The defining feature of this age is the never-ending crisis, always surrounding the latest name for the Devil. Everything about politics surrounds the current panic over Trump, Putin, white supremacy, and so on. These are just names for Old Scratch and the people going on about it are in a panic. It is not just that the Devil is out there, but that we must act now to prevent some terrible thing he is doing.
The theater of American democracy is always the same. The people we call the left are always in a panic about the Devil or a potential victim of the Devil. The point of their panic is to generate a sense of urgency to do something about the Devil or about the alleged victim of the Devil. Sometimes, it is a combination where the agent of the Devil must be stopped in order to save his victim.
Trump has been useful for the regime because he is the Devil, but not an abstract version like climate change or a foreigner like Putin. It is much more difficult to get people excited by a distant threat or one that is hard to explain. Trump is right here, walking among us. For the people we call the left, the last decade has been defined by the great struggle against the orange demon and his minions.
When Trump is gone, they will have a huge hole in their lives, but they will find a replacement as the center of American identity is this concept. What it means to be an American is the crisis of Old Scratch. To be an American means moving from cause to cause, always the same cause though. It is the crisis of what to do right now about Old Scratch and his evil designs on our democracy.
For sites like this to exist, it requires people like you chipping in a few bucks a month to keep the lights on and the people fed. Five bucks a month is not a lot to ask. If you don’t want to commit to a subscription, make a one time donation via crypto. You can send money to: Z Media LLC P.O. Box 1047 Berkeley Springs, WV 25411-3047. You can also use PayPal to send a few bucks. Thank you for your support!
This Week’s Show
Contents
- Introduction: The Crisis & Old Scratch
- Old Scratch
- The Crisis
- Permanent Crisis
Direct Download, The iTunes, iHeart Radio, RSS Feed
Full Show On Spreaker
Full Show On Rumble
Full Show On Odysee
They want a Hitler, they need a Hitler! It was all fun and games, but moving forward it doesn’t seem like it will be. Hell, Punch a Nazi murals and graffiti in Asheville is being washed away in the stark light of survival, people in Georgia are being chlorine gassed, port strike, middle east war. Punch a Nazi murals were so quaint.
I’m a so-called heritage American. Blood and soil nationalism is the sort I have. I was taught the proposition nation stuff, the mass movement, and took it at face value, but I never really took it to heart, because my attachment to this place runs deeper. I think it must be inevitable after centuries.
My roots don’t run as deep as I imagine Europeans’ do, and I think America is a nation that’s gotten stuck in a long adolescence. It’s not like we’re the only nation that started from a migration or a colonial project; or conquered and displaced or assimilated other people; or had a civil war. Why do we get hung up on these things? This is not a unique story.
What, to my knowledge, is unique is that Europeans experimented with their Enlightenment ideas, had an ideal laboratory for them in the New World. If American society turned out to not be very different, that might be because nation is not an idea.
The weirdest part is to be unquestionably American, if there is such a thing, and I think there is, and to be told that immigrants are more American than me. If an American is a proposition, I suppose that’s true, but then what am I? I’m not a proposition— I’m the reality, the latest link in the chain, the thing this movement produced.
It’s time to put away childish things and grow up.
I may lack the appropriate words, but my immediate “thinking” is that you ignore the conflation of race in your comment. So yes, America is a “proposition” nation, but one that assumed in the main a European, Christian, White populace. Over the decades, we had immigration—but that was of European origin. Other origins, example “freed Blacks”, could be contained—if segregated, controlled, and minority. Indigenous natives were placed on reservations and so forth.
Everything went to crap in the early 60’s and we lost understanding of this simple fact and allowed numerous foreign races and cultures to take up residence. And here we are today.
I agree. My thinking is that you start with people who have differences, and the proposition or idea is probably the best you can do as far as a foundation for shared identity.
Over time, with all the ugly realities of nation building, that identity solidifies into something like blood and soil (I’d add religion, but let’s not get greedy).
I’d argue that by the early 20th century, the signs were there that this was happening. America was beginning to produce an indigenous high culture, which is evidence of an indigenous elite. Closing the border, the melting pot, also evidence.
Then you had the twin disasters of the GD and WWII, which were used to overturn and discredit all that, so we’re back to the colonial mindset for a new colonial project. Imo.
…H. L. Mencken (1918)
Hoffer was the most concise of writers, packing more than any writer into a sentence or a page. Read Hoffer to learn his ideas. Read Hoffer to learn how to write.
Another author of less political philosophical interest perhaps, but nonetheless worth reading is Studs Terkel. Terkel was famous for his oral histories, where he captured the stories and voices of everyday Americans—you know, the working class slub. His book, “Working: People Talk About What They Do All Day and How They Feel About What They Do” (1974), is one of Terkel’s best-known works, where he interviews a wide variety of people about their jobs, offering an insightful look into work and life in America.
Well worth a read to understand just who Americans were of that “greatest generation”. These people really built (and I guess lost) the America as we now yearn for.
I believe the uniquely American piece that Z-Man is searching for is the First Great Awakening at around 1720 to 1740 where it is said that Puritanism began to morph into the Evangelical movement. There you have the crisis of hell and the great crusade of revival that formed the template for American social organization. Climate hysteria uses the same pattern of convert today or burn tomorrow. Your sins will be used against you.
