In sports, when a team prepares for a game, they think about all of the ways they can defeat the other team within the rules of the game. The good teams will be as expansive as possible when it comes to the rules of the game. If something is not explicitly forbidden, then they will assume it is permitted, even if convention and the unwritten rules of the game discourage it. The reason for this is the goal is to win, not uphold the traditions and customs of the game.
This is often the difference between winners and losers. The winners are always “pushing the envelope” when it comes to the rules. These are the guys for whom new rules are created because they discovered a loophole in the rules that gives them an advantage but might undermine the game. The people charged with protecting the game then make a new rule to close that loophole. The losers, in contrast, rarely think about finding loopholes and new interpretations of the rules.
Further, when the winner loses, he immediately begins to think about how to get around the limitations he sees to his success. Maybe it means changing how he or his team prepares for games. Maybe it is a fresh look at the rules that prevented him from doing what he needed to win. The loser, on the other hand, simply accepts that he lost and will often justify it within the rules of the game. The winner was simply better and that proves the rules, traditions or customs of the game are sound.
Put another way, the winners in all forms of competition look at the rules, traditions, and customs as a means to an end. The end is always victory. If the rules serve his ends, then he is a lover of the rules, but as soon as the rules prove inconvenient to his success, then he is an enemy of the rules. The loser is always a lover of rules, as they provide him comfort when he inevitably loses. The rules allow him to think that his role as loser is integral to the functioning of those rules.
This is why slavering works. The modern loser likes to think that slavery died out in America because it was bad economics, but this is nonsense. Slavery was fantastically successful as an economic practice. Slavery ended in America because the winners saw slavery as an obstacle to their success. The slave states wielded power derived from the practice of slavery that the northern states wished to overcome, so they decided to change the rules to rid the country of slavery.
The American Civil War is a complicated topic, but the index card version is familiar to anyone familiar with sports. The North kept losing to the South within the rules of the game of politics as set forth in the Constitution. Therefore, they did what winners always seek to do and that is change the rules. They won the Civil War by not allowing the rules, traditions, or customs of the young country to get in their way. Ever since, they have used control of the rules to secure victory.
Slavery itself is a great example of how winners and losers look at the rules, traditions, or customs as justification for their status. There is no greater lover of slavery than the slave, as the rules of slavery protect him from the whims of his master. The slave knows that as long as he upholds the rules, his master will show him mercy and kindness, so he is the great enforcer of the rules on his fellow slaves. One reason slaves seldom revolt is they prefer subjugation over uncertainty.
For his part, the master understands that the rules of human conduct among the slave owning class are a great tool to maintain the slave mentality of his slaves. His mercy and kindness is doled out like treats to a dog. He is not compelled by the rules to show his slaves mercy or kindness, so he does it as it suits him. This leaves the slave always seeking those things from his master, just as the dog is always ready for the pat on the head or the pleasant sounds from his owner.
In this age, we see this master and slave relationship between the people we call the left and the people we call the right. The former looks at the rules as a means to an end and that end is always getting what they want. Even the rules of physical reality are subject to interpretation if they prove difficult. In the hands of the people we call the left, the rules that supposedly regulate every aspect of life are merely the whip in the hands of the masters, who apply it to ensure obedience.
The people we call the right see the rules as every slave sees the rules, which is as a source of shelter from the uncertainty of their masters wrath. They invest their time in polishing their principles in the same way the house slave makes sure to always be seen busy tidying up the master’s house. This is a sign of subservience. David French is at the New York Times for the same reason the field slave rises to become the master’s manservant. He is the most resolute loser.
This is one reason the regime despises Trump. Unlike conservatives, the slaves of the system, he does not look at the rules as a security blanket. He wants to win so he is willing to reinterpret the rules to suit his needs. The people in charge see this as a challenge because they understand what it takes to win. A charismatic loser is easy to control, but a winner, even a boorish and thumbless one, is dangerous, because winners never stop trying to win.
It is also why the “right-wing influencers” have their panties in a twist over the Trump general election campaign. Despite their pretense to the contrary, the “right-wing influencer” is just another manifestation of the conservative loser. They suffer from the same slave mentality as all conservatives. Doing anything to win offends them because winning terrifies them. People born to be, at best, beautiful losers fear nothing more than winning as it reveals the ugliness of their reality.
Trump is far from a revolutionary character, but within the Trump phenomenon lies the seeds of a future revolt against the regime. That seed is the understanding that what matters is winning. That which serves the cause of winning is used and that which hinders success is discarded. Whatever rises up to topple this regime will not be constrained by the love for rules or the desire to follow the rules. They will be motivated only by winning, by any means necessary.
If you like my work and wish to donate, you can buy me a beer. You can sign up for a SubscribeStar or a Substack 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 through the postal service to: Z Media LLC P.O. Box 1047 Berkeley Springs, WV 25411-3047. Thank you for your support!
Promotions: Good Svffer is an online retailer partnering with several prolific content creators on the Dissident Right, both designing and producing a variety of merchandise including shirts, posters, and books. If you are looking for a way to let the world know you are one of us without letting the world know you are one one is us, then you should but a shirt with the Lagos Trading Company logo.
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.
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.
The loser is the White guy who strives to be colorblind (“good boy–here’s a treat and a pat on the head”) and accepts the Third World immigrants (as long as they come legally), which keeps him from being called a racist (bad!!).
Hmm, stapling a green card to every “legally” imported shitskin’s US degree – winner or loser?
Depends how one sees such? As to racial purity, probably not—albeit, if it draws Northern Europeans into American universities specifically for the aspect of immigration (now closed to them), perhaps. However, the program will probably *not* be restricted to STEM degrees and most likely attract 3rd world applicants in faux areas of study. As we don’t need more “dirt scrapers”, we don’t need more “Women’s Studies” majors. Universities are poz’d, they will do whatever it is they can to destroy any positive effect of the program.
Why are you dissembling on this? We all know what stapling green cards to diplomas means. It doesn’t mean highly motivated Swedes trying to leave the suffocating welfare state they live in. It doesn’t even mean more feminist blue hairs getting Women’s Studies degrees. What it means is endless pajeets with sham IT degrees crowding into your town, 20 to a building, raising your rents and pooping on the local riverbed. Just look at what has happened to Canada. They’re starting to talk about this openly, until the thought police step in.
My interpretation from the Trump speech, not the excerpt or news quip, was that it was for “US” university graduates. We have for years milked full tuition from certain foreign country groups, such as Chinese and particularly Indians. These students were common and sought after because US citizens often were not inclined to put in the work for such advanced degrees. My former department could literally be split between Indian and Chinese grad students. These folk *often* delayed graduation so that they did not have to leave the US. So much a problem was this that the last dept head… Read more »
H2b VISA’s
H1Bs. Sometimes L1s to circumvent the H1B quota.
I’m not completely up on these mechanisms. We actually had people to handle that for our students *and* our faculty. Yep, at one time we had 50% foreign born faculty.
