that would their life, family, and friends in their own country in a split second if given the opportunity to move to the most racist, oppressive nation that ever existed. I find that very odd.

American Citizen 2.0
American Citizen 2.0
Reply to  Judge Smails
3 years ago

They don’t want to be around us. They want the money.

Gespenst
Gespenst
Reply to  Ben the Layabout
3 years ago

What good is separating the races unless you can keep the whites you want and keep out those you don’t?
Woke whites are the ones cramming diversity down the throats of normal people.

Federalist
Federalist
Reply to  B125
3 years ago

“…went shopping in an area ‘where there aren’t many Asians’. She returned distraught and said she was facing racism at the store.”

She would have had no problems if she shopped in an area where there were many, many Asians – like Asia.

Wolf Barney
Wolf Barney
Reply to  B125
3 years ago

That makes me think of the Covington Catholic kids, where Nick Sandmann simply stood his ground smiling at the old Indian guy pounding the drum in his face, resulting in front-page international news.

I don’t care if those Covington kids jumped up and down and made woo-woo-woo noises like Kramer in that Cigar Store Indian episode, no way in a rational society should that be any kind of news. In fact, in a rational society, that would be an expected response when a rude Indian pounds his drum in your face.

Bill Mullins
Member
Reply to  B125
3 years ago

I, OTOH, have observed an enormous increase in the number of nearsighted people I encounter since the Governor of Texas ended the lockdown. You see, ever since that day I have refused to wear a mask. Since I stopped wearing a mask I have noticed a lot of people who appear to be nearsighted. I mean what other explanation can there be for all the people looking at me and squinting?😉😁

Salmon
Salmon
Reply to  Bill Mullins
3 years ago

You needed Cuck Abbott’s permission to stop doing that, huh?

nailheadtom
nailheadtom
3 years ago

“There are customs and institutions, for sure, but those are things that evolved within a people over a period of trial and error.” These customs and institutions didn’t just arrive out of the clear blue sky. As you say, they came about to solve some kind of problem. The solution has to be acceptable to those in power at the moment. The Jeffrey Epstein imbroglio is a good example. While being called a sexual predator and pedophile, Epstein was actually following the tenets of nature itself, which allows post-pubescent female humans to engage in sex and bear children. There’s nothing… Read more »

David Wright
Member
Reply to  nailheadtom
3 years ago

What a remarkably stupid take.

Glenfilthie
Glenfilthie
Member
Reply to  David Wright
3 years ago

Indeed. How did this one get over the great divide? May be we should throw him back? What errant nonsense.

Classical Marriage arose the way it did because it was a good deal for everyone. Men and women could divide tasks, and combine resources and accomplish more as a team than as individuals. Molesting children has never been a survival trait and the problems with it are obvious… except to a significant number of jewish perverts and their sycophants.

nailheadtom
nailheadtom
Reply to  Glenfilthie
3 years ago

Translated to English that’s almost exactly what a Muslim cleric would say. Make them wear burkhas and veils in public and don’t let them loose on their own.

Vizzini
Member
Reply to  nailheadtom
3 years ago

And? Islam recognizes something important about unfettered sexuality. The mores of Christianity addressed the same problems in a way that I think is superior, but that doesn’t mean Islam was wrong in its diagnosis.

Then we abandoned the lessons of centuries.

Islam isn’t wrong to despise the morality of the modern West.

JohnSmith
JohnSmith
Reply to  nailheadtom
3 years ago

Epstein and Maxwell were manipulative sociopaths, using vulnerable “white trash” girls for their own perverse gratification, and to obtain blackmail material on politicians and other power players.

Maxwell’s father, UK media baron Robert Maxwell, was known as “Israel’s Superspy”. Epstein was a member of both the CFR and the Trilateral Commission, along with his good buddy Bill Clinton.

Dinothedoxie
Dinothedoxie
Reply to  JohnSmith
3 years ago

All of that is true, but mostly irrelevant to the points he made. Biological reality is that post pubescent “teenage” girls have been sexual active throughout human history. Trading sex for money or other material advantage is icky to us, but has been happening forever. If in this particular case, Epstein and Gislane were taking advantage of the women in some way, where the fuck were their parents when they disappeared for days at a time? Why wasn’t that abuse by the parents? I’m coming to believe that the UR problem with YT cultures that led to all the others… Read more »

JohnSmith
JohnSmith
Reply to  Dinothedoxie
3 years ago

All of us are being raped by these elitists every day, mentally and physically, and they use the “weapon of language” to tie us down.