The Tucker Carlson interview with Darryl Cooper contains another missing piece. Cooper made the case that the Nuremberg Trials were the scapegoat ritual that forged the new GAE national identity by making the Nazi the American anti-identity. Calling someone Hitler is calling them Old Scratch to maintain the American religious vein. It is also a crude and largely subconscious form of identity manipulation where the target is painted as everything an American is not suppose to be, the anti-identity, which is meant to drive model citizens away from whatever the latest Hitler happens to be. While it was done out of hatred for the German people, it may still be the first deliberate Machiavellian manipulation of America to turn it into what it is today. 9/11 was certainly a conscious attempt given how American politicians acted as if the identity transformation into anti-Muslim crusaders was fait accompli.
The strategic elegance is that the Nazis were the one successful group to kick the communist revolutionaries out of their nation. The irony is that it pushes their enemies into emulating the one group who successfully kicked the communist revolutionaries out of their nation. I doubt they were conscious of these dynamics. Do not let your enemies define you in either case.
Lincoln was lionized for accidentally stumbling on the formula. Various presidents toyed with it via looking to war to save their presidency. Again, unconsciously in large part. Someone currently does have the formula in their playbook, however, as both Ukraine and 9/11 were deliberately managed to try to recreate the effect for new ends.
This podcast is mostly about the current devil figure — Donald J. Trump– the man the Left has used as scapegoat and bete noire to rally against. Who were the great devil figures of the past? I would argue they were as follows from 1929 to the present day.
1929 – 1948: Herbert Hoover
1948 -1974: Richard M. Nixon
1974 – 1994: Ronald Reagan
1994 – 2001: Newt Gingrich:
2001 – 2015: George W. Bush
2015 – present: Donald J. Trump
Trump sucks anyway, so who cares?
That goes for Bush, too.
I would say that the Left seems to need a Big Hitler and lots of little hitlers. The Big Hitlers in the last 50 years or so have been Nixon and now Trump. I recall talking to a bunch of old Lefties at a Unitarian church around 2004 or so. Many of them were quite proud of having “made the list” (Nixon’s famous Enemies List). How true those claims were, I can’t say, but it was clear that they were quite proud of having attracted the attention of the Devil Himself. The little hitlers, Gingrich, GW Bush, seem to be mostly associated with specific and time-limited policies such as the Gulf War(s) and the Contract with America. I think Reagan was on the line between being a little vs. Big Hitler.
I think and Nixon and Reagan qualify as “Big Hitlers” because the Left was using them as hate scapegoats (hate-goats?) long before and after their respective Presidential terms. I can remember lots of lefties railing against the alleged horrors of the Reagan-Bush years long after Bill Clinton became President. Nixon, only now is getting a more balanced view in history Also, regan was dismissed as af dangerous far-right extremist in the 1960s and 1970s, well before he was elected president in 1980..
“Hatred is the most accessible and comprehensive of all the unifying agents. Mass movements can rise and spread without belief in a god, but never without a belief in a devil.”
― Eric Hoffer, The True Believer: Thoughts on the Nature of Mass Movements
Zman, do you watch movies? Recently over at AmRen Paul Kersey and Greg Hood had a podcast episode about the 1999 movie “Fight Club”. Watch that movie and you’ll understand why so many dissident men might want to take up soap-making. (Also, in the course of the movie you’d encounter another interesting -and funny- connection to the comment you made just before that, about the Starbucks fatties.)
Starbucks’ business model is to sell women milkshakes they can pretend are coffees.
That’s why they’re fat and think they can make themselves look attractive with ink and metal
As long as the left is mainly deranged women, we will jump from hysteria to hysteria. The promise of constant hysteria is the main selling point of what passes as the left.
Women have a particularly hysterical response to strong, male authority figures who tell them “no.” Trump and Putin both fit that image. They are the daddy women rebel against.
There is the face of the devil and there is the Great Devil. Today is Trump is the face of it. Underneath that proxy is the real devil, the ultimate devil that must be “abolished” – White people.
That won’t stop. It will only intensify, unless some White men stand up and speak a few simple words. Examples: No; Call me anything you want I don’t care; This is going to stop – now; …
Then that person will learn what the generations and decades of cowards were too scared to find out. Namely, that tens upon tens of millions of Whites/Americans will roar behind him in support. Whoever does this and does this simply and explicitly after they have gone mainstream enough first, will have legions behind their back. Then others will pop up. Reject the blacks and asians and other non-Whites who pop up to ride the train. Get good and sick and tired of others not of your kind speaking on your behalf. Once that happens it will mean that Our Moral Subjugation has ended. Only White people can end it, and it only ends when you stop caring what people call you or think of you. Secretly, the strivers will agree with you. And slowly they will come out as well.
This is so reminiscent of an Austrian painter with a funny moustache.
i suppose there are prudent ways to do it, but ultimately it may cost you as it cost me. I can’t work in the career I have a masters degree in. There’s no getting around it as you say. I see people trying to weasel around it by doing some version of “putting away the work.” Ramz Paul Dave green seem to have all done some version of capitulation to the race thing : Paul with his opposition to white nationalism and green with reparations for blacks for a future promise not to complain anymore.
no. An exclusively white state is the base . If you can’t say whites need a homeland full stop, you are worthless to me.
