Partisan Minds

A fetish of the modern Right in America has been complaining about and denouncing partisanship in Washington. In fairness, the Left will indulge in this on the rare occasions when the Republicans do something for their voters. Mostly it is a conservative fetish, as it is the Left that drives the debate. The Right needs to maintain the fantasy that republican virtue still matters, so they regularly complain about the Left acting in their narrow interests, rather than in the interests of the country.

In theory, the conservatives are correct. Partisanship is the great bane of a republic, as it subverts the very basis of a republic. What is necessary to maintain a republic is what Montesquieu called republican virtue, the willingness to put the interests of the system ahead of personal or factional interests. For example, you must respect the office, even if you have no respect for the man holding the office. This shows up in our military culture where you do not salute the person, you salute the rank.

The trouble with the conservative approach is we have not lived in a republic for a very long time, so they are playing make believe. We live in a liberal democracy that is decreasing liberal with each turn of the wheel. In democratic systems, the ends justify the means, so partisanship dominates. It replaces republican virtue in favor of subjective moral certainty. This is one of the reasons that conservatism is worthless in a democracy of any sort. It prohibits victory as defined by the rules.

A good example of how partisanship works is in this conversation on the Daily Wire program, which is part of a series they run call Backstage. It is one of those round table deals where the stars chat about issues of the day. The highlighted clip is the discussion of Israel and their attacks on the Arabs last week. The people behind the Daily Wire are hyper-Zionists, so the conversation follows predictable contours. Israel is heroically fighting attacks from those evil Arabs.

Matt Walsh tries to point out a true fact, which is that Americans do not have a patriotic duty to support Israel or any other country. Immediately, the rules of the show are suspended as Boreing, Shapiro and Klavan leap to attack Walsh. It is an amusing bit of mask dropping, given the title of the show. The rules of decorum stop mattering to the partisan, as soon as his interests are in play. They cut off Walsh a few times and make sure he cannot get his point across to the audience.

An example of how rules are meaningless to partisans is when Shapiro claims that patriotism means love of ideas, while nationalism means love of country. This is laughable nonsense, and he surely knows it, so it is also a lie. The word patriotism comes from the Greek for “of one’s fathers” or fatherland. Of course, nationalism means a devotion to one’s own people. Both concepts have been attacked for obvious reasons, but their etymology is never in dispute.

In other words, Shapiro does not feel bound by truth when it comes to these topics, because what matters is his partisan interests. He wants conservatives to think they are duty-bound to back Israel, so he feels justified in making crazy claims like Americans have a patriotic duty to blindly defend Israel. This is an instinct that exists in the lizard brain, so he does not think of what he is doing as dishonest or immoral. It is just what he does, like pulling his hand away from a hot item.

Another aspect of partisanship is on display with Andrew Klavan. In that clip he makes the case for exterminating the Arabs. He does not put it like that, but that is the implication of his argument. In his view, the Arabs will never behave, and the Israelis are justified in using lethal force. The logical leap from those two statements is that the final solution to the problem is the liquidation of the Arabs. His excitement at the thought of exterminating the Arabs is an insight into the partisan mind.

Partisanship, like ethnocentrism, places group loyalty at the top. The first thing the partisan does when encountering people or issues is place them on one side of the partisan lines. “Is this person on our side?” is always the first question. In the case of issues or events, the question is, “how can this be turned to our advantage?” Since the partisans swaps his own individual identity for that of the group, these questions always feel deeply personal. They are life and death.

In a sense they are life and death. Since who Ben Shapiro is, from the perspective of Ben Shapiro, is his membership in the Zionist subculture, any questioning of it is a questioning of his very existence. It is why Klavan starts to salivate at the thought of killing Arabs. He cannot see them as human, as they are opposed to his group, so they are his mortal enemies. One is always justified in using any means necessary when defending your life from a threat.

You hear this in the left-wing justifications for violence over the last year. When they say “silence is violence” they are not being cheeky. To the partisan mind, you are either on their side or against their side. Words and violence are the same to the partisan mind, as anything that opposes the group is seen as a lethal threat. That is why silence is viewed as violence, as not declaring your support means opposition and the partisan is free to use any means necessary to end a threat.

There is not only no reasoning with a partisan, but there is no appealing to their better nature or their sense of virtue. Their chief virtue, the thing that matters the most to them, is their loyalty to the cause. Everything is warped to fit that moral framework, even the very definition of words, as you see with Ben Shapiro. Everything is viewed as a tool that can either be used against opponents or can be used by opponents. Facts and reason have no more resonance than clubs and guns.

This is why moral appeals against partisanship fail. It is like making the claim that pork is healthy to a devout Muslim. He does not share your morality, so your morals appeal sounds weird and offensive. Your good intensions are proof of your bad intensions, which defeats the point of making the moral appeal. The only counter to partisanship is more extreme partisanship. Once that genie has been let out of the bottle, the only way to put it back in the bottle is through any means necessary.

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

134 thoughts on “Partisan Minds

  1. Just at the moment when the Goy’s war club is about to swing down and dash out the Jew’s brain, at that moment the Jewish partisan will suddenly find reason and moderation. The stupid Goy will then have mercy on the Jew and apologize for being so mean.

  2. They scoffed that this was set off by people being evicted after living for free in four apartments. Under common law and Benjis patriotic ideas, it is doubtful you can legally evict them. You forfeited that right decades ago.

  3. Very astute post especially the conclusion that we have to be partisan and achieve victory by any means necessary. As Lee Kuan Yew observed, in a multicultural society people vote based on race and religion not political and economic interests. Unfortunately 90 percent of whites have allowed themselves to be brainwashed into believing that it is evil to consider their racial and religious interests which is why we are generations away from the mindset that you advocate. Add in the evangelical worshiping of Jews and Israel and I don’t know if we will ever get there. Support for Israel is going down with younger Millennial evangelicals but their support for woke is increasing.

    These highly partisan Jews control most of conservative media and it needs to appeal to evangelicals to gain much traction in red states. Most people on our side of the divide could watch that video and conclude that the goy, Walsh, got owned. “Every one knows Israel is our greatest ally.” Things might change if Walsh was to quit over this but losing all those shekels would hurt his bank account. Oy Vey, what is a goy to do?

  4. Z: “There is not only no reasoning with a partisan, but there is no appealing to their better nature or their sense of virtue.” As the post implies, such a mindset is of great utility in both defensive and offensive sense. But how do we get back to this warrior ethos without exterminating our women?

  5. Z-man, Ben Shapiro is the Jimmy Swaggart of the lite-right, but he is correct in a few things.

    Yes, the West is the result of Athens and Jerusalem, no less than Thomas Jefferson IIRC had said so, it was a fairly common view. As for accident, not really, as Hellenization and the intermingling of cultures around the Med spread a lot of ideas around, not just Christianity.