No, it is just US university graduates, although he said associates degrees count. I see a lot of the common lefty open border pro-immigration propaganda in your post. Universities have been handing out advanced degrees to American students for decades, so why are they not good enough anymore? Why do we even need universities in the USA if they are just training a bunch of foreigners to work for less money than natives and spy on behalf of their homeland? How does this country benefit from nonstop inflows of Chinese and Indian people, outside of lines going up? Are we… Read more »
I call it like it is. First, I repeatedly say that US universities “milk” tuition from students—especially foreign students. This observation is anything, but pro foreign student—rather it is anti-avaricious university, who are whores for money. Second, I was around before such and saw US students “dry up” or rather shrink in the hard sciences over time. They were logically “replaced” by foreign students who majored predominantly in STEM fields. Two different mind sets here—Americans continued to expand in general enrollment, but drifted to other, easier majors, foreign students, the opposite. Admittedly I have a bit of biased perspective as… Read more »
“These students were common and sought after because US citizens often were not inclined to put in the work for such advanced degrees.”
Of course not. This crowd is pushing their kids to be plumbers and welders, servants to the pajeets.
Several years ago a neighbor of mine asked me to talk to his kid about becoming a doctor.
When I told him that unless he had a photographic memory he would have to do what I did 40 years ago and devote every waking moment into studying to get the grades needed..
He said “That’s what the Chinese kids do. That’s too hard”
Another one asked me if there was “an easy way to get into Medical School”.
This was before Social media destroyed the White Suburban mind.
Every newly minted physician our organization hires is not White.
Do the Unis even have the capacity to train STEM in any quantity? Genuinely curious if it’s even possible to ramp up in less than a generation, or if there is so much malinvestment into the crap degrees and departments that it would take longer than that to strip out all the dead weight.
I doubt there would be many more STEM graduates. Instead, the preferred dieverse will simply replace white students in those fields.
Not a great problem I suspect. We had such fluctuations even without emphasis due to economy. All depends upon what numbers you speak about. Doubling? 50%?
Our problem is *not* so much facilities, it’s that Americans are/became ”fat, dumb, and lazy” and drawn to easier courses of study, hence the foreign student influx we encountered during my career—there was a dearth of American applications. Across the quad, the Business College was swamped with application from budding “symbol manipulators” who all wanted to get their Business Degree “entry ticket”. The College responded by having a tuition surcharge to enroll. 😉
“it’s that Americans are/became ”fat, dumb, and lazy” and drawn to easier courses of study”
The math, physics, chemistry, and comp sci teaching in high schools is often so poor that students are woefully ill-prepared (and often ill-motivated) to go into STEM at uni.
The STEM teaching staff at unversities becomes steadily older — usually professors in their sixties — augmented by a precariat adjunct staff who are lucky if they can eat regularly and put a roof over their heads. In other words I’m not sure there will be a STEM teaching staff a generation down the road.
There will be, but it will be very swarthy.
Probably fair response. I know when I’m going through resumes, I run through the homeschooled first. I’d do it for ideological reasons anyway, but my experience is even kids who went to the “best” high schools have an inferior grounding.
My kids saw the same thing at college. Kids who screwed around either flunked out or had been homeschooled, too, and thus bored to tears.
This is absolutely correct. Thanks Ali for keeping me “honest”. I was blessed with a HS education—public—at the highest level. Too stupid to realize it at the time, but that’s another story. Indeed, my HS senior math textbook was the very same one I was required to purchase freshman year at uni. It started at basic calculus. It was on my watch that such standards were allowed to decline—and now, to “add insult to injury” I put down those students whom, in a sense, have been wronged. Yep, it is hard for students coming through the system to get the… Read more »
That gibes with what I’ve seen in examining theses and dissertations at a certain university diachronically. By the second half of the 80s it appears over half of all advanced degree recipients in the STEMs were Moslems, Indians and Chinese. I thought the diversity imperative most likely responsible for this, but I can see the increasing sloth and stupidity of whites as a major factor, too.
It’s not just sloth, stupidity, and being ill-prepared. The jobs are not there in USA’s increasingly third-world service sector economy. The last I heard, 55% of new engineering Ph.D.s had neither a job nor a post-doc to go to. Now it takes four years to earn an engineering degree and a further six to earn a Ph.D. — ten years of hard slog to end up unemployed?
That’s true of many fields even outside of STEM. Law, for instance, is no longer a sure path to immediate riches. Unemployment is a distinct possibility, and many positions in the legal profession don’t pay anywhere close to what most people expect.
We also got a lot of foreign, but government sponsored, students whose tuition was paid for or subsidized by their home governments. Of course, these governments had not time nor money for frivolous courses of study. Hence STEM. Their students were expected to learn and come home to better *their* country!.
Compsci, given your perch in academia, would you recommend an 18 year old white kid go into STEM? Let’s say that he’s smart, but not a genius. He can program python and solve calculus problems.
This path certainly served me well, but from the anti-white-male-ness I’ve seen in the last 10 years in industry, I’d hesitate to recommend it now. On the other hand, I’m not sure what else to recommend to such a kid.
A formal degree in CS at the undergrad level is still good. Programming is not really taught as much as you’d think in CS, but that varies with the dept. There are different “flavors” at the university. For example, we had Management Information Systems (MIS—Business applications) and Computer Engineering (CE—chip design and such). I remember my second year and they simply dropped a half dozen books on languages down and said, “read these”. You learned programming in various languages on your own after the first. What you get—that you don’t in home learning—is the *science*. Algorithms, searching, database organization, etc.… Read more »
I was an undergrad in a STEM program at a state flagship and B1G conference school in the late 90s.
Even back then there was some ridiculous grade inflation via curving. There were also plenty of unqualified women and minorities present.
At that time they had begun injecting the mind virus into STEM students through a few vectors. One was the required Humanities/Liberal Arts electives. Another were, “live in learning,” programs presented as easy credits/quasi-requirements for living in some of the dormitories.
If Europe is any guide, and I hear it’s bulging at the seams in certain places, and even California, we could soon be getting lots of Ukrainians. we meaning the rest of the US. They’re going to have to go somewhere. Will,russia want them? Lots of young white American men will be thrilled if a million sexy Ukrainians get imported here. Who gets the fat ones?
“Who gets the fat ones?”
Same as today, the dykes and the nogs.
Heh heh. I hope Ellis Island supplies the requisite tatting and piercing facilities these days. Earlier fatties were deprived of those good offices.
Uh, there are plenty of anecdotes around that indicate those blonde Uke gals are totally stonehearted mercs.
I have a distant cousin who married a Ukrainian mail order bride many years ago. By all appearances it worked out very well. She became a university prof here. But the kicker was a few years later she brought her mom over to live with them.
I’m sure all those green cards are getting handed out to Ukrainians.
Very sure.
Certain.
“We give the most greencards to Ukrainians, don’t we folx. Believe me”.
Democrats want to get rid of white males anyway they can. Republicans want to get rid of white males legally.
My takeaway from this somewhat schizophrenic post is that Odysseus-the-Liar from yesterday is a winner and Taylor and Derbyshire are losers.