Exactly Right… https://northwestfront.info/
Given all the Africans in Paris, speaking Russian would not be so bad, I would think….
“…they will find a replacement as the center of American identity is this concept.”
And that concept is an old one:
The quote “We can live without God, but never without the devil”—often attributed to the French philosopher Michel de Montaigne, in his “Essays”—written in the late 16th century.
I’d say it’s more like: those who reject God inevitably fill the resulting void with the devil. People who have God as the moral focal-point of their lives are drawn towards the cultivation of internal virtue, while those fixated upon the devil seek an external evil to joust against.
The quote is removed from context—as are all such quotes. The reason for the quote is to preserve the essence of the sentiment in a memorable form. I admittedly have neither read, nor attempted to read the entire context of the quote, but I highly doubt your extension/interpretation is not made clear in the original essay penned by Michel de Montaigne and needs further clarification or extension.
It’s fine to do all this analysis and ruminating, up to a point. In fact it may already be past that point. It’s time to prepare.
This advice from a FBI whistle blower:
An FBI Intelligence Expert, testifying before Congress about FBI abuses, has a stark warning for average Americans: Vote, Arm yourselves, have 3 to 4 months worth of FOOD stocked-up, and Pray.
https://halturnerradioshow.com/index.php/news-selections/world-news/fbi-intel-whistleblower-warns-americans-vote-get-armed-have-3-4-months-food-pray
Whoa whoa whoa; we don’t take kindly to “doins stuff” round here. You just move right along .
A man whose job is defending us, helpfully warns us that we’re screwed & on our own? The Regime right now is eager for an excuse to impose martial law before the big election, and here’s a FedBoi telling us to group up, hoard food & draw iron? “Arm yourselves and vote! Signed, an FBI agent.”
Tip for recognizing a psyop: notice he dramatically told you to do what you should have been doing for decades already. (Less the voting.) At a Congressman’s invitation, no less. It was all planned, all theatre, all factional infighting.
Ok gunner, go it alone, don’t hoard food, don’t arm yourself and don’t vote.
Never follow good advice if you don’t like it’s source.
He explicitly said he already does what the “former” agent advised him to do. As all men have done, for generations.
You drop in at the last minute to clearly ignore the meaning of his comment to stir up shit. You are probably hoping he provides some details of his prep, aren’t you?
Whoa! Art, you are Smart! Smoked me right out. You probably even know my badge number!
-Agent 99
When a productive person faces adversity, they roll up their sleeves and get to work. When a parasite faces adversity, they seek new and more potent ways to exert control over the productive in order to assure access to sustenance. That is the essence of globalism; a cabal of parasites gets to feed on a productive sheeple class with least hassle and opposition. And their biggest obstacle is alpha males who refuse to be tamed and neutered. We cannot talk our way out of this dynamic. If you still have a swinging pair, its time to pick up the mace.
While I would never advocate anyone ever do anything under any circumstances, I was reminded of your thoughts yesterday. Someone uploaded a video from the right stuff (Enoch and his buddies) where one of the guys does parody songs. This one had an accompanying music video with video of the Australian police beating people for being on a beach during covid.
Everyone has just forgotten about covid and all the evil stuff they did and what hypocrites they were. We’re all just pretending that never happened.
Joe Normie doesn’t have a pair and he’s never going to pick up a mace. He won’t even pick up an LED powered tiki torch and a plastic pitchfork to send a message.
There’s a clickbait crisis going on. “Crisis” inflation has to be problematical for the left, the word will become meaningless. Soon ads for hair loss treatments will refer to the “crisis of thinning hair.” They’ll have to copyright “crisis” and limit its use for it to have any impact.
Too late. It passed into the public domain long ago, as did “emergency” and many others. Indubitably hyperbole is the stock in trade of media but sometimes they’re not far from the truth. For example the recent hurricane (Helene) was feared to have “catastrophic” impact (N. Florida coast). It was a doozy of a storm; I’m a bit north of Tampa; well out of the way of the storm’s worst of course, but to judge by fallen limbs in my area, it was easily my biggest storm in the 21 years I’ve been in Florida. It probably isn’t an all timer but it’s tropical wind zone diameter was about triple that of a normal hurricane. On Friday’s national radar image, the remnants literally covered the eastern half of the country, from the East Coast west all the way to Kansas City.
Is it fair to say that America/AINO are the greatest crusader states in history?
I’d say England.
Even now, so late, the rump empire is even more enthusiastic for WW3 than our usual suspects are, and it’s England’s bidding America seems finally always to do. Not the people of England (RIP) obviously. What rules England rules the waves.
I always point to this moment: Early 2017, to signal that Brexit & Trump would change nothing, the British led a mock NATO invasion of Russia through Estonia—one that actually penetrated the border. “This war is ours, not any president’s, not America’s, not any people’s. Lie back and think of us.” And Putin’s non-retaliation will doom the world, apparently.
The madness of Nuland et al. I understand. England’s crusade is either too expansive for me to grasp or so stupid I can’t even imagine it. They seem for the last century or so to have gotten exactly the wars they want, everywhere in the world. What for? What’s the idea? Whose is it?
“Bankers.”
Not them. The other guys.
Most of Europe sees America as the revolutionary state.
Germans regard the uS as the greates threat to world peace.In mkost polling for the last 30 years the US always comes out top for enemy of mankind.