    Klavan is correct that the only way for Israel to buy temporary peace is ethnic cleansing, such as of the Germans after WWII, in the former Yugoslavia, etc. Gazans will never stop rocketing, nor will West Bankers stop rioting, nor Israeli Arabs stop killing. [The reason is that Israel is a small nation with few resources, fewer people, and difficult geography and absent continued American support which is doubtful can be overrun eventually]. However it would gain a few decades of greater tranquility — no more rockets from Gaza at any rate. Non White America of course will give Israel the support that non-White France and England gives her, which is none. So in the end its a doomed country, but so is France and England and Germany and Spain and pretty much every White country save Russia which is so miserable few Africans want to move there.

    As for Patriotism, what is it now, in a nation that is largely non-White and hostile to Whites? People under 18 in the US are 60% non-White and rising. There is however Team White and Team Brown. White people like Team White. They like seeing it win. Brown people the reverse. Support for or against Israel is merely a function of which team one is on. That is all.

    Ben needs some real quick money. Or Yaweh will call him home. Metarie motels don’t pay for themselves!

    • Yeah, well, talk to Gen Z males and they’re clearly trying to join Team Black. I’m sure that most people over 65 do cheer for Team White but the younger you go the more likely they either don’t care, or are actively hostile towards their own interests.

      I also see alot of down and out white males getting hooked and drugs and becoming homeless, passively killing themselves, rather than becoming angry at the antiwhite system.

      • You touch on a key point as to why the celebrating of boomers dying off will be a Pyrrhic victory for the right. The younger you are, the more likely you are globalist, anti nationalist and anti interests of whites

        • And then you grow up. The problem is that the young are coddled, stunted, effectively not allowed to grow up. They know it, some give up, some suffer in ignorance, some want to do something about it but don’t know what to do.

    • “Z-man, Ben Shapiro is the Jimmy Swaggart…” Jimmy was at least a real man you homo.

    • Stop calling yourself Whiskey. Whiskey is a cool name. Whiskey is Robert Mitchum and Steve McQueen and even Conor McGregor. Call yourself something akin to what you are. Manic Freakazoid. Then I’ll tolerate you.

  6. “ exterminating the Arabs is an insight into the partisan mind.”



    And how about clubs and guns instead of words and morals get their resonance on?

  7. It is misleading to call it a liberal democracy and the November 3, 2020 election demonstrated it conclusively. We are living in an illegitimacy.

    The 50% + 1 did not and has not committed a tyranny against the 50% -1 as Mencken proposed.

    Repeat after me:


    • Yeah, that stolen election was a game changer. It proved definitively that it’s no longer possible to effect change from within the system. The system no longer works.

      Whatever you want to call it, it’s no longer a democracy of any sort. Kleptocracy?

      • Theft is certainly one aspect of it, but I think sadomasochism is what a lot of these control freaks are into and they, by all accounts, appear to be on their game.

        Got beef?

        Circa 2004, a friend of a friend is a Marriott hotel manager in metro Chicago. We are going out and his friend says swing by the hotel for pregame beverages.

        Ok, nothing strange.

        Get to hotel and friend of friend proceeds to explain that this hotel room he had was the scene of an unsolved murder. Apparently, some sicko had leased the room, murdered a woman and every inch of the room, including the ceiling, had been painted in blood. Immediately looking around, I asked if this room was normally occupied and he responded, absolutely!

        “Well, I’m out of here!”

        I know the stories I heard around that town only scratched the surface and what I’ve come to realize is that Chicago isn’t unique.

        What everyone should be prepared for isn’t .mil, efbeei, dhs or even BLM/antifa kicking in your door, it’s the MS13 and real gangs making a huge comeback.

        Over four months in, this illegitimate government doesn’t appear to have the juice to kick many doors. This is compounded by the risk of an aggressive offensive going wrong and permanently emboldening the masses. The downside risk is real and too great, in my estimation.

        A key feature that distinguishes the progressive government from the neocons is their affinity for waging low intensity conflict through proxies that can be denied and abandoned as needed. I don’t think I’ve met anyone scared of BLM or Antifa, but I do know more than a few that would not be sad if they had a personal excuse to pull out their war toys for live action. I don’t know who the prog muscle will be and I doubt we’ve heard their marketing yet, but the wait can’t be forever. One would think Jim Messina and the prog machine would have their ducks in a row after four months of Biden Executive Powers, so keep an eye out.

  8. Vaxpartheid – Day 1

    …and to be honest, I’m pretty impressed at the lack of early adopters.

    There don’t seem to be any folks with the big green, “VACCINATED,” badge around to virtue signal.

    In fact, I didn’t overhear any conversations about how great it would be to get jabbed, even from folks I expected to discuss it. No one I interacted with broached the subject with me at all.

    Of course, the eye-level letter sized posters with the big green, “VACCINATED,” badge have magically appeared at all entrance and exit doors.

    I’m sure the lovely sunny, mid-70s Memorial Day weather didn’t help the jabber cause.

    For my part, I went cruising out to one of the lake towns here. Rolling down the main strip with bars and restaurants there was no evidence of face diapers or social distancing, especially at the biker hangouts.

    I took a state highway back to my place, and the road pirates were out in force. They’re getting a lot better at angling their radar guns to limit the spurious emissions radar detectors rely on picking up. Hiding behind foliage to further attenuate those emissions is another neat trick they seem to have picked up in recent years.

    I went

    • “In fact, I didn’t overhear any conversations about how great it would be to get jabbed, even from folks I expected to discuss it. No one I interacted with broached the subject with me at all.

      Of course, the eye-level letter sized posters with the big green, “VACCINATED,” badge have magically appeared at all entrance and exit doors.”

      That squares with what I’ve been hearing elsewhere. The top levels are pushing vaxx-apartheid but most people’s sense of signaling virtue doesn’t extend to dehumanizing their fellow man.

      “For my part, I went cruising out to one of the lake towns here. Rolling down the main strip with bars and restaurants there was no evidence of face diapers or social distancing, especially at the biker hangouts.”

      Man, that sounds nice. I should start calling California “Covidia”.

  9. By coincidence, this post comes as I am 10 pages into a fascinating little book by political theorist Carl Schmitt, “Theory of the Partisan.” (1961) Here are a couple quotes that bring out both the “untamed,” lawless character of partisan conflict, and the “totalitarian” nature of revolutionary parties — both of which are at issue in your post, I think.
    1) “Fundamentally, [regular] war is still contained, and the partisan is outside of this containment . The modern partisan expects neither justice nor mercy from the enemy. He has turned away from the conventional enmity of the tamed, contained war, and entered the realm of another, a true enmity, which increases through terror and counter-terror and culminates in annihilation.” And: “The word ‘partisan’ comes from party and refers to the attachment to a party or group that is somehow involved in fighting, warfare, or is politically active. Such ties to a party become particularly strong in revolutionary times. In revolutionary war, belonging to a revolutionary party implies nothing less than total absorption. Other groups and associations, especially the present state, are not able to integrate their members and adherents a completely as a revolutionary fighting party integrates its active fighters. In the extensive discussion about the so-called total state, it has not yet been recognized that today it is not the state as such but the revolutionary party as such which is the real and essentially only totalitarian organization.”