The way women in general and motherhood in particular have been degraded over the past 60 years is shocking. “Our side” is doomed to literal extinction unless that bondage can be broken.

Vizzini
Member
Reply to  Dinothedoxie
3 years ago

Epstein and those like him are opportunistic parasites drawn to a dysfunctional society they both exploit and encourage. Epstein is just an uglier face of the same thing going on at Disney, Nickelodeon and the culture in general, and it has been going on for generations. First destroy the morals of the people (literally “demoralize”) then snap up the vulnerable offspring of the weakened people. Sure, the girls’ parents were terrible, but it is the Epsteins of the world — both literally him and those exploiting our children in the name of progressive “morality” that need to be eliminated from… Read more »

nailheadtom
nailheadtom
Reply to  Vizzini
3 years ago

Take a look at a picture of Harvey Weinstein and his former wife Georgina Chapman. This repulsive, obnoxious slob was married to an attractive woman 24 years younger than he. Why do you suppose this elegant lady even deigned to speak to that oaf, much less exchange vows with him? Do you think that she’d have become just as enamored if Harvey had been the driver of the car that took her back and forth to the studio instead of the head of the production company? Or was she simply putty in the greasy fingers of that prick? An interesting… Read more »

Vizzini
Member
Reply to  Vizzini
3 years ago

” The only real voice of reason in this argument is Camille Paglia, who says that women are responsible for themselves.” Women are, in a lot of cases, idiots with regard to their sexuality and modern society encourages them to be so. That’s why we developed customs and institutions — “social constructs” over thousands of years to safeguard women’s sexuality. Those Victorian mores that insisted that women should be chaperoned in the presence of men weren’t just made up for kicks or to oppress women. That’s the point of this entire article! Camille Paglia is a societal wrecker. She’s simply… Read more »

Vizzini
Member
Reply to  Vizzini
3 years ago

I should add that men, too, are idiots with regard to their sexuality and the societal customs also protected *them* from the consequences of “thinking with their little head.”

The customs were there for a reason!

nailheadtom
nailheadtom
Reply to  Vizzini
3 years ago

“Women are, in a lot of cases, idiots”

So, we arrive at the inescapable conclusion, what this entire discussion boils down to, women are different than men and can’t be treated as men are. They have occupied a certain place in society for millennia and do so to this day in many societies. Their struggles to become fighter pilots, firemen,CEOs, priests, cops and congressmen have simply resulted in embarrassment.

Good ol' Rebel
Good ol' Rebel
Reply to  Dinothedoxie
3 years ago

If your response to teenaged white girls being plied with drugs and booze and then raped is “they had it coming,” then you are a moral midget and too short for this ride.

sentry
sentry
Reply to  Dinothedoxie
3 years ago

“Epstein and Gislane were taking advantage of the women in some way, where the fuck were their parents when they disappeared for days at a time?”

they probably died or were ruined when america saved the precious muslims by destroying yugoslavia.
j*uws came in & grabbed some young girls like they did back in their khazarian days.
lots of children get kidnapped in eastern europe if parents are broke.

Long live american j*uwcracy!

The Wild Geese Howard
The Wild Geese Howard
Reply to  Dinothedoxie
3 years ago

In today’s sick, sad world the truth is that there are tons of parents who are more than willing to pimp their kids out for money and fame.

Peabody
Peabody
3 years ago

I may have shared this before here but it bears repeating given the topic. I once had a very prescient professor (in the before times) who said “Those who do not understand how words are used will be used by them”. Wise as he was I’m not sure even he could have predicted today’s tyranny of words.

Bill Mullins
Member
Reply to  Peabody
3 years ago

It’s simple really.
Control the vocabulary, control the language.
Control the language, control the narrative.
Control the narrative, control . . .
Damned near everything!
War is peace.
Freedom is slavery.
Ignorance is strength.

Forget Jeanne Dixon, Edgar Cayce or Nostradamus, it’s Orwell who gets my vote for greatest prophet since Biblical times!

American Citizen 2.0
American Citizen 2.0
3 years ago

Yet another great post. This cognitive ellipses really sticks with me though: “the default for eons” The dissonance of facts and clear language for the beclowned, wine-besotted Aunt has an analogue in traditionalist’s “default for eons” though. What if I am a Bedouin and I say that buggery has always been the way our tribe deals with outsiders. Why should I have to explain or justify the default for eons, he says, as he rips your pants off and goes to work on your hind-end. I get the feeling that you wouldn’t be so deferential to the default for eons… Read more »

JohnSmith
JohnSmith
Reply to  American Citizen 2.0
3 years ago

Since the psychology tends towards “picking sides” as the default, then perhaps we should use our words to create a strong, positive image for “our side”.