If “crusader” here has a messianic connotation, yes, AINO holds the lead and there is no close second. The USA is a never-ending tent revival and exports its carnival acts to all four corners of the Earth; hence, trannies WILL be honored in Madagascar, by God. But from a purely economic standpoint, shorn of evangelism and claimed principle, I agree with Hemid that Britain wins the prize. It absolutely believes it has the right to plunder anywhere, anytime, so, for example, it very well could plunge humanity into World War III any day now to try to get its hands on wheat fields in Eastern Europe. But/for its nuclear recklessness, the UK’s material imperialism is less nauseating than the American missionary version.
Yes, The US and UK are the Uday and Qusay of Globohomo, ever egging one another on to greater and greater madness and bigger and better crimes. It is this Anglo-American “axis” that the rest of the world needs to defeat to prevent catastrophe.
The most hopeful things happening right now are the European anti-immigration parties making headway against the Globohomo parties which are clearly catspaws for Angmerika. If they can free enough of Europe they can begin mass deportations and start to re-establish White homelands. This creates a de-facto shrikage of the GH empire and over time translates into less wealth for it to use to fuel its global ambitions.
If European anti-immigrant parties can also implement anti-“Green” policies there’s also still the chance of rebuilding the continent’s industrial base. Imagine Germany freed of climate-change policies and back in the business of making things. The Euros could become an example of what rational energy and economic policies combined with removal of immivaders can accomplish. Maybe even Americans and Brits will eventually want to free themselves of destructive GH policies.
The historical analogies are nice and somewhat relevant, but we need to remember that the country is ruled by a different group than in the past. It’s a bit like looking at how the Saxon rulers thought after the Norman invasion. Sure, the Normans had to take Saxon culture into consideration to keep the natives from rising up, but the Normans were a different people with different ways of looking at how to keep power.
The days of the WASP ruling class is long gone. Our current rulers are a loose collection of Jewish communities. In addition, their important voters are Lefty whites, particularly women. Jews are (correctly) paranoid as they are a tiny, foreign group ruling over other peoples. As such, they need to be constantly on the look-out for anything that might challenge their rule or even expose them as our rulers. Thus, Old Scratch is always around the corner.
As to women, well, they just look drama. Z’s theater analogy is apt. Women love the show, love the drama, so having a new devil to fight means constant drama.
Haven’t listened yet, but the written text here is great. Reminded me of when Mencken wrote, in his hilarious book “Notes on Democracy” (1926) that American history had always been about the scotching of bugaboos. Zman occasionally reminds me of Mencken. That should be taken as a huge compliment.
There was zero chance that the English would have allowed the colonies representation in Parliament. (Not that the colonists really wanted it.) As always, demographics is destiny. As Ben Franklin pointed out to the English, the colonies’ population was growing dramatically faster than England and within 100 years, its population would be larger than England.
The colonies were destined to break free of England. To give the colonists representation in Parliament would have meant allowing the colonies to someday have a majority of the seats. That wasn’t going to happen. Conversely, there was no way England could continue to hold the colonies as they and their economy grew to nearly the size of England.
Apart from Ethan Ralph, anyone know of any other ZMan guest appearances I missed? here?
2017 08 25 Greg Johnson of CC
2018 07 08 Luke Ford – The Haunting of Western Civ
2019 10 09 Myth of the 20th Century – Reaching the Tipping Point
2020 07 31 Myth of the 20th Century – The Money Game
2020 12 21 Cotto-Gottfried – Sick of corporatism
2021 03 19 Patrick Casey Restoring Order – The False Choice Society
2021 04 10 Provisional Writer’s Block – Crypto Debate w Karl Thorburn
2021 11 21 The Writer’s Bloc – Z on Rittenhouse
2021 12 13 Jolly Heretic
2022 02 09 Cotto-Gottfried – Why US conservativism fails + Church of Covid
2022 03 26 Friends of Aquinas episode 3
2022 06 07 Jose Nino episode 33 – What does the future of the US look like?
2022 06 19 MGTOW Chats – This Side of the Great Divide
2022 07 06 Pete Quinones episode 760 – A Survey of America’s Political Players
2022 10 12 Gregory Hood
2022 11 04 Coffee and a Mike episode 515
2023 04 08 Blood Satellite episode 212
2023 04 12 Coffee and a Mike episode 589
2023 05 04 Patrick Casey Restoring Order episode 255
2023 07 19 Jose Nino episode 87 – Is a Right-Wing Backlash Brewing?
2023 08 27 Pete Quinones episode 939 – Mugshot Debates and Hitting the Target
2023 09 25 Coffee and a Mike episode 680
2024 01 19 Coffee and a Mike episode 729
2024 03 31 Psychic Plumage
2024 04 03 The J Burden Show episode 181
2024 07 09 Coffee and a Mike episode 861
2024 07 21 Pete Quinones episode 1082 – Zman + Jose Nino + Jeff Deist
2024 09 02 Coffee and a Mike episode 910
2024 09 03 The J Burden Show episode 227
Building a Fed case against him?
Lotta work, nicely done! Thanks.
MGTOW chats!? That’s when I talk to myself!
I wish my stalkers were so thorough. But ma and grams were LAZY.