  10. This partisan thing sounds like it would be a powerful tool for a group of people to have. I wonder if whites will figure that out in time.

  11. If I may be totally silly for a moment, does anyone else have Elvis playing in their heads right now? We can’t go on together… with part-is-an minds (part-is-an minds!!) And we can’t build our dree-e-eams etc.

    • First line: we’re caught in a trap, I can’t walk out…
      I will say that part rings true.

  12. Klavan’s laugh and the host joking when the latter brought up the USS Liberty made my blood curdle.

      • Agree! Nobody just tweets ‘have a nice long weekend’. Her handlers (cause she is not bright enough) told her to do this in order to highlight the Memorial Day snub. Sorta the way tipping one penny makes a stronger point than no tip at all.

  13. ” Partisanship is the great bane of a republic, as it subverts the very basis of a republic. What is necessary to maintain a republic is what Montesquieu called republican virtue, the willingness to put the interests of the system ahead of personal or factional interests.”

    So would it be accurate to say that for a republic to function and endure, what’s necessary is a common understanding of what constitutes “republican virtue”? Mutual agreement regarding what the interests of the system should be?

    And that when ‘diversity’ reaches the point where commonality of understanding regarding republican virtue is no longer possible, then the erstwhile republic devolves into a democracy?

    A ‘liberal’ democracy, which prides itself on the very inclusiveness and diversity of opinion which made the republic impossible to maintain…..

  14. As far as trying to appeal to a partisan’s better nature, Robert Heinlein said “Never appeal to a man’s better nature. He may not have one. Invoking his self interest gives you much more leverage.”
    I am done discussing things with partisans. I haven’t yet been able to invoke their self interest. I’m stuck in the FOAD phase.

    • Right.

      And could it be the case that one of the hallmarks of a sane society, is that there’s considerable overlap between it’s citizens’ better natures, and what they see as being in their self-interest?

      I.e., a society in which pursuing my self-interest doesn’t require me to abandon my better nature?

  15. On the personal level, isn’t there a sense in which we’re all partisan: evolved to seek after what we see as our best interests? To ask, ‘How will this affect me?’ seems to be an innate response, part of our programming.

    That seems to be entirely natural: the one characteristic all life forms share in common, is that they’re programmed to survive: to do whatever it takes to try and go on living, and to struggle relentlessly against anything which they see as threatening their continuing survival.

    For most of our human prehistory, we existed in roving hunter-gatherer groups composed of our extended-family members. In that situation, our individual fates were indeed inextricably intertwined with that of our group: if the group thrived, we thrived along with it; if it perished, we perished along with it. And being banished from the group meant certain death.

    Survival outside of a group was not a possibility. Even if you switched groups— left your group and went to live with your mate’s group— all you were doing was trading one group for another. It was still the case that survival outside a group wasn’t possible.

    So a certain sort of hyper-partisanship— seeing our personal good as being indistinguishable from the good of our group, and experiencing a threat to our group as a threat to us personally— was part of our human experience for hundreds of thousands of years.

    Of course in our modern world, those conditions no longer apply; there’s no group into which we’re born and cannot ever leave, and survival is possible outside of any group. But it shouldn’t surprise us that the group instinct remains as part of our psyches, and our natural inclination is that we experience part of our identity in terms of the group(s) we see as being like us.

    Today we live in a world where the dangers are largely political rather than physical: where the outcome of a ‘War of Ideas’ often determines the nature of our existence. For example, if an overwhelming majority of our fellow citizens should ever decide that guns are evil and must be outlawed, our right to own them will be taken away.

    So group partisanship still makes a lot of sense. Lobbying for what we see as being in our individual best interest, and identifying with those who share our beliefs— our group— is still vitally important to our survival; or at least, to the survival of our way of life.

    A nation composed largely of people whose views on what is best are more or less in line— like America in its early days— will experience harmony. But should other groups come in, with different notions of what life should be like, conflict will gradually arise.

    Given enough diversity of outlook, and you have what we see in America today: a ‘nation’ of partisan groups in perpetual conflict, with no hope of the groups ever seeing eye-to-eye on important issues. In such a situation, relinquishing your partisanship is tantamount to surrender and extinction.

    All of which is why separation into two or more nations is the only acceptable solution I can see; the only possible route for escaping from the ‘Diversity Hell’ we currently find ourselves in, and perhaps regaining a semblance of the national unity we once had but long ago lost.

  16. He’s right for all the wrong reasons:

    Americans are a murder-happy people — not only with firearms but with knives and clubs and hammers, with bombs, automobiles, and standing water. There are lots of countries where people have guns. Switzerland is a gunned-up country, and there are millions of privately owned firearms in France, Austria, and Italy — walk around Tuscany at the right time of year and you can hear the shotguns of the pheasant hunters, a blast in the distance every few minutes.

    I hear shotgun blasts where I live, too — but this is an American city, and they aren’t shooting at pheasants.

    But this isn’t really about the guns. It’s about a society that is, palpably, wobbling on the brink of something awful, with failing institutions, incompetent government, reciprocal distrust among rival social groups, and widespread simmering rage.” –

    Kevin Williamson, noted NRO Neocon

    And you and your corrupt, lying friends contributed greatlt to the “brink of something awful.”

    • Long periods of peace and quiet favor certain optical illusions. Among them is the assumption that the invulnerability of the home is founded upon the constitution and safeguarded by it. In reality, it rests upon the father of the family who, accompanied by his sons, appears with the ax on the threshold of his dwelling. ― Ernst Jünger

      • Ex-Pralite Monk,

        Great quote! Thanks for sharing.

        What would be seen by many today as a deplorable example of “toxic masculinity”— but which in fact embodies the essence of true manhood, and the foundation of an ordered and safe society.

        The opposite of which may be the image of a “single mother”, cellphone in hand, calling through the door, “Go away! I’m calling the police!”

    • Subtract majority-Black inner cities from the murder stats— Baltimore, St. Louis, Chicago, Detroit, Oakland, Philadelphia, etc.— and our murder rate per capita is quite low.

      It’s not a gun problem, it’s a people problem.

        • I agree. Combined with a lack of race-realism on the part of ‘progressive’ Whites’: their unwillingness to accept the fact that Africans are simply less evolved than other groups.

        • I forget where I saw it (it might have been Scott Alexander), but someone did a murder rate analysis and determined that if you excluded black perpetrators from American stats, the American murder rate per 100k population was basically the same as the average of European countries. If you also exclude southern whites, then America’s murder rate becomes the lowest in the world. I didn’t verify this, but it does track with my lived experience. Of the half a dozen kids in my high school class who ended up with a juvenile record, half were black, and half were rednecks.

          • Delete negro murders and America’s murder rate is the same as Belgium’s, is the way I heard it.