But I don’t want to live in a society that rewards lying and loopholers, and I see the supposed eminences of this thing as being nothing more than smug nonfactors.
The idea, distasteful though it may be, is to use any means at hand to demolish the Left and create our own society. And that society will not reward “lying and loopholers.”
The idea has been tossed about repeatedly by Z-man. He used to refer to “virtues” and now substitutes the word “rules”.
The problem is framed in today’s relativistic worldview. Obey the rules or disobey the rules? Of course, you have to obey the rules if they are fair and try to subvert them when they are unfair. The leftists know that, but their only problem is moral inversion: they think good things are unfair, they think bad things are fair. They have a rule of morals opposite to the moral law. As a group, conservatives have no external rule of morals other than to follow the rules. They think following the rules is good, not following the rules is bad. So… Read more »
“He only wants comfort and things staying the same. “Stay out of my garden!”. He thinks the rules will protect his little world of comfort. This is why he insists on the rules being followed. He does not want to fight for anything. He wants others to preserve his comfort for him.”Generally speaking the conservative has a “live and let live” attitude and just wants to be left alone to enjoy his family and hobbies while the leftist spends every waking hour obsessed over gaining power and control. If conservatives are going to be like grazing herd animals at least… Read more »
Yes, the conservative is too lazy. Deep down, he knows life is a fight, but he does not want to fight. So he loses all battles because he never appears in the battlefield. He is busy enjoying life. Then, when the leftist has built the prison where the conservative is going to live, the conservative sees that his life and hobbies are affected and are not that enjoyable anymore. Then, he complains but does nothing. He wants somebody to fight for him. He looks for a savior. Trump will save us so we don’t have to leave the couch! Let… Read more »
I’ve been saying for decades that as long as there’s one beer left in the fridge and one ballgame on TV, the white working-class “conservative”, even though he has at least one AR-15 in his closet, isn’t going to “get off the couch” no matter WHAT provocations are heaped upon him and his children.
Do you want to live in this society? Most societies for most of time were either awful due to their rulers or in a struggle to survive – or both. People suck, and yet many hope that the society that springs from people will be better than the individual (“Man never is/ But always to be Blest”). Most people are pleasant enough, but beyond pleasantry lies the truth of selfishness and immorality and aggression and survival.
Brutal but true…The Northern moralizers who condemned slavery (a distinct minority) didn’t seem to have any problem with 8 year olds being worked to death in the Northern plutocrats’ mills, which could not (and did not) happen to slaves….The South thought that after Bull Run the North would simply concede, because those were the rules…after Sheridan and Sherman’s rampage against civilians and a million dead, they found out that there were no rules…
My response to blacks whining about “racism” and poverty and blaming it on Whitey was simple. My Irish ancestors dug most of the drainage canals and other public works projects in New Orleans because unlike slaves, they cost nothing to replace and scores of them were coming in by the boat load. When I would tell the black criticizing whitey that, their heads would explode when I’d tell them how the slaves were worth more than the Irish, who were disposable.
That’s why I call them O’Guatemalans
There were plenty of indentured servants from all over the British Isles who would corroborate your story…most of them Protestant. Their own families often sold them into involuntary servitude as teenagers.
I think the term of indenture was perhaps seven years (?). Orignally blacks were indentured as well but later they became lifelong slaves.
This is correct. Indentured proved to be of limited value compared to chattel slavery. Blacks proved more valuable in that respect. For one, they were acclimatized and more resistant to disease such as malaria. For another, they were less susceptible to running away and blending in with the populous.
My nominal paternal grandmother, a Scot from a famous family, was indentured to an aristocratic british family at age eight. Her mother had died of a fever not long after my grandmother’s birth. Her father, a dragoon officer, was machine-gunned to death in a charge. When my grandmother came of age, the eldest brother was building a printing house in London for himself. Forgot all about her but cashed the payments. The british boys in the house came of age too and raped my grandmother. Grams stole train and lodging fare and went to London. Under penalty of shame, the… Read more »
Italians as well. There were at least 3 racial classifications in New Orleans: white, black and Dago.
I don’t recall the exact circumstances, but a bunch of Italians were lynched down there.
“but a bunch of Italians were lynched down there.”
One of the biggest lynchings in US history I think. Italians weren’t accepted as whites in those days.
It wasn’t that the Italian men who were lynched weren’t White, it was that they committed horrific crimes.
Exactly. 99% of every black person lynched in the South did something very bad. And every lynching was covered by the press, so this is no secret.
Even so, how you were classified determined what price you paid for your crime or what penalty someone who had committed a crime against you paid.. If memory serves there was a court case in the South (in the 1920s, maybe?), where a negro was charged with raping an Italian woman. Now the law was clear on the point that if a white woman was raped, the penalty for a negro was death. The conundrum for the judge and jury was how to classify the Italian woman — was she white or not?
Obviously, genetic science was in its infancy.
Historically Northwest Europeans were thought of as the apex of the racial hierarchy, with Eastern and Southern Europeans racially inferior. The idea of a “white race” is relatively recent and owes much to non-white immigration.
Regardless, Northwest Europeans share far more genetic material with Southeast Europeans than Southeast Europeans do with negroes, Arabs and Orientals. Contrary to the tiresome bromide, perception is NOT reality.
I bet any Southerner of that time or the present would say that Michelangelo, Leonardo da Vinci, Giuseppe Verdi, Columbus, Saint Francis of Assisi, Cicero, Seneca, etc, were White.
There’s always been that divide between northern Italy and southern Italy (that persists to this day). North Italy has always been considered part of Northern Europe but southern Italy not so much and as for Sicily ….
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6_G7-opxBLQ
Southern Italy suffered far more from Muzz depradations–including conquest–than did northern Italy, and there was attendent miscegenation. This is the main reason southern Italians are darker than northerners.
Depends on whether she was a Sicilian or a Florentine…
Pretty sure damn near everyone had to work to eat and live, from Paul down to Miles Standish and on. Non useful beings that are fat is more of a recent feature. Fire is the quickest teacher but hunger… hunger is the most patient.
In places like New York, the Irish and later the Italians were competing for the same jobs as blacks. In many cases wage labor was preferable to an employer because there was no responsibility for the upkeep of the laborer. Slave labor probably fell by the wayside because of economics rather than some moral argument.
Well said Dr. M. On the subject of indenture, a compelling (and darkly amusing) read is Cracker Boy by James Lafond. It’s based mainly on the personal writings of those who lived through it, and I learned a lot about the general system of white slavery. As always seems to be the case, the usual suspects play a prominent role as both middle-men and direct owners.
It is something that is extremely american. The enemy is always the devil and the american cause perfectly godly. X foreign leader is worst than Hitler but the horrors of the american thecnotheocracy the very definition of good. It is like you guys don’t understand limit warfare, everything must be a crusade.
Pardon my ignorance, but ain’t that how ya win?
Kinda sorta thought that was what todays blog was about.
But I’m justa dumb american.
I guess it depends on how the Theocracy views its own populace.