We could start with a simple slogan like “Civilized Life Matters”, and force the other side to argue against it. The goal is to put globo-homo on the defensive, to show them up as corrupt and degenerate, and to get the “silent majority” to support our vision instead of theirs.

Vizzini
Member
Reply to  American Citizen 2.0
3 years ago

The poison of cultural cowardice and moral relativism. Have the courage to defending your own culture instead of gauging in musings about theoretical buggering savages. You’ll know what to do when you encounter them.

“Be it so. This burning of widows is your custom; prepare the funeral pile. But my nation has also a custom. When men burn women alive we hang them, and confiscate all their property. My carpenters shall therefore erect gibbets on which to hang all concerned when the widow is consumed. Let us all act according to national customs.” ― Charles James Napier

Maus
Maus
Reply to  Vizzini
3 years ago

Indeed. Practically speaking, “Vae victis” is the only truly universal custom in our fallen world. The victor dictates the terms of conquest; and the vanquished submit. So fight to win or die trying.

American Citizen 2.0
American Citizen 2.0
Reply to  Vizzini
3 years ago

Exactly. The default for eons is that we will kick your butt. That’s about it.

ProZNoV
ProZNoV
3 years ago

In re: Takimag — that was the funniest misquote of Glubb I’ve ever read. Depressing, but funny.

“This new religion, the worship of black people, may be the sign we have reached the final stage. It comes crashing down in an orgy of crime, foot washing, and self-flagellation by a people no longer fit to rule.”

Bill Mullins
Member
Reply to  ProZNoV
3 years ago

It may get me sent to the gulag but I categorically refuse to genuflect in the presence of holy negro. Actually, being non-Catholic, I have never genuflected in my life and see no reason to start now!

usNthem
usNthem
3 years ago

You have to wonder when, or even if reality will ever make itself known in dramatic fashion. The longer this garbage goes on, the more likely people will accept it as “reality”. When are we going to start hearing the sun actually rises in the west, the sky isn’t blue and snow isn’t white?

Jack Dobson
Jack Dobson
Reply to  usNthem
3 years ago

That’s the point and it’s devastatingly effective.

ProZNoV
ProZNoV
Reply to  usNthem
3 years ago

The patina lent by the appeal to authority is irrestibale.

The “Harvard Implicit Association Test” should be right up there in credibility with the Myers-Brigs personality test, astrology, and phrenology but..

It’s HARVARD. Smurt people go to HARVARD. You’re not qualified to call it quackery because you didn’t go to HARVARD.

(the IAT is a whole steaming mess of quackery. Don’t bother taking it…I’ll spare the suspense: you’re secretly racist)

Ostei Kozelskii
Member
Reply to  ProZNoV
3 years ago

Who cares? The people who control Harvard are explicitly racist. Against whites.

Vizzini
Member
Reply to  ProZNoV
3 years ago

“The ‘Harvard Implicit Association Test’ should be right up there in credibility with the Myers-Brigs personality test…”

Unfortunately *it is*!

You’ll find supposedly respectable businessmen pushing Myers-Briggs or clones of it on hapless employees all over the country as part of employee “development” exercises.

Maus
Maus
Reply to  ProZNoV
3 years ago

Racism is a nothingburger. If I have white privilege, then I intend to enjoy it. As for blacks, they’re 13% of the national population. They were once enslaved; now they’re not. For that fact alone they should be supremely grateful; but gratitude is completely foreign to their nature. When a child continually whines for a cookie and the adult capitulates, this enervates both. To then have to listen to the child gripe about the quality or size of the cookie is frankly an inducement to rage. Finally, one is told that striking a child — even as a means of… Read more »

JohnSmith
JohnSmith
Reply to  usNthem
3 years ago

It is now widely accepted as “reality” that the extra CO2 produced by human activity is somehow responsible for catastrophic “global warming”, that the only solution to this problem is a “zero carbon” future, etc. This is even a fanatical religious belief for some, and woe unto any heretic who says otherwise!