  17. In other essays the ZMan has more/less already stated it, but the last paragraph in this one is a 44 oz. baseball bat to the head

  18. It’s funny that you mention these people. Ever since the Palestinian thing kicked off I’ve been hate listening to them and Goldberg and Podhoritz. Goldberg has had several podcasts explaining the history of anti-semitism in Europe. Not the Jews fault of course. Podhoritz has been kvetching about American Jews supposedly being attacked in the streets. For no good reason. And Klavan (a supposed converso) has explained that Jew hatred is a special form of bigotry. Because people who hate god also hate the Jews because they are his chosen people. They are just innocent victims. I have to admit that I’m impressed by their racial solidarity. If whites had half as much our problems would be over quickly.

  19. Excellent observation. Sums up the Dem approach to politics quite well. Basically the Dems play by the notion “win anyway you can”.

    That said, one thing about conservatives is that most of them are not conservative in the least. Most are just rapacious business types or wannabes who only care about lower taxes and kissing the ass of business. Most of the time they supported policies that have been very destructive to the people and country. Things like killing Glass-Stegall, the CFTMA, passing NAFTA, giving China MFN, refused to bust up monopolies and stop mergers, etc. Sure the Dems supported all of these but the Conservatives made sure they passed and the country got gutted like a trout,

    Look at the stone silence of conservatives at all those MAGA peeps stuck in DC prisons. Clear violation of their constitutional rights, yet nothing, even from Trump.

    There aren’t two parties, there is one party with a wing that pretends to be a opposition party. And what we see is Kabuki theater. Sundance from CTH nailed it.

    • Once conservatism abandoned cultural conservatism it became worse than useless because it lulled whites into thinking that a true conservatism with their best interests in mind, still existed. So, instead of fighting back against the AWRs, we trusted the “conservatives” to do what needed to be done. But what needed to be done was no longer on their agenda.

  20. Pingback: DYSPEPSIA GENERATION » Blog Archive » Partisan Minds

  21. If what Z says about different moral systems being incommensurable and inherently antithetical is true–and it may be–then he is making an argument that is very similar to what one hears from poststructuralists. They also argue for group incommensurability, but it is based upon linguistic rather than moral structures. For them, “discourse” structures reality, and every identity group is entitled to its own discourse, which is separate, distinct, and largely unintelligible to people belonging to other linguistic structures. If Z and the poststructuralists are right, then multi-culti is utterly doomed to failure. The difference is, Z sees this as a tragedy (for white civilization); the poststructuralists see it as a delight.

    • I’ve been thinking about both poststructural and CRT arguments surrounding ‘cultural constructions’ and ‘cultural preferences’.

      They would be aghast at the idea of forcing a gay to change the ‘sexual preference’ that they were born with, since homosexuality is endemic to their nature. So I say: Neither can anyone expect me to change the ‘cultural preference’ that I was born with. It is endemic to my nature.

      I don’t expect BIPoC to share my ‘cultural preference’. In fact, the liberal establishment is needlessly and cruelly forcing them to participate, as we see daily the magnificent failure of BIPoC to excel within our ‘cultural constructions’. And why would they excel? This culture is not endemically for them. It is for us. These beautiful, diverse peoples have their own ‘cultural constructions’. This also means I do not wish to share their ‘cultural constructions’. How could I?

      Peaceful separation is the best solution. With the tragic fact that BIPoC’s cultural preferences result in chaos, mistrust, third world shitholification, and a state of perpetual envy towards my cultural constructions. So here we are.

      • If they cannot excel within white culture, they will destroy it through hatred and envy. White culture–Western civilization, if you will–is a standing reproach to intellectually inferior peoples. And, when equality is regarded as the summum bonum, that reproach cannot be allowed to stand.

  22. All of these people, including Shapiro, have an Israeli passport to fall back on when the going gets tough. Most of us don’t. So when Shapiro makes noises about how it’s positive that the country is filling up with brown people as long as they become “conservative” it rings hollow. And to add to the hypocrisy what did Shapiro do last year? He called the moving company and moved from LA to TN. What’s wrong with LA????? Hmmmm???? Why are the taxes so high? Why are the serviced turd world? Let me think. So he gets another 20 years in a state that’s not quite as inundated, and in his twilight years he can retire to Tel Aviv. Maybe skip out on a big income tax bill the way half of them run that up before going there.

    • And he knows the mega-chuch hicks in that area who have the whole Left Behind book series will bow down and lick his penny loafers.

    • ‘Lil Benny’s going to give a HUGE g*d-damn about the Browning of America when all those beautiful BIPoC’s his tribe has been gleefully importing side with the Palestinian cause and call him a White-Colonizer-Oppressor.

  23. Lauren Chen, who is usually the sort of family-friendly down-with-the-(nice)-gays normiecon that YouTube still allows on its platform recently did a video criticizing the right’s knee-jerk support of Israel.

    I was pretty surprised and I’m wondering what is up with it.

    • Israel, and the arguments in support of it as an ethnocstate, is a wedge the young have rediscovered. Back in the before times paleos would use Israel as a weapon against the neocons. The Zionists really do have an unsolvable problem. To embrace Israel as an ethnostate means embracing ethnostates and nationalism. This rustles the diaspora and they provide the money for Zionism. On the other hand, they cannot defend a lot of what Israel does on liberal democratic grounds. That’s why guys like Shapiro try the sleight of hand business by redefining patriotism as loyalty to abstract concepts.

      • True. If America is an “idea” then changing someone’s mind obliterates the country. Countries aren’t fleeting constructs of the mind.

  24. It’s certainly true that conservatives have misplaced virtue, and that has contributed to their various tactical failures. However, the bigger problem is that they desire to return to a past that exists solely their imagination. An example of this the normie con belief that we need to round up illegal aliens and send them home. This is simply not going to happen. The solution to the demographic problem will be either economic collapse or genocide, not repratriation. However, both of those outcomes will radically alter the fabric of American society and effectively close off the past, which is why normie won’t consider them. Going back to a golden past is impossible, so the only valuable tactic is to look to a possible future, which can be informed by the past, but not a copy of it. The partisan virtue is irrelevant but nostalgia is deadly.

    • We can learn from the past, both what not to do and what to do. An example of the first is the extreme economic and social class divides in 19th century England. Not only Marxists and Socialists but almost every humane thinker was troubled by the system at the time.

      As for what to do, the past also offers ideals and guidance. Republican virtue may have often been honored in the breach but was still an inspirational force. We can use it today, as we can use beauty in our lives such as our ancestors took for granted as a goal.

      Inevitably any proposal for reviving what we have lost brings up easy scoffing. As Drew says, it’s just nostalgia, constructed by imagination. The standard line is some variation on “Not. Going. To. Happen.” Better to look to some vague but alluring future.

      So-called fantasies about the past can still be our friends as we shape the present and what is to come.