Abolition, women’s suffrage, prohibition, civil rights, sexual deviancy, Our Democracy®. How on earth will we ever put a stop to this American tendency to lurch from one crusade to the next? Without the constant moral warfare there’s no need to create Hitlers against whom to do battle.
There is no stopping it. There is only separating from it.
Yea something we all know that has to happen and yet no movement towards that… Everyone is still too comfortable and the water isn’t hot enough yet…
That’s easy for people like you and I to say because we have already separated from it. I have a lot of sympathy for those who think they have a good reason to not separate yet, but, as they say, some people have to pee on the electric fence for themselves.
I think the wheels aren’t coming off anytime soon, but if they do, there are a lot of people nominally on my side who are going to be jumping around holding their junk.
Ren and Stimpy take on electric fences:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=azxx9sG4Gjw
I wouldn’t say easy because it took a lot of sacrifice and still does to keep separated as much as possible from this corrupted system…
In re: Overserved side gig markets
Every Farmers Market, Swap Meet, and County Fair has too many:
4 Maple Syrup.
Yeah, we don’t use the soap or burn the candles, but we use the honey and especially the maple syrup.
You need to get away from the city more.
ProZNoV: I’ll make an exception for the honey. No, I do not usually eat it. But – in the absence of sugar or other sweeteners – both honey and maple syrup would suffice, and both last (if properly stored) for years. The hummingbirds would go hungry without cane sugar syrup, but people would still have sweeteners for beverages and baking.
I’d take the honey but our fam already has 18 produceing hives.
& Mead is nasty imo.
@Springerah
The worst hangover I’ve ever had was after a Mead Festival. Ouch.
A gigantic market: Useful but unused things.
The comedy top ten list concludes with “Republicans’ guns.”
5 – Coffee Roasters
6 – Produce Stands
Speaking of coffee, the K-cup side of my multi-brewer just broke.
I have an electric kettle, so I snagged an $18 pour-over coffee maker.
The coffee quality from the pour-over maker is nearly unbelievable. I’m talking Milanese cafe levels of smoothness from the grocery store’s house brand ground coffee.
The thirteen American Colonies were not poor relative to the home country by 1776. In the 17th century, colonial deaths exceeded natural increase. The colonies grew only by immigration. By the 18th century American colonists were better fed and more prosperous per capita than the populous in England. Support for independence among American elites stemmed from the removal of the Indian threat after the French and Indian War in 1763. The Stamp Act was a measure to allocate a portion of the debt incurred in that war for the colonies’ defense, which they could well have afforded. “No taxation without representation” was a slogan, not an actual demand. Benjamin Franklin, representing the colonies in London, was instructed by no means should he accept a deal for representation in Parliament. The founding fathers viewed Parliament correctly as thoroughly corrupt and felt they could do better.
As I wrote, colony representation in Parliament was a non-starter. As Franklin pointed out to the English, the colonies were growing at ~3% a year while England was growing at ~0.3% a year. Within 100 years, the colonies would have more people than England. To allow the colonists representation in Parliament would have meant allowing the colonies to have a majority of seats in 100 years. In essence, to allow the colonies to rule England.
The US economy overtook the size of the British economy in 1870.
America overtook England in per capita terms in the early 20th century.
I’m not sure how you would quantify corruption in the English Parliament. It wasn’t particularly democratic but didn’t claim to be.Taxes in England were low , no police force and people were left to their own devices.
One of G Washington’s complaints against the English was that they were bigots and opposed open bordersfor the colonies. Early SJW?
A cursory Google search confirms the facts I alluded to (see subheadings 1 and 2). The sentiments of the founding fathers regarding immigration are well known in dissident circles, and are not as you suggest. You can research it for yourself.
When Trump is gone, they will find another Hitler. Trump is Hitler, Reagan was Hitler, Bush was Hitler, Saddam was Hitler, Milosevic was Hitler, the Iranians are Hitler, Putin is Hitler, and of course Hitler was Hitler.
There’s no shortage of Hitlers out there… particularly when (((you know who))) is in control of the country.
To paraphrase Andy Warhol: “In the future, everyone will be Hitler for for fifteen minutes”.
I think that follows from Warhol’s conception of fame/celebrity in a democracy. The idea of fame would be democratized so everyone could participate; thus, “In the future everyone will be famous … for 15 minutes.”
But if fame—really notoriety—is democratized, then the same logic applies to its opposite. Therefore: “In the future everyone will be INfamous for 15 minutes.”
It’s the inevitable dark reverse of the democratizing coin, but nobody’s thought about it that way, until recently. As our rosy perception of the democratic order starts to fade, such thoughts are becoming more frequent.
Your fifteen minutes in the bunker
I prefer to paraphrase Warhol’s other famous truism, “If everyone is Hitler, no one is.”
One question is: Was Hitler Hitler?
Tiktok banning literal translations of his speeches.
A phenomenon I find fascinating.
There’s no living memory of Hitler, only the cartoon devil of Our Democracy’s founding myth.
Artifacts show him to be pretty normal, kind of a dweeb, smarter and saner than present-day politicians. Mein Kampf is big and tedious enough to be invisible even where it’s not banned, but film is immediate. Until now, only specialists and enthusiasts have seen more than seconds-long fragments of Hitler’s speeches, chosen to make him look crazy—his Howard Dean moments swamped in creepy film music. The TikTok vids are just him, translated pretty well, chosen to give a less dramatic impression (so, very dramatic).