Of course, this myth has been crafted and promoted by the oligarchs of the CFR, the Bilderberg group, the Club of Rome, the World Economic Forum, the UN, etc. to advance their own “global governance” agenda.

https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/

The Wild Geese Howard
The Wild Geese Howard
Reply to  JohnSmith
3 years ago

The unstated goal of’ “carbon reduction'” is the removal of the carbon-based lifeform known as man.

Ben the Layabout
Ben the Layabout
Reply to  JohnSmith
3 years ago

. Agree that “climate change” is a racket that, in money terms, probably has already outstripped what was spent on trying to achieve racial equality. As contentious subjects go, it’s still more acceptable to debate global warming than wokeism in public. I post on some forums as one of the “deniers.” It’s fun to poke fun at greens who, for example, claim that wind & solar power is already cheaper than coal. “Why then are so many nations still building coal plants, if that is the case?” Alas, as is often lameted here, it’s close to useless trying to reason… Read more »

Bill
Bill
Reply to  usNthem
3 years ago

usNthem,

I believe it was Orwell who pointed out that getting people to repeat ‘facts’ they know aren’t true— but which they’ll be severely penalized for not publicly embracing— is a totalitarian strategy of threat of humiliation leading to unthinking compliance.

Reziac
Reziac
3 years ago

A similar method is to attach a qualifier to the norm, frex: Responsible steward (of the land, or whatever) This creates the illusion that the =default= state is the “irresponsible steward” — and normal ordinary stewards are now forced to defend themselves and prove that they too are “responsible” lest they be cast into the outer darkness. (And the way it’s framed, this results in having to prove a negative: “I’m not irresponsible” vs ever-tightening definitions of “responsible”.) [Slightly obfuscated to head off a different argument, but I’ve seen an entire formerly-honorable profession denigrated and ultimately destroyed by recasting them… Read more »

Jack Dobson
Jack Dobson
3 years ago

Short version: this is what the Frankfurt Schooll hath wrought. Disfiguring language is the final step toward obliterating objective reality. Even now objective reality is denounced as “racist” or “transgendered” or whatever is the current hobgoblin of totalitarians and/or psychopaths. Objective reality no longer is required even within a courtroom as evidenced by the Chauvin trial and the judicial commissars hellbent on sending insurrectionists, a/k/a political opponents, to America’s Lubyanka. As an aside, but not unrelated, it hit me this weekend why there has been such a meltdown over Liz Cheney, a totally grotesque and despicable monster. The GOP, of… Read more »

The Wild Geese Howard
The Wild Geese Howard
Reply to  Jack Dobson
3 years ago

The entire Liz Cheney thing is bizarre.

She, and many others are speaking and acting as though she has the level of power her father once held.

Huh?

JohnSmith
JohnSmith
Reply to  Jack Dobson
3 years ago

Liz Cheney is a former CFR member, and daughter of former CFR director Dick Cheney.

Here’s a short article on the history of the “culture war” launched by the Frankfurt School emigres, and the “Congress for Cultural Freedom” of the 1950s and 60s. The article mentions Allen Dulles, Henry Luce, C.D. Jackson, etc. Nearly all of them were CFR members:

https://modernhistoryproject.org/mhp?Article=Kulturkampf

Hoagie
Hoagie
3 years ago

The first paragraph is one of the finest I’ve read. Thank you Zman.

Shrugger
Shrugger
3 years ago

When the church I used to belong to was debating same-sex marriage because of a bad choice in calling a new pastor, they held a struggle session to “debate” the issue. The bishop was there to help. He changed the words of a question I submitted from “same sex” to “same gender” as if he were correcting a student’s homework assignment. The whole denomination was converged. Found a new church soon thereafter.

Jack Dobson
Jack Dobson
Reply to  thezman
3 years ago

I would not take your bet. Tje same applies to those who cite science to justify their positions. Ask them what a null hypothesis is and watch them blank out.

Drake
Drake
Reply to  thezman
3 years ago

Any explanation he offered would not be based on scripture.

Cameron
Cameron
Reply to  thezman
3 years ago

I agree about their use of “gender” (properly speaking, I think gender refers to declension of nouns e.g. “grammatical gender”).

It doesn’t help that “sex” became shorthand for coitus at some point in the recent past.

Cameron
Cameron
Reply to  Cameron
3 years ago

To be clear – I mean I agree their use of “gender” is a weaponization of language.

B125
B125
Reply to  Shrugger
3 years ago

It really is easier than ever to find a decent church. You can ask: “should women be pastors?” and “should homos get married?”.

If the answer is anything other than “no” and “no”, you go elsewhere.