  25. Since we’re on the topic of Jewish nationalism*, here are the videos I assume got The Hill’s Rising cancelled:

    Palestinians launch general strike

    Israel attacks AP building. Either in this vid or another, she points out that Israel is an apartheid state

    The Hill’s publisher is this guy:

    The were abruptly cancelled a few days after these videos. I assume they were canceled because God’s All Stars, as a certain YouTuber refers to them, got nervous about America’s waning support of Israel in the wake of this kind of commentary. Evangelical support has plummeted. My guess: it’s a reaction to censorship from groups like the ADL. In short, a nationalist Jew seems to have, inexplicably, canceled a popular show because the hosts criticized a foreign country, an opinion which is increasingly en vogue for both the right and the left.

    *Shapiro attacked the definition of “nationalist” (which is what he is) because he didn’t want to be associated with the negative connotation. He wants to be loyal to a foreign country while calling himself a “patriot”, which has a better connotation in most normie minds.

  26. Happy the people who, when put to the test, ask no questions about other people’s behavior under similar circumstances, but pick up the first club that comes to hand in one simple, easy movement and hammer away with it until the humiliation and vengeance deep in their hearts give way too contempt and compassion.

    Tolstoy, War and Peace, Vol. IV, Part III, Chapter 1

  27. An example of how rules are meaningless to partisans is when Shapiro claims that patriotism means love of ideas, while nationalism means love of country. This is laughable nonsense, and he surely knows it, so it is also a lie.

    I don’t think Shapiro is lying here. Which is to say that he believes what he is saying.

    Shapiro and his ilk are a branch of civ nats. Civic nationalism is a pseudo religious phenomenon. With the constitution and associated documents as holy writings revealed by god, establishing the one true faith. Their loyalty is to the document and ideas not any geographic area under the strict control of those ideas – much less the people living in that geographic area. Further, it’s a short step to believing that the ideas are universal and should apply to all of humanity – even if they don’t yet. Which creates a crusading impulse to bring the true faith to the benighted. The world is divided into a house of democracy and a house of tyranny (and war).

    Non faithful Jewish people such as Shapiro have latched onto this pseudo-religion and extended it largely from its compatibility with their own cultural underpinnings. But they did not create it and most of the adherents are nominal Christians of European heritage.

    You can see this religious element in the reverence shown to the constitution by traditional conservatives. It’s effectively a form of idolatry. The document is perfect and immortal with any problems flowing from a failure to follow the holy writ strictly enough. The people have failed the constitution, never that the constitution has failed, or was flawed or has outlived its usefulness.

    It’s a common mistake when examining the actions of some group of people distant from the observer in culture or geography or time, to assume that they really think as we do, and therefor don’t really believe what they say they believe. Instead the claimed beliefs must be part of some elaborate internal deception. But that is a mistake.

    • Ben Shapiro is an observant Jew. His adherence to civic nationalism may be stronger, but he follows Jewish religious practices. I would say his allegiance to Judaism is stronger than his civic nationalism.

      • It is not surprising when you lose your innocence how not subtle are Shapiro, and Klavan. They defend their own tribe, even when they are on paper Americans. Interestingly they disguise as christians for some reason. Bill Maher is another not so secret member of the tribe. He is a furious lapsed catholic, but he is very candid about having a Jewish mother. And surprise, another member of the pro-Israel media lobby.

        It was clear that Walsh did not get the memo, or maybe he is controlled opposition on the show. It was funny to hear how they try to make a case for an America first policy that includes a provision for making Israel our priority in the middle east. BTW I don’t have any intentions to self harm myself despite what mossad may say.

        Unfortunately, as with many other things we have to suffer, this zionism seems to be another fruit of WWII. I read a biography of Albert Einstein, where it was pointed out how disappointed he was on how American were NY Jews at the time. And he set himself up to convince them on how important being a Jew was. NY Jews were too happy being Americans and they did not have any tribal connection to their motherland (their space so to speak). It is funny how Israel has a wall and segregation, but it is OK.

        • I didn’t watch Religulous from Maher but my impression is that the one religion he didn’t mock mercilessly in it, was the religion of his mother.

    • Shapiro is such a color blind civ nat that he once advocated ethnically cleansing Palestinians from their lands. What kind of American patriot is so fanatical when it comes to the issues of a foreign country?

      • I don’t have any problem with ethnically cleansing Arabs out of Palestine.

        • True, but most normie conservatives don’t sit around thinking about it or advocating for it either. If every second word out of my mouth concerns something going on with a foreign country, might you not suspect that’s where my true loyalties lie?

        • That’s what (((they))) hoped you would say.
          I simply prefer that that country’s co-ethnics in our country would advocate for an immigration policy just like Israel’s and a wall just like Israel’s. Absent those positions the Israelis are the new Nazis in the M.E.

      • I suspect Ben considers himself a Jew first and last. As such, “his country” is Israel. He merely works here for the Shekels. That’s why I am dead set against dual citizenship. One can not serve two masters. Funny how such has changed in the US, probably due to Jewish influence and globalists. When I first got a passport, way long ago, I had to swear I had no loyalties to any country, except the USA. I was specifically asked about dual citizenship. At that time, I did not know that my father’s country of origin considered me a citizen. Had I said anything, I suspect I’d not have gotten the passport—even though born on US soil.

        Anyway, as I understand the “old country’s” rule on this, I had until 30 yo the right claim and return. So I am not as fortunate as Ben. 😉

        • Point of aspergy order:

          Little Hat B.S. does not currently hold dual citizenship.

          However, it’s a distinction without a difference: he can apply and be granted instant citizenship to Israel, when the time comes.

          Most of the rest of us aren’t so lucky to have a nationalistic ethnostate to fall back on.

    • Shapiro literally wears his loyalty on his head.

      Israel and the betterment of Jews is his first and last priority. He’s not a devout colorblind CivNat. He’s an ethno-nationalist.

    • The other “English” way of setting up colonies, businesses, voluntary organizations was to AGREE on a Constitution. The Magna Carta from the English nobles, the Pilgrims and their Mayflower Compact, the US Constitution did not spring fully formed from the head of James Madison and the Confederate States were not winging it. If you don’t have basic rules (written and unwritten), you do not have a “society”.

  28. Walsh says, “You do not have a patriotic duty to support a country that is not your own.”

    They simply refused the statement in favor to the alternative: Supporting Israel is your patriotic duty. Imagine such a statement.

    • I have to hand it to Walsh, he really seems to have improved his rhetoric after the blunderous comment he made concerning “the jogger” incident. He was trying to cover for the guy, saying something along the lines of “Going into construction sites and looking around is just something guys do” He was appropriately lambasted for it by his own audience. Ever since then he seems to have become more honest, observant and dare I say blunt.

      But I haven’t been following the guy, so it may be a negligible change.

      • The was a major shift with Walsh after his idiotic construction site comments. It embarrassed him and seemed to spark a thought that he really needed to improve his analysis rather than just make a knee jerk reaction on Twitter to whatever event was in the headlines. It could be something he has worked out with Shapiro too, where the Daily Wire realized they needed someone closer to the right edge of the Overton window to avoid looking like a younger version National Review. Walsh has clearly moved our direction though.