What’s important: Nothing about actual Hitler suggests that the people who supported him or “allowed his rise” or whatever were evil, possessed, mad, etc. With a few historically determined deviations—none as severe as current “left” enthusiasm for censorship, de-banking, war for pederasty, etc.—he was a liberal centrist just like you (probably are). So you can’t see him.
They’ve been removing him from the myth, have you noticed? Kids aren’t taught that Hitler did the Holocaust anymore. They’re taught that whiteness did it, the whiteness of the British and Americans who knew what was happening and let it happen—who made it happen via specific inaction. The “isolationism” of the average American was in fact antisemitism. Antiwar is anti-Jew. Etc. From Hitler’s Willing Executioners to The Plot Against America. Read the latter to understand how much Jews hate you. See the latest Ken Burns thing for the dumbest new revision of the Holocaust, the one your kids are taught. You did it.
Hitler cannot exist in this story. So he cannot exist. When you think of him, nothing can come to mind. It’s the law.
The H-man was the greatest gift to the Choisens by far than the Choisen land.
No.
There’s a joke in here somewhere. Something about the Infinite Hitlers Theory. Given an infinite number of Hitlers and typewriters, eventually they would produce both the collected works of Martin Heidegger and Hannah Arendt.
I like my variant of the infinite parallel universes theory – for every one of you, there is a universe out there where YOU are Hitler right now!
Lol.
If an infinite row of Hitlers typed away randomly on an infinite number of typewriters they would eventually produce the whole Talmud
Hitler was a piker compared to Stalin and Mao. When it comes to genocide, he was no better than bronze on the 20th Century medal stand. And Netanyahoo is rising fast. And don’t get me started on the Great Khan or the mass internecine killings in Africa. I guess Hitler had better PR than everyone else.
No, worse. A (((friend))) in high school once told me,”The devil just was a victim of bad PR”.
Yes, its all so tiresome.
The sky is always fallling.
I thought Anglin had a relivent thing on good old daily stormer.
“Considering the life to come”
Actually from sept 8th.
As for my self, steering of a 270 course will be sooner than later.
Making points & attempting to red pill (as the kids say) yeah no.
Still got lots of nails to pound & pumpkins to grow.
Old HL said it best Z:
The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.
Trump is their hobgoblin. Once he passes, or moves from the stage, they shall find another.
As seems likely, Bad Orange Man will be “defeated” at the “ballot box.” What will the managerial harpies do to him then? Prison? Murder? As a useful bogeyman he diminishes greatly after Fortification beats him. Does he have an escape plan? Because it’s perhaps fifty-fifty odds that they liquidate him entirely.
Since the “left’s” whole platform the last two elections has been “we’re not Trump,” if they kill him, then they have to have a new him waiting in the wings. Or else they lose their entire raison d’etre.
As first order thinkers, they likely haven’t considered that eventuality. But I’m confident they’ll succeed in conjuring up yet another mustache man on whom to paint a target. They always do.
Truth and reconciliation trials that are publicized like a Super Bowl. They will be broadcast in schools.
Struggle sessions full of tearful recantings and pleadings for mercy by former supporters.
Ruin the life of anyone who is insufficiently contrite.
Democrats haven’t had a rigged primary since 2008, and who knows maybe that was rigged also. But it was obvious in 2016 it was rigged, and again in 2020, and look what happened this year.
Don’t worry. Once Orange Hitler is gone they will still have tens of millions of MAGA “Nazis,” “anti-Semites,” and “white supremacists” to deal with…
Some of them actually have laid out a “deMAGAfication program” using the 1946-1949 template. You can read hints in NYT and WaPo, and I don’t consume J-for-J media but I bet there’s a lot more there.
My Father-in-Law used to say that the U.S. was facing off against the Soviet Union because it needed a boogyman. I thought at the time that was far-fetched, and a huge dismissal of the evils of communist tyranny, but now, I think he might have been onto something.
I used to meet girls for dates next to the garibaldi statue in Washington square back in the 80’s. It’s was easily located and close to a couple of bars and restaurants. I wonder if it’s still there
Actually, yeah it is. I had to look that one up myself cuz my natural assumption was Giuseppe fell in the Great Toppling, like so many others.
For a second there I read your username as “Panzermutter.”
OK, I gotta be that guy, Z. Lincoln was not a reluctant abolitionist. He was just as fanatical as the rest of the party of fanatics he joined. The difference is, like a good modern politician, he was a much more adept liar than his contemporaries. Lincoln’s problem was trying to mask his abolitionist fanaticism to the extent necessary to keep Southern border state slaveowning unionists in Maryland, Kentucky, Missouri Tennessee and Virginia on one hand and the Northern Democrats on the other, in a coalition with his abolitionist fanatics to win the war to extirpate slavery. His “reluctance” to free the two legged farm equipment was wholly feigned. In 1858, Lincoln was quite clear that he was a radical abolitionist-
I believe this government cannot endure permanently half slave and half free.
I do not expect the Union to be dissolved – I do not expect the house to fall – but I do expect it will cease to be divided.
It will become all one thing or all the other.
Sam Dixon has a concise pamphlet on how agitating and demagogic Lincoln was on the slave issue. 200 years of compromise on the slave issue; but it has to end now!