Bill
Bill
Reply to  B125
3 years ago

It’s astonishing how many Christians— while insisting that the Bible is in some real sense “inspired by God”— feel free to pick and choose which Biblical injunctions they’ll heed, and which they’ll ignore: like the ones condemning homosexuality or mandating male headship and female submission.

The Chinese restaurant menu approach: pick one from column A and one from column B.

But that doesn’t make a whole lot of sense if it’s ALL from God…?

don't inhibit--expedite
don't inhibit--expedite
Reply to  B125
3 years ago

question-why do you “need” church at all? Can you not talk or pray directly to your deity without involving a paid third party intermediary to interpret your deity’s wishes? From my experience, people attend church for all kinds of reasons not very many of which actually have to do with the love of God. They attend church to find a new mate, show off their new attire, make themselves important by seeking status in church activities, seek out fresh victims to scam or abuse etc. I equate church with gang as their practices are very similar and boil down to… Read more »

B125
B125
Reply to  don't inhibit--expedite
3 years ago

Right, if we just vote by mail harder and post more comments on Zman we are going to change the world! No need to even leave the house.

B125
B125
Reply to  don't inhibit--expedite
3 years ago

Not to say that there aren’t bullshiters at church too – that’s why I give sparingly – but it’s not like I don’t have an agenda either…

Cameron
Cameron
Reply to  don't inhibit--expedite
3 years ago

Catholics and Orthodox believe that public mass is the offering of Christ’s sacrifice to God. The people are their to support the priest/bishop in this. For Catholics and Orthodox, there is a public aspect to the faith that is an absolute requirement.

KGB
KGB
Reply to  don't inhibit--expedite
3 years ago

The leftists who marched like Sherman through our culture did the exact opposite of what you suggest. They organized and very publicly proselytized for their morality. Had they limited their relationship with their Socially Constructed god to quiet contemplation at home, the dissident right would to this day represent a completely uncontroversial center.

Shrugger
Shrugger
Reply to  don't inhibit--expedite
3 years ago

Nah, we’re supposed to gather for worship. Still possible to do without giving in to the poz

KL
KL
Reply to  don't inhibit--expedite
3 years ago

Congratulations you invented Baptists

Cameron
Cameron
Reply to  B125
3 years ago

Do their women cover their heads during mass (service, prayer)? If not, next them.

Moe Noname
Moe Noname
Reply to  Cameron
3 years ago

I don’t disagree, Mr. Cameron, however scarf wearing women , Latin mass and communion on the tongue must be pretty weird for most Catholics born in the last 50 years (I can’t begin to think what an Evangelical or atheist would think). However, I drive past thirty empty, cold and sterile Vatical II Catholic churches to attend such a mass and be part of that community.

KGB
KGB
Reply to  Moe Noname
3 years ago

I came across this editorial by Leonard Pitts a few weeks ago. Pitts is a long-time member of the Negro intelligentsia, a former recipient of a participation Pulitzer, despite having nothing interesting to say. He writes that the steady erosion of church attendance is due to, you guessed it, churches moving in a conservative direction. They can’t stop being wrong.

https://cdispatch.com/uncategorized/2021-04-03/leonard-pitts-small-wonder-the-church-is-shrinking/

Cameron
Cameron
Reply to  Moe Noname
3 years ago

@KGB – not just wrong. They literally invert everything. It’s like bizarro world from the old superman comics.

American Citizen 2.0
American Citizen 2.0
Reply to  Moe Noname
3 years ago

I was raised by Fundamentalist Christians. I can tell you what they think: Catholics are Satanic Idol worshipers who follow the Pope, who is himself a representative of pure evil.

Glenfilthie
Glenfilthie
Member
3 years ago

We are not reasoning, shaming, or voting our way out of this. At some point we will have to start shooting.

Glenfilthie
Glenfilthie
Member
Reply to  thezman
3 years ago

You have to understand that most women are fascists and socialists by nature. Your founding fathers understood this, and wisely forbade them the vote or positions of authority.

I strongly believe the biological vector is the women. There are already many reasons for women to be unhappy – some legit, some not. An unhappy woman is the devil’s workshop and when they go to the dark side, many will take their men with them.

Moss
Member
Reply to  Glenfilthie
3 years ago

Orthodox and Reformed Christian churches forbid women from teaching men. Wisdom seems best followed.

LineInTheSand
LineInTheSand
Reply to  Glenfilthie
3 years ago

Glen: “You have to understand that most women are fascists and socialists by nature.”