      • Walsh may be one of those that completely comes over to our side. It really depends on the money and how much economic security he is willing to forego.

      • I think the 2020 BLM riots had more of an impact. Many people saw first hand the fruits of their naive ideology coming to bear. Guys like Charlie Kirk seemed legitimately shocked when it all went down. They looked panicked, like “OMG what we done with all this diversity thing!? It’s all wrong.” Then it was back to cashing their paychecks. The difference between Walsh and Kirk is that Walsh is somewhat less about cashing out.

    • Nobody has a duty to love support “the country,” that’s retarded. What we have, as patriots, is a duty to our nation. Our nation is not the state, nor is it democracy or any form of government or text or group of ideas. It is to our people, our nation.

      If there is ANY candidate for supporting a “foreign” nation, it is most certainly NOT Israel, it is Britain. Hell, Israel didn’t even exist until 1947. If they love Israel so much, why the hell don’t they just GO!

      I could not help but notice their screen shot they use for the video is one of those soyboy pictures of each one of them by themselves smiling that creepy so-boy smile. All of them have that look. They are a meme.

  29. “their entomology is never in dispute.”

    Etymology is the study of language, while entomology is the study of insects like Ben Shapiro. And on the subject of Shapiro, the non-violent answer to dealing with him is the same as the non-violent answer to dealing with illegal immigrants in any sane country (not America). They have to leave. Ben is loyal to another nation. Fine, but he should have to go back there. He might complain at first, but he’s not going to resort to violence (and if he did, it would probably be amusing to watch him flail about). Making illegals leave would result in some tearful scenes (heavily filmed and exploited by the media) and a lot of them would get violent, especially if local police were charged to do their job and protect their communities (and I don’t need to tell you that the media would misconstrue every interaction as the Gestapo picking on poor, innocent brown people). Then again, if Ben’s people went home, the media might not be quite as biased. It would still be bad, and we would be left with a sizeable fraction of insane white people, but it’s all academic at this point anyway, as sane policies designed to defend the citizens are off the table. We’re the enemy, not the aliens at the top or the aliens at the bottom.

    • We have a winnah! When I ran spellcheck and landed on that, I bust out laughing, so I left the bug version. I was waiting for someone to spot the unintentional humor.

      • Speaking of “spotting”, the designer of the small man in question must have had a sense of humor, or irony. If Physiognomy be the guide, no one with a working brain would take the small man in question seriously, even before he squeaked out his latest verbal emanation.

        When otherwise well-meaning civ nat normies amongst my relatives mention the small man in question, as part of making their ‘conservative’ bones, I just repeat the name of the small man in question followed by, “really?” And a laugh.

    • There wouldn’t be any (((media))) to run those propaganda poor-immigrant-must-go-back stories. Loosing 75% of their writers/editors would not be what killed the media, it would be the lost funding.

      I don’t know what exactly the percentage is, but a lot of the US media loses money. These are propaganda outlets, not for-profit businesses.

      • The media outlets are part of a larger business model. Sure, they lose money, but their propaganda allows much more profitable wings of the business to exist.

  30. Please God, why can’t we bring back the gladiator arena and enable the partisan hacks in the media to do actual battle-to-the-death with those of us arguing on behalf of sanity and reason? Can we not have a world in which these miscreants are truly battle-tested and then actually live or die based upon the merits of their argumentation? If we’re going to play the existential game, please let it be real. The ends justifies the means baby!

  31. Ideological debates can only exist (and even then, it’s not always possible) within a secure ethnic group. The Japanese, with their secure border and almost zero immigration, can have debates about various ideas because the Japanese people are secure.

    As soon as your people (however you want to define that, though it will always come back to ethnicity) are not secure, ideology goes out the window. Protecting your people has to be the primary consideration for every debate and decision.

    Btw, lying and deception are not wrong when protecting your own people. Jews feel no guilt lying to the goy because, in their mind, it’s part of the larger cause of protecting their own people. Even lying in business deals is acceptable because more money for them makes Jews more powerful which can be used to protect the Jews.

    Jews catch a lot of flack in the DR, but in many ways, they’re just doing what needs to be done. We can learn from them, though we don’t want to be like them. Jews (especially American Jews) now have a negative identity, and it’s dragging them down. We need to fight for our people, but not out of hate for other peoples but to make something better for own own.

    • There is even public discourse about public policy. It’s amazing. Take this BS:

      This has been in the works forever in different forms and attempts. I had quite literally forgotten about it until some morning DJ on one of the local radio stations brought on someone arguing against it. No malice, no blatantly obvious push either way, just some gentile back and forth on the latest piece of fashionable liberal BS from the West.

      And the helluvit is even if this tripe is passed it’s very unlikely to ever be taken seriously given the cultural interpretation and execution of law and order. The only trannies I’ve ever encountered were already on TV, dipshit foreigners already into cross dressing, or mentally ill transvestite Japanese. It’s only being considered at all because, as I said above, it’s currently fashionable in most other first world nations.

  32. The best part of the session is Matt is mildly ambivalent to say anything at all, as he knows he’s going to get jumped. Remember too, these guys have been friends and associates for years, and they still can’t be bothered to give him even a little acknowledgment of the obvious that yes, maybe this blind loyalty to Israel by a foreign nation is a little strange. It’s boring as hell ,as you can tell exactly what they are going to say before they open their mouths.

    Compare this to dissident shows like Myth of the 20th Century or the Amren podcasts, where there are sometimes strong disagreements that are discussed in respectful and enlightening ways. Given the Daily Wire is supposed to be one of the flagship internet Conservative media outlets, it shows how banal that side all.

    • It’s a shame that Myth and AmRen don’t have massive audiences. They do such interesting and thought provoking work.

      Instead the MenWithSmallHatsMSM pushes drooling, limp-wristed ‘personalities’ who spout nothing but pilpul and nonsense. And on the so-called ‘independent’ right, we’re served bloviating midgets like Shapiro.

  33. ” In his view, the Arabs will never behave, and the Israelis are justified in using lethal force. The logical leap from those two statements is that the final solution to the problem is the liquidation of the Arabs.”

    This was and is exactly the thinking behind the establishment and expansion of the United States itself, as can be seen in quotes from George Washington and Andrew Johnson.

    • The difference is that Washimgton and Johnson were on their own territory, fighting for their own people; not sat halfway around the world, insisting that their foreign hosts do the heavy lifting on their behalf.

      • While those two may have made their headquarters along the lower Potomac the operations they directed were against indigenous peoples living on their own homelands. In both instances major portions of the military efforts were composed of non-Americans, French and Polish adventurers in the case of the treason against the UK, non-English-speaking immigrants and newly freed blacks west of the Mississippi. If indeed the colonialist British in North America had some warped moral right to decimate the natives and take their land, how can anyone object to identical efforts anywhere else in the world..

        • mike: I could go into all sorts of examples and/or exceptions, but ultimately nationhood means people and state means government or land – traditionally (and most accurately) the historic homeland of a specific people.