Russians dont see ukranians as the devil and Russia itself has been fighting a limit war with Ukraine.
If for example Texas or the european vassals declare independence i am pretty sure washington would be very willing to immediately carpet bomb entire metro areas.
What i said is about americans being dumb or smart simply how they tend to see things.
But that is the American overlords, not an American. I can agree, however, that Americans tend to embrace evil/good duality more than Russians – one only need read Chekhov or Tolstoy to see the distance from Western thought.
Chekhov and Tolstoy were western thinkers. America’s Manichaeanism smacks more of ancient eastern thought.
I don’t know what this means. Chekhov lacked Western duality because he simply sketched with such a delicate touch; Tolstoy avoided Western condemnation of sin because he illuminated the righteous path, leaving the criticism secondary to the celebration.
And I don’t know what that’s supposed to mean.
Chekhov and Tolstoi were immersed in Christianity and Western philosophical thought. And their works are routinely taught in Western literature classes no different than Shakespeare and Goethe and Rabelais.
Based on my response to the OP, the context is aversion to pure good/evil duality. You qualify Tolstoy and Chekhov as Western. Pretentious. Shit, Putin must be Parisian by your logic – for he knows of Rousseau. Contrast with Washington Irving, a real American writer.
Alright, Copernicus. If Tolstoi and Chekhov aren’t western, what are they? And don’t say Russian because Russia is part of the West. Indeed, Russia right now is far more western than Great Britain.
You think Faust is of the same tradition as Ward No. Whatever?
“If for example Texas or the european vassals declare independence i am pretty sure washington would be very willing to immediately carpet bomb entire metro areas.”
Probably not right away. Blues really believe they don’t need the flyovers. They believe instead that civilizing the hicks is their White Man’s Burden. And think that, like a petulant child, so long as it’s not in their cities, a “time out” is the best course of action.
It’s how foreign policy is done, too.
They don’t want to civilise you, they want to kill you. Even i thousands of kilometres away can see that.
They don’t want to kill you. They want somebody else to kill you while they watch on tv and cheer. This is the fundamental reason why, when the times comes, secession has a chance. Not there yet, but we’re moving in that direction.
This is the real defect of the (American?) right-winger, they always seem to think libtards are ultimately well-meaning but mislead.
Kind of like Russia and Ukraine. They thought Russia didn’t have the stomach for a drawn out conflagration, because they don’t have the stomach for one.
Pure projection on the part of the neocons. What’s the difference between a Ukrainian, and a Russian? Less than the difference between me and my neighbor down the street. They are/were racially and economically the same. So one is considered weak and afraid, and the other strong and brave? Nonsense.
Like I always tell normies, the difference between Ukraine and Russia is not unlike the difference between the USA and Canada, except that the ties are closer, more longstanding and deeper between the former two.
Now you tell me what would happen if China or Russia attempted a hostile takeover of Canada through rigged elections, with the aim of parking missiles and military bases on our border, with the aim of splitting up the USA into four or five different France’s instead of one superpower.
Do you think we would invade Canada if push came to shove? Of course.
And a good number of Canadians would openly welcome it.
Wage slavery is more efficient than chattel slavery, because much of cost of caring for the slave can be socialized, in one way or another.
Also, there is the illusion of “freedom”, which only means the wage slave gets to choose his master, sometimes.
Hello $10/hr menial employee with EBT, medicaid, student loans, and child tax credit
I’m not sure but I suspect a large number of the slaves became sharecroppers after emancipation, which probably worked out cheaper for plantation owners. The level of exploitation was probably not less post-emancipation but became more abstract and indirect. Modern wage capitalism versus slave capitalism.
When I was in school the transition from childhood to adolescence was marked by being given things to read that aren’t textbooks, self-contextualizing material that we were trusted to understand. The first I remember were “slave narratives,” reminiscences (interviews, brief autobiographies) of recently freed blacks. Two things stood out as different from the textbooks’ story. The most obvious was that slave life as seen on TV wasn’t the life these people described. Our parents watched Roots and the little Tarantinos among us knew Blacksnake! and other slave sexploitation stuff (the more artistically legitimate precursors to Roots). Every book had a… Read more »
“Crackers were banished. Blacks freed into sharecropping lamented their reduction to that state of lonely helplessness, of not knowing anybody.”
The real antagonism was not between slave-owning whites and their slaves but between poor whites and slaves.
“beautiful losers fear nothing more than winning as it reveals the ugliness of their reality” See: 85%-plus of Republicans in Washington as the prime example. I confess I didn’t have them figured out until Obama’s emergence, and the nomination of McCain. Obama would have been a tough opponent for anyone, so the Republicans didn’t even bother trying. They nominated a guy who wanted nothing more than to run an honorable losing campaign, because he’d been denied that chance years ago. And that’s exactly what he did. And then, when Obamacare starts getting pushed through, voters in Massachusetts of all places… Read more »
It’s all about controlled opposition. They’d rather play their part in the Kabuki theater of our politics than actually win.
Exactly. Just finished listening to the AZ Rep head on morning radio. Same lecture. We need anybody in office who can win—regardless of effectiveness. I’m certain this is exactly the same phenomenon we hear of with women who have “battered wife” syndrome.
For a different generation, it was Bob Dole in 1996, who was given the nomination as a parting gift, and then unceremoniously kicked out of the Senate (he tried to play it off as a campaign gambit to spend more time “on the trail” — my rear end; he was still hanging around his Senate office until the last paperweight was removed).
I’d like to see a novel or movie where a Republican President has more muscle and vigor, isn’t afraid to use his power, and the weaselly Democrats are just thankful that Mr. President is magnanimous to them while still reminding them to know their place. As Anti-Sorkin as you can make it. Something that champions normal well-adjusted [White] people.
(Maybe he can even McLintock-spank Nancy Pelosi immediately after she rips her State of The Union on national television, and his approval ratings skyrocket)
So, I take it you will be voting Trump with gusto?
Well, this is why globohomo instituted permanent vote by mail in 2020. How is a populist going to win when elections moving forward are all rigged? 2016 was very likely the last real election of our lifetimes; 2020 will be looked back historically as when globohomo cabal seized permanent power. And due to demographic changes (20 million Democrat illegals in the past 4 years alone) we are at the stage where, like California, we are becoming a permanent one party state. Once that happens, the intensity of shitliberalism will go parabolic unlike anything we have seen so far. Lastly, what… Read more »
At last, an explanation why the Owners of the Mississippi Delta and King Cotton* “fought” against their co-ethnic shipping and banking dynasties in Boston, Newport, and Charleston.
*(who bankrupted their Irish-Scots neighbors with slave labor plantations on the same baronial plan they had in South/Central America.)
Among committed leftists, it is common to find this framed 180 degrees to the opposite, that the Democrats are the controlled opposition designated losers who care only about fundraising and not winning, and the Republicans are the ruthless rulers who do whatever it takes to win. And we live in a right wing dystopia. I am not making this up. They really think this. I could introduce you to people who think this, in addition to the ones I see online. They have to think this, for leftism (for lack of a better descriptor) cannot ever see itself as holding… Read more »
Yep, even when they live in a $2.8m house in Winnetka, IL, and Trump signs in the neighborhood are as common as men at Mount Holyoke College. Their idea of oppression is not getting whatever they want whenever they want it. Their cravings and aversions are practically infinite, ergo they are always oppressed.