Putting aside that I think that fascism is our only means of survival in the near future, I take your point.

At the risk of simping for the women I must point out that they have little agency or ability for independent thought.

Someone else put those ideas in their heads and promoted the women who parroted these ideas. The women are pawns.

Glenfilthie
Glenfilthie
Reply to  LineInTheSand
3 years ago

Agreed.

The women at my church are not afflicted with it nearly as much as modern “empowered” women. That crap gets beat out of them as children, and traditional family values tend to encourage women to rise above it…

Ostei Kozelskii
Member
Reply to  thezman
3 years ago

That is a good point, but in point of fact, they had no choice but to jump to liberal democracy, and its economic system, capitalism. Fukyuama’s thesis had a great deal of purchase back then. The communists could either get on history’s locomotive or get run over by it. Once the communists and other assorted Leftists made this transition, they set to on liberal democracy with hammer and tongs and transmogrified it into the horror we see today. Funny how victory in the Cold War proved to be the beginning of the end.

Stranger in a Strange Land
Stranger in a Strange Land
Reply to  Ostei Kozelskii
3 years ago

If there is greater irony than that – I’d be interested to read it.

Citizen of a Silly Country
Citizen of a Silly Country
Reply to  Glenfilthie
3 years ago

As I written before, many of us have reached the point of no longer wanting to argue with the other side. We just want a divorce. Once you hit that point in a relationship, it’s hard to go back.

The problem, of course, is that the other side can’t let us go. They need us to keep the system running and as their emotional devil.

Glenfilthie
Glenfilthie
Member
Reply to  Citizen of a Silly Country
3 years ago

That is a good analogy. When you divorce, you need time by yourself to grieve, to think, and to NOT think – everything is focused on healing.

In those tragic cases where men lose their chit and murder their ex’s and kids in grizzly murder/suicides… it’s because the woman wouldn’t give him his space and distance.

As our esteemed blog host likes to say… this will not end well.

JohnSmith
JohnSmith
Reply to  Glenfilthie
3 years ago

Who would you shoot, comrade? How big is your army? Would the public support you or lynch you? If you win the war, how would you control the replacements? Better think this through before you pull the trigger…

LineInTheSand
LineInTheSand
Reply to  JohnSmith
3 years ago

JohnSmith, your observations are all correct. However, I think that Glen’s point is that our worst option is our only option.

Our backs are against the wall but our prosperity hides this fact to most eyes. Once the veil of prosperity falls, many more people will see the desperate truth in Glen’s message.

Stranger in a Strange Land
Stranger in a Strange Land
Reply to  LineInTheSand
3 years ago

pith•y pĭth′ē►
adj. Precisely meaningful; forceful and brief.
That statement is representative as it gets

American Citizen 2.0
American Citizen 2.0
Reply to  LineInTheSand
3 years ago

No, we could do what the Ashkenazi and lots of other people in History did and just convert to Islam or Judaism, blend in, and in reality in the privacy of our homes practice whatever religion we feel like.

There are tons of options. This has happened to civilizations and peoples thousands of times in history. We lost.

LineInTheSand
LineInTheSand
Reply to  American Citizen 2.0
3 years ago

I want to believe you.

B125
B125
Reply to  American Citizen 2.0
3 years ago

Young generation of Muslims is woke and anti white. You can’t escape.

JohnSmith
JohnSmith
Reply to  LineInTheSand
3 years ago

Disagree that this is the “only option”. It’s wishful thinking that you could solve any of this with a shotgun, like a hero in some kind of DR video game.

If we are not bold enough or clever enough to win the ideological battle, mainly within our own tribe first, then it will truly be “game over”.

B125
B125
Reply to  Glenfilthie
3 years ago

Well, I won’t say too much, but I don’t see any point in arguing with local leftists on the school board who want to encourage white children to be trans and homos. Words aren’t going to stop them. The number of people actually promoting it, though, are remarkably few. We are just weak.

Streets n San
Streets n San
Reply to  B125
3 years ago

Not enough of us occupy positions of power. I’ve been on the ascent. I’ve had to make a public decision based upon my conscience, the one I learned in the old time Boy Scouts. Suddenly I had no public supporters and I was informed that I was no longer on the ascent. I blew it because I did the right thing but it wasn’t what my sponsors had wanted.

LineInTheSand
LineInTheSand
Reply to  Streets n San
3 years ago

“That’s why I say, ‘Hey man nice shot.'”

Good try. We live and learn.