          My best understanding of the American Indian tribes, poor as it is, indicates they did not consider certain lands inalienably ‘theirs.’ They had traditional hunting grounds, but there were numerous instances of tribes killing and conquering other tribes and taking over their ‘traditional’ lands.

          Any historical exceptions aside, world history demonstrates quite clearly that, like it or not, Might Makes Right. It’s only the modern American puritans who’ve decided it’s not ‘fair’ to conquer another people or take over their lands, unless we do it and call it democracy building.

          So morally ‘good’ or not, the British colonialists (and the smaller contingent of colonialists of other ethnicity) conquered the land and the Indian people. Not because one side was utterly good and the other utterly evil, but because one was stronger than the other. And since the winning side founded what used to be a White republic and allowed me to be born and raised in a fairly free, decent, White state, I am not going to cavil about their motives or actions.

          If I’m going to be totally morally consistent, then I would have to say it doesn’t particularly matter to me that Israel conquers the Palestinians and takes their land. I don’t like the way they started out, with small hat bankers and politicians world wide greasing the skids. I don’t like how they’ve used American money and people and politics. I’d prefer to see both groups wiped off the map so they didn’t trouble the rest of the world. But from a purely rational view, it is not contradictory to believe all people have a right to exist in their own land, and for two different tribes to contest that same territory. And historically, winner takes all.

          But I don’t feel that I need to be utterly consistent or morally neutral on any issue. And this issue in particular does not compel me to side with one group or another. My primary concern and duty is to my own people, White people. For you to attempt to use a purportedly moral argument against White British settlers indicates you don’t share that value or sense of duty. That’s your right, but don’t cloak pro-American Indian or pro-Palestinian political beliefs in moral guise.

          • Historically, the defeated became mounds of skulls and their gardens were sown with salt. Women were a form of domestic animal. The Puritans, acolytes of Oliver Cromwell, invaded a land far beyond their own experience in order to achieve the famous “city on the hill”, and its ancillary path to paradise, while at the same time banishing the unbelievers to Hades. Maybe those are the “white” people you regard as your own. Of course many of the “progressive” leftists you abhor are “white” people as well. Since the beloved forefathers were primarily British and the usual victims of their avarice were Irish, which group do you side with?

            “don’t cloak pro-American Indian or pro-Palestinian political beliefs in moral guise.”

            So the actual survival of the native Americans is a political belief cloaked in a moral guise? No wonder people all over the world are repelled by the US hegemony.

          • 3g4me, the European conquest of America is a difficult issue.

            Our systemizing minds want to find a morality that allows for the actions of our forefathers. Of course, no other race feels this compunction.

            In the law of the jungle that exists between groups, might makes right. When we form a government, we try to protect ourselves from the law of the jungle.

            “I’d prefer to see both groups wiped off the map…” Yes.

          • nailheadtom, your position is logically consistent. If I accept your premises then I must agree with your conclusions.

            But I’m curious. Do you live in the US? If so, how do you reconcile this with your beliefs? If not, do you live on land that was never conquered?

            Do you have the same criticisms for Indians tribes that tried to exterminate each other?

          • When the Puritans came to the new continent to take over the world there were under two million homeless scattered over three million square miles. What did you think was going to happen?

            In all previous migration in the history of the world the new people murdered all the male otherings and only left alive their nubile women.

            Our forefathers generously provided reservations and alcohol for the displaced. Not unlike what our rulers have well in the works for the unwoke. And the woke, more fools they.

          • “When Columbus landed, there were an estimated 25 million people living in Mexico. At the time, there were only 10 million people in Spain and Portugal. Central Mexico was more densely populated than China or India when Columbus arrived. An estimated 90-112 million lived in the Americas, which was a larger population than that of Europe. ”

            “Do you have the same criticisms for Indians tribes that tried to exterminate each other?”

            Extermination of others was never an object of native American conflict. Battles that resulted in just a few casualties were remembered and commented upon for generations. The goals of any conflict between groups were protection of communal property and the kidnapping of women.

            It’s truly a shame that supposedly educated and literate Americans with diplomas tucked away in drawers somewhere know so little about the land in which they live and celebrate. Maybe it’s because the US educational system is an effective demonstration of the glories of socialism.

    • Your rhetoric outruns your reason.
      You lie about the nature of war with the victims being mounds of skulls and women treated as animals.
      You lie about the “noble savage” who slaughtered and slaved with the best of them.The Puritans were not acolytes of Cromwell and the Irish were not the European equivalent of noble savages.

      You write like a bitter continental European still sore over some defeat inflicted upon your misbegotten tribe by the dreaded Anglos.

      It is not the job of a people to regard the fate of their country as neutrally as if they were considering the ancient history of some exotic empire. Countries and peoples are not academic exercises in moral eqivalence and it is immoral to demand of a person they pretend otherwise.

      • It is a mistake to judge a civilization by it’s history or how it came to be. Every civilization has a checkered past.

        Instead, tell me what it is like today. How free is it, what are it’s achievements, what is life like for it’s citizens – today. Don’t look back to agonize over some injustice centuries ago. Guilt over something in the past will destroy your confidence and what you have today. Slavery? So what? Slavery was historically omnipresent. Get over it already.

  34. Facts and reasoning have been virtually eliminated from any political or public discourse. There is no arguing with lefties over anything anymore. It’s high time to get as nasty and partisan as they are. It’s too bad it’s come to this, but the left brought us here, conservatism didn’t fight back and now here we are with our backs virtually against the wall. Even the most docile creature will turn and fight when there’s no other choice. Do bad Whites have the same survival instincts? It’s getting closer to now or never.

    • The right needs to get comfortable with cancel culture, up to and including getting your leftist associates fired if the opportunity presents itself.

      • I used to post on Quora, mostly about scientific and math stuff but I still lurk in gun forums and GOP topics. There’s a very pompous super-poster in the main MAGA forum who clogs up any talk of the election fraud with “you can’t prooooove anything” and then regurgitates Dem talking points about Russian conspiracy theories. Oddly, he’s not actually all that bad in general and often says some reasonable stuff too before heading back to his cheatsheet which seems like it’s probably titled “How to be an Establishment Republican Never Trumper on the Internet”. Even when he’s saying reasonable stuff I methodically downvote everything he posts. The guy could post the legitimate high temperature in Phoenix, AZ every day and I would downvote it. It’s my own little one man cancel culture Jihad. I’ve never written a word to argue with him though and he probably doesn’t know who the super reliable “-1 guy” is. Be someone’s “-1 guy” today. Stomp a Lefty for Jesus, or Hitler, or just for the hell of it. They’ve been doing the same to us for years.

  35. I don’t see an inherent conflict between republican virtue and democratic decision making. I’ve been part of groups where the majority has listened to the minority and has taken their views/interests into account and permitted those views/interests to influence the decision. Of course this may not be workable on a grand scale. Plato disfavored democratic organization largely for this reason, yet his philosopher king possessed, as his leading qualification, a staunch commitment to republican virtue. I know that America, 2021, isn’t Athens fourth century B.C. Alas.