During the first Trump election, wife and I took a cruise ship to Canada from NJ (Hoboken). When on a tour of one city, Nova Scotia, there were Trump signs in those yards. I kid you not. It was then I knew what was gonna happen.
And that is why the Left can never tolerate any status quo, even one they created and control absolutely. The Left’s raison d’etre is to slay armies of dragons in furtherance of a utopia that never arrives. And that utopia is the Left’s mortal enemy because it would put them out of business.
The ones who think this way tend to be those that Vladimir Lenin called useful idiots. The reason there are so many is that the useful idiot category includes the overwhelming majority of the whole of shitlib woketards, always engaged exclusively in their feelings. As Mark Twain pointed out, it is much easier to bamboozle a man than it is to convince him he has been bamboozled. Applied here, this type is people who have been thoroughly duped, yet their egos/feelings will not allow them to even see this, let alone acknowledge it. Thus, their solution is to see the… Read more »
One insight, I think first phrased this simply by the goofball Aimee Terese, is fundamental: There is no left, only Democrats. “The left,” with incredibly rare true believer exceptions, gets what it wants all the time, because all they really want is whatever power says it’s about to do—”the feeling that power is increasing,” as Nietzsche put it. The bandwagon (or progress, or History) announces its next stop, and that’s where “we” were always going. (“Did you know that libertarians were always for gay marriage?”) See ya, losers! It’s not an ideal situation for power—if it has desires of its… Read more »
This transformation will be generational I think. The young white men with nothing to lose will likely be in the vanguard. The old grillers have too much to lose. The recent election in Germany showed this – the AfD did best among young men. It’s also possible we will see a “Fight Club”-like “Project Mayhem” among blue collar white men that brings the country to its knees.
One can hope. Boomers would be more useful as soilent green than whatever it is they do at the moment (watching the home-shopping channel?)
I’m fully in agreement that “beautiful loser” all but defines what’s left of the Conservative Industrial Complex. They cling to their “principles” and lose happily because it saves them from taking any action and they can – at the same time – pat themselves on the back for being “moral”. I think we have to recognize something far more sinister in the GOP as a whole though. It’s become very clear over the last several years that the GOP will lose on purpose if it serves their ends. Even now I’m certain there are many working behind the scenes to… Read more »
Correct. And they will justify undermining Trump based upon the notion that he is, like literally, Hitler. And you can’t have Hitler and muh Constitution. Thus, ratting out your constituents and subverting the electoral process–doing terrible violence to the very spirit of democracy they claim to worship–is actually the highest form of American patriotism. These people have internalized the beliefs of the Left.
In conservative AZ circles, John McCain was decried for years and years as worthless to conservatives. He proved this by voting against the repeal of Obama’s Affordable Care Act (ACA) when Trump assumed office and the Rep’s controlled Congress—even though prior he voted for repeal many time before when such repeal was politically impossible. He was a typical phony Republican professing conservative values. He also argued strenuously against building the Wall when illegal immigration soared under Obama. McCain ran a pretty good political machine which Trump upset. Now there is a full blown war between Trumpists and RINO’s (as represented… Read more »
McCain wasn’t a RINO, he was a perfect example of them.
This is like going to McDonalds, being served a soggy mess, and complaining the burger is MINO.
No, you are just under the illusion that McDonalds is something that it’s not.
I can accept that rebuke. I just don’t have a better descriptor handy. You are correct, McCain was always McCain. I yield. 😉
This column is apropos for me because I just finished listening to Scott Adams blather incoherently about how it would be a great thing if Trump, should he win, appointed Elon Musk to re-engineer the US government — but of course we’d keep the Constitution, Adams says! We want to keep the rulebook (close to his actual words), apparently oblivious to the fact that “the rulebook” prohibits Musk from “re-engineering” the government. Musk can’t repeal the Pendleton Act, he can’t fire civil servants in union protected jobs. He can’t repeal any other laws, abolish any agencies, refuse to spend the… Read more »
The “rulebook” was made by and for White, Christian, European men in the 18th century. The didn’t work in the 19th century nor the 20th. Even if Whites could establish a modern-day polity, they would not work in the 21st. They were based on supposedly universal premises that did not comport with reality. Times, people and technology have rendered them obsolete.
That is the problem isn’t it—“you can never go back…”
Those rules can easily be modified to apply only to ourselves, to the purposeful exclusion of others.
Well I think you hit the nail on the head when you said the guys that play fast and loose with the rules undermine the game. The flaw is that the losers inevitably, eventually adapt. All empires rise and fall, all champions are eventually dethroned. That “win at all costs” mindset eventually shoots itself in the balls because there’s no point playing against cheaters. We see this in the rise of the BRICS. Historically, we see it in the regular expulsion of the jews from their host countries. All empires ris and fall, as do all champions. Dissidents had better… Read more »
I would rather Trump win, myself, but I don’t see how campaigning as Romney 2012, but with more dope and abortions, will get him there. I definitely don’t see how it is better for his odds if he does that instead of campaigning the way he did that actually got him victory in 2016. Also, when I see Rabbi Schmuley Boteach bragging about his association with new Trump surrogates Tulsi Gabbard and RFK Jr., I am not encouraged at the prospects of a revolt against the regime or even of avoiding World War 3. If this new cuck version of… Read more »
“I don’t see how campaigning as Romney 2012, but with more dope and abortions, will get him there.” To me it’s in the same ballpark / continuation of such brilliant talking points during 2020 like the black unemployment numbers, pushing red flag laws that disarm people without due process, the black platinum plan, patting himself on the back for the vax & attacking governors for opening up top early. Its all deliberately geared towards people who will never ever vote for him & needlessly causes friction with the people he needs to try to win back over who felt betrayed… Read more »
Yep. When it comes to dope and abortion, all he has to say is “these are state issues, 10th amendment, let them resolve it, let’s talk about things under the purview of the federal government, like the border.” He is not just wading into stupid conflicts he has no business stepping into, he is walking right into the trap that Democrats laid out for him. They WANT to make this election about abortion, because if they do, they will win. I don’t know who told Trump to try to claim that he will fight for “reproductive rights”, but that person… Read more »
Very well said man, that’s exactly how he should handle those kinds of questions. You know now that you mention mushbrain when they did the switcharoo putting kamala in his place that seems to be when this all started. I mean at least that’s my perception, I admittedly haven’t been paying that much attention, I just see headlines & the like for the most part without really digging into it. Maybe I’m wrong but I just don’t remember seeing anything like this when it was still biden but ever since the switch all I’m hearing about is completely irrelevant &… Read more »
You guys sound like Right Wing Influencers!