I’ve only heard that interpretation from Southern fanatics; the type who, much like leftists, have to lengthen common terms for no good reason, who use “The War of Northern Aggression” instead of “Civil War”. It’s annoying, you have every reason to hate the man, but certainly no reason to tell any truth about him beyond “welp, shucks, I guess at a bare minimum we have to admit he was born”. Not a Lincoln sympathizer, BTW. I’m from AZ, the Civil War was a cat fight between two homos at the end of the day.
I’ve only heard that interpretation from Southern fanatics; the type who, much like leftists, have to lengthen common terms for no good reason, who use “The War of Northern Aggression” instead of “Civil War”. It’s annoying, you have every reason to hate the man, but certainly no reason to tell any truth about him beyond “welp, shucks, I guess at a bare minimum we have to admit he was born”. Not a Lincoln sympathizer, BTW. I’m from AZ, the Civil War was a cat fight between two homos at the end of the day.
That’s because Civil War historiography has been the province of generations of historians who have interpreted Lincoln and slavery as a whole to suit them. The Lost Cause interpretation downplays Lincoln’s fanaticism in order to minimize slavery as the primary cause of the war, which it absolutely was, to fit the Progressive South of the early 20th century. Marxist historians of the same time downplayed slavery and Lincoln’s fanaticism because old school Marxists had to interpret slavery through Marxist economics. Modern critical race theory downplays his abolitionist fanaticism because he wasn’t fanatical enough to suit them, and he worked alongside and compromised with racists so he’s impure.
Civil wars are always about ideology, then and now. The people cheering for and pulling triggers to accomplish Trump’s assassination don’t want him and us dead because of our economic policy or the GDP. It is about power, and who wields it, forever. Notice how that thread runs through Lincoln’s words in 1858 and after- that the government, not the nation, not the people, should “endure permanently” and that it will become his version, the “free” version, at all costs, forever.
It was a failed attempt to establish a nation-state. There have been many such unsuccessful efforts. Was the war itself really driven by ideology, though? Slavery undoubtedly underpinned the original rupture, but ultimately the South had become a separate nation in all but name. It faintly still is. There were pre-war attempts to impose slavery on the western territories, but with the outbreak of hostilities there was no Confederate effort to impose an ideology outside of the states that tried to form a separate nation, as evidenced by the militarily foolish Confederate decision not to invade and sack D.C. after it won the first battle of Bull Run, to cite one example. The states where “civil war” is not a misnomer and ideology could be claimed as the reason are to varying extents Missouri, Kentucy, Maryland and Tennessee.
I realize this isn’t what you are arguing, but slavery became a post-hoc rationale to mask what Z mentioned, which was the contradiction between the United States’ claim that self-determination is just vs. what it did in prosecuting the war. I don’t like either “Civil War” or “War Between the States” as labels since the conflict was literally a revolt that failed to establish a separate country as had happened with the Revolutionary War. That’s not to reduce this to semantics but to try to present truth in labeling. To cite slavery as the “cause” of the war is to use “cause” very, very loosely, and, again, I know that is verging on a semantical argument. The immediate cause was secession, and all that led to that point created the circumstances that made the drive to form a separate nation inevitable. Those who argue that slavery wasn’t the “cause” of the war itself generally do so out of embarrassment over slavery, but they very broadly are correct. Conversely, those who argue that the South started the war by firing on Ft Sumpter often do so to avoid the unpleasant issue of self-determination.
The United States has been a basketcase ever since Appomattox, and the thuggish totalitarianism manifesting now is the logical endpoint.
I’ve read that one of the reasons Lincoln ended slavery was that there was a real danger foreign nations, like France, might side with the South and start delivering material support. Ending slavery was supposedly the nail in the coffin, since the European nations had become anti-slavery.
The 13th Amendment, not Lincoln, ended slavery. But, yes, the unrelated Emancipation Proclamation was issued in large part to keep Britain from recognizing the Confederacy. It didn’t free a single slave since it applied only to those in areas of the Confederacy that had not been conquered by the Union. It was quite a fraud, and part of the intent also was to keep slave-holding Union states and the occupied parts of the South in line, saying, in effect, your slaves are OK.
but ultimately the South had become a separate nation in all but name. It faintly still is.
Sadly, I don’t think this is true today, even if it was true of the time. We have had huge movements of people in the US for many decades now. Everyone is from somewhere else. Most of the blacks in the North are from the South, for example. The South is loaded with Northerners. I’m sure everyone here has relatives (or they themselves) that have moved all over the country. Just in the last 5 years, how many New Yorkers are living in Florida?
What percentage of people living anywhere in the US can trace their roots 5 generations in the same town or even the same state?
This is not even counting the MASSIVE influx of third worlders into the US especially the South.
Hence, “faintly.” Southerners tend to stay put, but, yes, the influx has been enormous. Still, outside of urban centers (and even in some of those), a regional identity remains. For how long, dunno. Much of psychotic iconoclasm was a response to this.
Southern distinctiveness existed when I was born, it’s all over the John Ford cavalry trilogy. It existed at the 1964 BSA Jamboree at Valley Forge, when the confederate troops had their own area. It existed when I went away to college to mix with boys from the deep South.
But it doesn’t exist any more.