  36. I’ve been fascinated lately by how important Greek and Latin are to the understanding of words and there meaning. I learned some in elementary when I went to private school for a short time. That’s what it would mean to “be educated” if we wanted to get people back on track, but could you imagine these education major bimbos teaching or evening knowing Greek or Latin….I digress…

    Those root meanings of our words are enlightening.

    • Princeton no longer requires Greek and Latin for their Classics degree. The humanities in colleges are going through Idiocracy levels of freefall.

        • My children are attending a K-12 classical school that requires 2 years of Latin and reading from primary ancient roman sources in their High School.

          At graduation, they will be better versed in the Classics than a Princeton grad.

        • Hazony is factually wrong. The Bible was studied, but until just before the Reformation it was almost exclusively the Vulgate in the Latin West and the Septuagint in the East. Erasmus’ Greek New Testament came out in 1516. There are Old Testament quotations all over Augustine and Aquinas. But they viewed it through the lense of the New Testament, not the Talmud. Even illiterate Christian laymen knew Bible stories, such as Adam and Eve.

        • Even his claim that Hebrew should be taught along with Greek and Latin is subversive. Hebrew is not the language of the NT. For that matter, neither is it the language of the OT: insofar as Christians quoted the OT, it was exclusively the Greek translation of it, which became something like the official version of the OT in use by the Church. Whatever original works in Hebrew might have been the basis for the LXX are lost.

          What Jews have contributed to the West is merely the OT and NT, neither of which is usefully read in Hebrew.

          • I did a podcast on the wit and wisdom of Ben Shapiro. I read his books in preparation. An interesting thread in his writing is the attempt to weave his people into our family tree. He regularly claims that the West is the result of Jerusalem and Athens. He goes further and claims that the culture of Jerusalem and Athens just sort of landed in Europe by historical accident. It really is an amazing bit of chauvinism.

      • Chet : Women and blacks and Jevvs and black womyn and Jevvish women have decided to ‘deconstruct’ and ‘decolonize’ classical history and studies. It was too ‘White.’ My older son studied Latin both in private, Christian school and then in public high school. It has served him well.

        Almost all of English’s advanced vocabulary has Greek or Latin roots. I did just a bit of Latin in college, but that bit, and some middle school Spanish, enable me to understand a surprising amount of Italian. On historical birth documents, Italian word for twin is “gemeno/a.” Immediately brought to mind the Gemini spacecraft and astrological twins and it all made sense.

  37. Having studied Hoffer, I have long maintained that today’s SJW is tomorrow’s obergruppenfuhrer, because the SJW’s identity is defined by being the member of the most radical group. Once the pendulum starts swinging back… (cf.Goebbels and the “beefsteak Nazis”). I realize now that I’ve been missing a step. We don’t *want* to be partisans, because they are so obviously bitter, evil, nasty people. The missing step, therefore, is for normal people to embrace *that.* Our ” partisanship” is active, aggressive pursuit of our own interests, which starts with “not being them”… with extreme prejudice. ‘Actively hostile normality” doesn’t really roll off the tongue, but…

    • “Actively hostile normality”
      That DOES role off the tongue. I’m going to use it in my conversations and live it!

    • Yeah, we didn’t really want it. But we have to begin hating things simply because they belong to the enemy. One thing I have been seeing online is the brutal rhetorical treatment of white women who sleep with black men. One guy allegedly took a woman on a date and, after discovering that her child was half black, abandoned her then and there, leading to her breaking down in the restaurant.

      But this is kind of what we’re talking about. The reason is simple: it is not in our interests to raise the children of black men, neither is it in our interests to support their women. But that expresses itself in something like a joy of harming a woman who never thought of herself as doing something wrong.

        • There’s a sense in which nobody told them what they were doing was wrong, quite the opposite, really. On the other hand, an enemy soldier is also not guilty of any crime, and they get bad treatment.

          But in this sort of conflict, certain concepts of justice and innocence are changed.

        • I will never hear Led Zeppelin’s “No Quarter” the same way again. I don’t know whether to thank or curse you.

      • BTP: I wouldn’t necessarily call it ‘joy.’ It’s more a sense of just desserts, or actions have consequences. And while that woman may never have thought of interracial sex as definitively wrong, she certainly knew that was somehow socially transgressive. She knew it was what the ‘cool’ kids did, and she probably considered herself as being more edgy or ‘virtuous.’ To totally exempt her from any moral culpability is just as wrong as to totally damn her, But either way, once she has mixed race children, she is no longer part of the White whole and never will be again.

    • “today’s SJW is tomorrow’s obergruppenfuhrer,”
      Doubtful. They will be deep behind enemy lines in vibrant diversityopolis when the power finally goes out for good. Best case scenario – they’ll be killed before being eaten.

  38. The Left only respects brute force and power. Everything else is fatuous nonsense to them. Given the viciousness against the White majority and the Left’s total domination of all instruments of power, we have to bear in mind all these realities to respond effectively.

  39. Yeah this is like the endless accusations and finger-wagging at the hypocrisy of the left. They don’t care! No matter how many times you point it out, they are never going to care!!

    • I’ve been banging that drum for years. “Cognitive dissonance” only exists for normal, well adjusted people. Leftism is an all-purpose asshole license – it’s main premise is that the nastier you are, the more righteous. When they lie, cheat, steal, screw you over, for any reason or just on general principles, they think they’re doing *good.* They can’t be bargained with, they can’t be reasoned with…

      • And it’s just so tedious when it’s pointed out. That actually is when I want to start punching right. Literally.

      • That’s all very true, however there are many who we might call leftist, but mainly because they still trust the corporate news, where we still need to point out the hypocrisies. I cringe a bit every time I do it, but these people just don’t understand how the system works, how they’re fed constant propaganda, etc. More normie than true leftist. The true leftist, yeah, they don’t care.

        • That’s true, and important. Which is why I still have some vestigial use for the term “Liberal.” I was never a Leftist in college, but I was a Liberal, for the simple reason that that’s the default for young people. Liberalism is a literally childish mentality — “it’s just so unfaaaaaair that I can’t use the car this weekend! The government should buy everyone a car!”

          If you’re dealing with one of them, yes, pointing out hypocrisy has an important function. It’s worse than useless on a Leftist, though, because as I say, they think it’s good — it obviously pisses you off, if nothing else, and to them, that’s a good in itself. “Evil, be thou my good,” as some rapper once said.

        • Very true Mr. Barney,so many of my old college friends support the left with visions of the peace movement of their youth dancing in their heads, not seeing the beast driving the train they’re on.

      • Much as I can’t stand Pelosi, or Barry O, they understand something that Republicans refuse to see:

        Being in power, and staying in power, means punishing your enemies and rewarding your friends.

        Fear and loyalty are basic precepts of power.

Comments are closed.