Another way you can look at a game is if it is a finite game or infinite game. The spiritually aware play the infinite game, while the trapped in the body play the finite game. The progressive plays a finite game in that they think heaven can be brought to earth by overlooking the rules of nature. Our side wants to play the infinite game because we want to keep the game going even after we are gone and stay in harmony with nature. (((Certain groups))) look at life as a finite game of attaining power, money, and subjugation of… Read more »
I think Z has showed me the reason why I despise organized sports and the extreme rich. I’d like to live in a loser world where time tested social conventions are backed up by rules. I liked the Main Street Republican world I grew up in quite a lot. It’s gone now, of course.
There are myriad reasons to loathe organized sports, but Z’s critique is not among them. For, while it’s true that most coaches subvert the rules in the monomaniacal drive to win, this behavior is not decisive. The teams that win are still, in the main, the ones with the most talented players and the most gifted coaches. (In the college game, the winners are now the franchises with the largest NIL war chests.) The willingness to bend the rules is a marginal factor.
Money doesn’t buy championships. But if you don’t invest the money, you won’t win a championship.
“prefer subjugation over uncertainty”. This is concisely as one can put it on why a majority of Harris supporters want her, and Biden before her. Basically a more succinct way of me explaining to my wife the other day when she just can’t fathom why any one would vote for her. In a way the minor panic over Tucker’s interview with an alt-history guy is a tangential example of people ,even on our supposed side, getting twisted when historical narratives and myths are challenged. It leads to uncertainty, and the timid don’t like that. Look forward to a piece from… Read more »
That interview was tame, and it was still too much for many Con Inc losers. They really have no conception of what is coming.
Yes, very telling. He even made an explicit point — twice — to dumb it down for them, saying “Just because you say X is bad does not mean you believe Y is good” in explicit reference to Churchill and Hitler. I grew up with a guy, known him 40 years now. Spent a lot of time with him the last five years, hadn’t over the past 20. Never had too many political conversations with him. He’s a Bush conservative, got into politics after 9/11, but grew up saturated in Reagan and conservatism. Last six months or so, I realized… Read more »
Most people throughout history have always preferred ‘safe’ subjugation to uncertain independence. Most people are neither very bright nor very capable. They don’t want freedumb, they want to be taken care of but without too many heavy-handed limitations. While any form of human society requires some rules and social norms, the Big Lie of Equality means no one can be excluded for any reason, except those who insist on some basic rules and norms. Ergo Klownworld. Satan’s panopticon and playground, happily enabled by his acolytes.
As someone much wiser than me said recently – “most people do not want to be free”
They are continuing to lose control of the narrative. That is why, in the end, I am convinced they will pull out all the stops for Kamala. Beyond any policy changes Trump may (or may not) implement, the real threat is to the mythology that justifies the current ruling order.
If she “wins” I expect the crackdown will be brutal.
Yes, if Kamala wins, I suspect all of Congress may go with her. The societal changes as codified in law will be the greatest since the Great Depression.
Which interview? If it’s alt history, I’d like to catch it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vOTgPEGYS2o
Why thank you!
I’ll believe the “win at all costs” mentality taking hold of the conservative right when I see it – but, but we can’t break the rules of muh constitution. Yeah, keep telling that to the leftards, asswipes…
A sound analysis, and I agree with it. However, winning itself is a means to an end. And that end is power. Absolute and unalloyed power. The Left is dangerously close to attaining that end.
Maybe. I think if I were king for a day, first thing I’d do is abdicate. I’m just not interested in running/ruining other peoples’ lives.
But that’s the point of politics. Incentives predict that those drawn to politics would skew through self-selection towards a desire for power over others. And evidence is that’s what it does.
Ostensibly, the Constitution was the best try at limiting politics yet conceived. It failed. Got any better ideas? Or is it time to just rip political power out by the roots and get on with life?
Then as now, morality had a huge part in abolishing slavery. I don’t think it was simply the North being spiteful. There were a ton of powerful Yanks that thought slavery was reprehensible and also the south was backward and needed civilizing and industrializing.
If the North were simply trying to get one up on the South, why did Republicans go whole hog on reconstruction and putting blecks in national and state legislatures? Remember that leftist crusades started with abolition. Shortly afterward we had the suffrage and temperance movements.
The reconstruction made sure the the south would never rise again plus the future american empire needed warriors. Something like that was done to Europe after WW2.
The South rose again, reformed, not tidewater Virginia. Think Texas, libertarianism, Alex Jones-style conspiracism.
I mean, young people around here listen to country music, style themselves like Duck Dynasty or ranchers. Black people are becoming a thing lol. Definitely not the LanCo of my youth!
Because they feared revenge and wanted to humiliate their enemies.
Christianity in the USA started focusing less on salvation and more on helping the neighbor. This Christianity without Jesus and focused on this world is the origin of the progressive religion. After this, the doctrine was used by different power groups to get what they wanted, by identifying their power grab as a helping the neighbor. Each of these power grabs changed the religion. This is structured like a series of crusades to bring paradise to earth. The abolition movement was its first cause. Then the temperance movement, suffrage, civil rights, feminism, LGBTI and multiculturalism. There is no contradiction between… Read more »
Reconstruction was as brutal as it was because Southerners were figuring out the outsourcing model — sharecropping. Yes, slavery was lucrative if you were already a large slaveowner. As with any other livestock, there’s the calf crop. Smaller slaveholds were always on the edge because of the massive capital investment. A young fieldhand would sell for over $1000 — 50 oz of gold. Sharecropping made it so a minor landholder could split his acreage up into plots, then wait for his sharecroppers to drop off the tribute. No expenses other than taxes. If one of them gets old or sick… Read more »
No one cared about Blacks, before and after the CW. That is shown by history. Slavery was a useful tool to rally the populace around a “brother war”. Slavery was abolished, and then allowed to basically continue in the South (and North) via segregation and sharecropping. The entire war was fought to maintain the “Union” and finish the job of expansion of the USA to the Pacific. It (CW) was a ploy used by the Federal Government to break the back of State’s Rights as outlined in the Constitution. It worked. We fail to appropriately appreciate this due to a… Read more »
Northern carpetbaggers had their covetous eyes on the luscious south. The rest was moral baloney similar to wanting to bring democracy to Iraq.
What’s so luscious about it? The soils are red and it’s full of bugs. It’s full of iron. Northern soils are far more productive.
Seems to me the war turned on two things: Lee’s invasion of the North, and the Emancipation Proclamation. Lee’s invasion changed the dynamic, because the South was now playing aggressor instead of defender. Now the North was injured and threatened, no longer half-heartedly conducting war. The Proclamation was a result and a desperate move, imo. It unleashed the radical abolitionists, burning hatred of the South and Southern culture. I would say it’s true that the North’s homunculus is a spiteful mutant— Thaddeus Stevens being a great example imo. I think that’s the case for any culture that exalts literacy and… Read more »
I would disagree on this partially. There have been long periods of equilibrium where nations, and political parties, “play by the rules”. Examples include the stability from the Congress of Vienna up to Kaiser Wilhelm post-Bismarck, and Democrats and Republicans from roughly 1945 up to 2008. In the Post Cold War world, you had the Clintons and Bush families being roughly indistinguishable save at the margins from core policies and politics. Each won “small” and the “rules” were that various technocrats would do “incentives” policies that did not change much and wins/losses were small. Similar to the unwritten rules in… Read more »
“Examples include the stability from ….. and Democrats and Republicans from roughly 1945 up to 2008.” Are we living in the same world? Arguably the democrats started the machine up again in 1932 and still have not relented. It’s been nonstop insanity from them from 1932 to today. Their power to do this has waxed and waned for brief periods between 32 and today, but to the extent they could, they have been doing this from 32 to today. Recall we had an FDR court (all 9 justices) well into the mid 50s and some beyond. We had the insanity… Read more »
TT-
I’d go ever further back and claim the modern insanity started with the utterly vile Woodrow Wilson, who gave us the Fed, income tax, and began the long, sorry US tradition of playing globo-cop by plunging us into WWI.
I was an officer anti-immigration group and wanted to sign my letters to the editor of the local paper with a pen name and my office title. ie. Peyton Fahrquar, Treasurer, Citizens for Responsible Immigration. The president of the group was displeased with the use of a pen name. It offended his sense of honesty. Well, I’d rather keep my day job than be honest. We compromise and I used a pen name but left out affiliation with the group. That was too bad, because when I used the group’s name, it immediately got a response from the newspaper, sending… Read more »
Reading down the comments, I see the Constitution come up a lot. Likewise in the anti-immigration group. I kept trying to tell them, as soon as they say “The Constitution”, they will be pigeon-holed as just some boomer conservative cranks and most people will shut them off. I advocated going to the belly of the beast at the local Organic Farmers and Growers fair and setting up a booth to talk about had bad mass immigration is for the environment, but that would never get any traction with that crowd if we started talking about “The Constitution”. We might as… Read more »
The “science” is settled. Immigration has no effect on the environment because Wall Street financier David Gelbaum says so. “It was a very bad day for the cause of protecting America’s wilderness and resources some years back when the Sierra Club secretly took over $100 million in tainted donations from Wall Street investor David Gelbaum. The enormous contribution came with strings attached, namely the stipulation that America’s flagship green organization would not mention excessive immigration as harmful to the environment generally and resource preservation in particular” The Social Contract – How Deeply Did Wall Street Investor David Gelbaum Damage the… Read more »
David Gelbaum. Hm. Sounds……Thai.
Peyton Fahrquar. Ha! Wasn’t he one of Thurston Howell III’s golfing buddies?
I live this post – in large part because it desacralizes “The Rules”. The dictates our oppressors try to force on us, which work against our interests, have no moral component that we must respect. There is only the practical consideration of cost/benefit/risk in defying them. Normal people in the US must learn to embrace subversion of bad rules, as is common in many other countries. Ways to get around the system need to become part of normal thinking, normal business. Make the cost of ensuring compliance too high to bear. Render every absurd pronouncement from the overlords down to… Read more »
What’s hilarious about this dynamic with Trump is that he wants to be the slave, he’s never stopped trying to prove how he’s not hitler to the ruling class. Only in the minds of the people who want him gone is he truly a threat to the system but the mere act of calling out them out for their bullshit during his first presidential run was just too much for them to handle. They reacted this way even though in the end he stuffed his cabinet with the very people in his party who opposed, denounced & undermined him. Words… Read more »
Technology would have eventually eliminated chattel slavery. Machines are cheaper (less upkeep) and more reliable than blacks.
Eventually. My guess is turn of the century or maybe a bit later. The cotton picker wasn’t developed ’til the ’30s, but if not for all the destruction of the brother war, there might have been the capital, human and otherwise, to bring that about few decades earlier.
If evil bastards like Thaddeus Stevens actually cared, they would have worked to make slavery obsolete rather than just imprison or shoot people who disagreed.
Mechanization was already in effect in the South on plantations. Slaves were “moved”, if you will, to other States and other manual labor handling different crops not yet subject to technological innovation. (I forget the details and am not interested in looking them back up.) However, it seems the association of slave utility and large plantation farming is simplistic. Hell, I could use a house slave myself, I’m tired of doing most of the daily maintenance around here. How about your local Walmart? Can’t they use slaves to stock shelves and sweep floors? How about a new Black nanny for… Read more »
Fertilizing those seeds are The Regime’s reaction to the first winner with a will to power who arrived to challenge them. They are going after other major potential rivals. The infiltrators and occupiers got their seats by cunning but also by virtue of a system where the best pursued their self interest on the outer periphery of the system. They aren’t going to accept being told by Bugs Bunny to just go stare at a pile of shoes and kick the ground. They aren’t going to accept that they can be extradited and jailed. Massive lawfare. Assassination attempts. Forced Humiliation… Read more »
Could not help but remember William F Buckley. Before reading this he was a beautiful loser. Now he he is the slave house negro.
Buckley was an OSS spook, and his rag was apparently financed with CIA money. His mission obviously was to marginalize the real Right, and replace it with a denatured zombie conservativism that would police the right end of the spectrum and prevent any anti-Regime thought. He was ruthless about canceling those who strayed off the reservation.
I have wondered if NR was part of the Mockingbird program
He was an Uncle Caleb. And, I must admit, I used to admire the guy.
“Uncle Caleb”? Forgive me, I’ve never heard the term before.
The white version of Uncle Tom. A house honkey.
Trump Claims He Was Sent by God to Save the World (With Abortion, Gay Sex, Weed, Endless War)
No Trump does not troll.
No, genius, Trump will not save anything. He’s a real estate guy from NYC.
but an Agathocles of Syracuse? Yes, that model would do nicely.
FB, I think you forgot the link:
https://www.unz.com/aanglin/trump-claims-he-was-sent-by-god-to-save-the-world-with-abortion-gay-sex-weed-endless-war/
Many of the “Orthodox” still adore him. One hateful supremacist (255 second video) says that DJT is a new unjewish messiah chosen to serve the moschiach and the “Jewish people”. Because Ex. 21:6 is about the bullet dodger’s ear. Another loon, a Protester named Chuck Baldwin, says that the supremacist is a rabbi, Isser Zalman Weisberg, who just doesn’t understand Num. 24:17.
KnowMoreNews.org is Adam Green’s site.
Can someone remind me of the name of the notable Southerner who opposed the South (and wrote a book about it during the CW) not because he was pro-black freedom or the North, but because he was against the importation of blacks and working class whites being shut out? At least I believe that was the jist of his argument; could be wrong.
If I understood your rather convoluted question, such a person does not exist because the importation of slaves was banned in 1808 the first moment the Constitution allowed it, and with pretty serious support in the South. The big “ranchers” running a couple hundred head knew it would increase the sale price of their stock.
From ChatGPT: ”The notable Southerner you’re referring to is likely Hinton Rowan Helper. He was a white Southern critic of slavery, but his opposition was based on his belief that slavery harmed poor white Southerners by limiting their economic opportunities. Helper expressed these views in his controversial book, “The Impending Crisis of the South,” published in 1857. In this book, he argued that slavery benefited the wealthy slave-owning elite at the expense of non-slaveholding whites, whom he saw as being economically oppressed by the system. However, Helper was not an advocate for racial equality; his opposition to slavery was rooted… Read more »
Hinton, incidentally, was best known by his nickname, Hamburger…
thank you!
It’s funny that leftists themselves don’t appear to understand this. Weaponization of rules undermines the rules themselves.
But you really have to wonder if the “right” in this society will begin to see the rules for what they are and revolt against them. I have my doubts.
For some reason, this randomly made me think of a great Yogi Berra quote: “I always thought that record would stand until it was broken.”
[…] ZMan pulls no punches. […]
Ahhh… finally, the long awaited, well deserved David French insult.
There is a DR site I used to read provided a perfect example of this mindset. This place literally set up a super duper secret password channel to be able to say such naughty words as “Nazi” and “Jew”, like those aren’t going to be lost in the millions of times they are used every day on the internet. I mean, there is excluding the weirdo element of the internet, and then there is behaving with such cringing servility to the rules of TPTB that the taste of boot is permanently implanted in your mouth, especially when you are basically… Read more »
Just want to acknowledge you hit yet another homerun brother. Thank you. Still don’t want to show up at the booth in November. It feels shameful and, here, it’s truly pointless.
/s former Chicago election judge with stories
Here’s one such story: Back in 2020 at least one of the machines at Goethe Elementary School wouldn’t allow a voter to choose a certain candidate.
Recently, I made the comment that “Republicans Bring Boxing Gloves To A Gunfight.” One of your commenters improved on that by saying “They Bring Talking Points.” If this is the best Republicans, of for that matter, the white world in general can do, then we are certainly doomed to well-deserved extinction!
Don’t forget the charts and graphs that will surely enlighten them!
The Republican platform of 1860 was to forbid slavery in the territories acquired after the Mexican War but to preserve it in the states where it was already legal. There was actually a constitutional amendment proposed to make slavery permanent in the slave states of 1860 (supported by Lincoln). This was unacceptable to the southern elite, as it meant the political power of the free states would eclipse that of the South, which would endanger slavery regardless of the constitution (which could be amended to remove the slavery guarantee).
Well, he needs to quit giving interviews to Maggie H, to begin with. Not sure he’s learned all the lessons he ought to have learned by now… Kicking Pompeo off his team wouldn’t be a downside, either – dude wanted to whack the guy who gave us wikileaks..
Chump talked up wikileaks in the past, and then when time came to pardon Assange he pardoned a tribe member that ran one of the largest human trafficking / illegal immigrant scams in US history instead. That’s where the priorities lie.
I was contemplating slavery a few days ago. It’s not inherently immoral. The means of obtaining slaves and their treatment can be immoral, but not slavery itself.
What the f#%k am I but a wage slave?
Then don’t be one. Any man with the capacity to understand wage slavery has the capacity to break free. Let the lesser men die in those traces.
My point was the ubiquity.
Fair enough. As more than one have pointed out, though, most people are fine with a more or less comfortable slavery. We can’t give them ambition to be something better, and can’t give them skills if that is what they lack.
If we are doing the brother’s keeper thing, the best we can do is encourage those who can but are too unmotivated to act. The rest, it’s more merciful to let them live in their dreamworld.
I have posted here repeatedly that we still, generally and where I live, have a high quality of life. I will not LaVoy Finicum myself. Anyone who thinks that they can make an effective gesture that will change the minds of the masses is living in a dreamworld. The dreamers are the oppressors, but they are completely unmoveable, and they are Legion. And before I get some snarky responses, I have probably awoken more than anyone else posting here in my life and work (Z exempted), and I’m still in my 30s. I will not, however, make myself a target.… Read more »
Oh, I wasn’t counseling that! Rather that no one need work for a boss other than himself. Now granted, many have made choices that preclude some options, so you have to live within those limits. Design constraints. And the older you get, the more design constraints there are, largely because of self-inflicted golden handcuffs.
If wage slavery bothers you that much, putting up with it for another 30 years is going to destroy you. Examine your design constraints. There’s likely a whole lot more degrees of freedom than you think.
“Any man with the capacity to understand wage slavery has the capacity to break free”
Not so sure about that one.
Would disagree that victory in any particular game/tournament in sports is the only goal for a team and that exploiting loopholes is always the hallmark of winners. This seems a very cynical view of what sport is supposed to be, although I understand Z is perhaps simply trying to draw a parallel with politics. At least back in the day, sportsmanship was held in the highest regard by the game’s authorities, the players and spectators, and victories achieved in unsportsmanlike fashion, or so perceived, were scandalous. Fast leg theory bowling in cricket for example, was highly controversial precisely because some… Read more »
Most of the points in today’s essay ring true, but I would dispute that slavery “was fantastically successful as an economic practice.” Slavery as practiced in the New World probably WAS profitable, although perhaps not always “fantastically” so. In fact, one of the strongest arguments for its existence over many centuries was simply to consider the falsification of that statement. If owning and working slaves had been a net-money loser, it would have been illogical for any planter or other slaver to enter the business. In other words, one needs look no further than base greed, the profit motive. … Read more »
I bet pretty quickly, within 10 years, of black Africans being taken to live under white protection and patronage, theywere lined up on those western shores at a chance to escape the chaos and insecurity of African life to live among our ancestors.
maybe the cheap labor revisionists are right: African slavery was a cheap labor scheme of the mercantile class and all of us are living the results of their get rich quick scheme.
not that there’s anything wrong with slavery as such, but black slaves? So far from Africa? Not a great long term plan, anglicans!
This kind of feels like two separate, mutually-contradictory essays awkwardly stapled together at the middle.
The North kept losing to the South within the rules of the game of politics as set forth in the Constitution. Therefore, they did what winners always seek to do and that is change the rules. Not at all. Before 1860, the South had an outsized influence on national politics. Consider the number of Presidents from the South. In 1860, the South found out that someone could be elected President without any support from the South. This was a first. The primary reason for this change was that immigration went primarily to the North, not to the South. That tipped… Read more »
The wars between nation’s are also winner-takes-all spats. Boosted (or dragged down) by their economies, nation’s look enviously at rich countries like the USA, “Arsenal of Democracy.” A good banker on your side is worth a fully decked out military division.
— Greg (www.dark.sport.blog)
“A good banker on your side is worth a fully decked out military division.”
The root of all power is the capacity for organized violence, not money.
The American political system — a trifecta of idealism, wealth and power — weeds out the losers from the winners in a ruthless Darwinian process. This is part of the reason the rich are worshipped in the U.S. — they appear to beat the House in a gambling game called capitalism. In politics, the rules haven’t changed much in generations — make the other guy look bad, and be the one the voter wants to have a beer with. But behind the scenes it’s the donor rich pulling all the strings. As the internet’s The Young Turks has observed time… Read more »
“To be clever enough to get all that money, one must be stupid enough to want it.”
G. K. Chesterton