So, all historiography except the type you espouse was driven by ideology? I see…
-“Civil wars are always about ideology”
I’m not so sure. Civil wars are about who will be the ruling class and who will be ruled. Sometimes ideology is used post hoc to justify economic, sectional, or ethno-religious interests.
Yes, slavery was the burning ideological issue of the Civil War, but I think it was used as a moral justification to kill Southern whites by Northern capitalists who wanted to create an industrial economy with “free” immigrant labor that was cheaper than slave labor and could be discarded when the workers were crippled or used up.
Personally I don’t see it as any more morally justifiable to have Irish dig the Erie Canal by hand and pay them in whiskey than it is to have Negroes pick cotton and then feed them and give them a shack to live in. Possibly it is worse — the capitalists didn’t have to feed or house the workers and when they did it was often in exploitative company towns.
Ideology does not always explain great power wars, either. Nazi Germany the the Soviet Union were ideological states, but they went to war only 25 years after Wilhelmine Germany and tsarist Russia went to war. Geopolitical rivalries occur notwithstanding the ideology of the ruling clique.
It’s interesting how the U.S. ideologically retconned the Holocaust and “democracy” and “freedom” and all of that bullshit as a casus belli only after World War II was over. Prior to and during the war FDR made absolutely no speeches whatsoever about how we were fighting to save the Jews — because we weren’t. We fought the war with a segregated army and rounded up Japanese and put them into camps based purely on racial characteristics. And we were allies with the USSR, LOL.
With all due respect Templar, people use the term “War of Northern Aggression “, because that is what it was. A “Civil War” is between two combatants that want to control the same government or area of operation.
The South wanted nothing to do with the North, and were allowed, based on the agreement between the states, to leave.
Im pretty sure most of the commenters on this site are aware of the particulars.
As has been stated many times, language and words have meaning. Bastardizing their meaning just allows them to win the mind game. Don’t fall for the gaslighting.
For a great video on the topic, check out The Rageaholic’s video,”Lincoln, Americas first Tyrant”.
It largely wasn’t a civil war, though. Outside of some pockets of the Upper South, and I’m including Missouri there, the boundaries were well-defined. Now the Spanish Civil War? THAT was a civil war, and how civil wars generally look.
The definition of “civil war” denotes two factions in a country fighting for predominant power in that country; that’s not what took place in the U.S. 1861-1865. Rather a formed confederation of southern states attempted to leave the Union & go their own way. Ergo the description “War Between the States” is more accurate than “civil war”. The “War of Northern Aggression” while admittedly a politically loaded description, is applicable since Lincoln mobilized the Federal Army to send it south to destroy the southern confederation & force the states back into the Union @ the point of a bayonet.
“War of Secession,” or some variant thereof, works for me.
How else can you possibly describe the war other than the war of Northern aggression? That is exactly what it was.
The South was not trying to impose their way of life or their way of looking at the world onto the North. They were saying, “uh, we’re gonna do our own thing. It was nice knowing you and we will be good neighbors” and the psychos in the North couldn’t have that and immediately started aggressing against the South.
Lincoln was a fanatical lunatic. It’s a shame Booth didn’t get to him earlier.
Support seccession always and everywhere, is my motto. However, the reality is that nation-states very rarely allow attempts at secession to go unpunished. In fact, they do everything they can, including using mass violence, to destroy secessionary movements. The leading men of the South certainly knew this. Thus, they realized their actions very likely would mean war.
What you describe sounds like the current situation with Ukraine vs. Russia.
Perhaps, but there are differences. For years, the Ukraine was under Russian influence. Russia didn’t seem to give them much grief until NATO reached their borders, the 2014 color revolution took place, the Crimea had to be annexed to prevent Western threat to Russian Black Sea control, and the attempts of Ukraine to suppress the Russian populace—culture, language, etc.—in the Eastern Provinces ramped up.
Even today, the whole thing can be “settled” with a shedding of these Eastern Provences (already annexed) and an agreement to forgo alliance in NATO, i.e., neutrality. Russia really doesn’t care about the Ukrainian per se, just their use as a weapon against the Russian nation State by the West.
Look @ the trouble Britain has had getting out of the EU.
But Lincoln, as he repeatedly said in the historic Lincoln-Douglas debates, wanted to free the black. slaves and then ship them to other countries…He also said that the black man would never be the equal of the white man, so it was best to separate completely…..All very true…
You have to consider the context and the audience he was speaking to, rather than take them at face value in a vacuum. Like I said above, Lincoln is a “modern” politician in that he is an adept liar, and tailors the truth to achieve his goal in the moment. He’s speaking to rural voters in Southern Illinois (A Democratic stronghold, when Democrat equaled conservative) trying to get elected, because he wants them to believe that so they vote for him, when he has no intention of doing so, because repatriation would, in the 19th century, be politically and practically impossible. It is a fantasy to think Lincoln was serious about repatriation because he lied to the rubes at a debate, which we all know are lying contests. What Lincoln does, the party he leads, not what he says, proves his lie at the debate. The Republican Party would have turned on him in a heartbeat had he been serious, they would never countenance removing the Sacred Negro from America, not when they planned on using them as a club to beat white Southerners with after the war.
Agreed totally here. Lincoln was imbued in such a fanatical Protestantism that it precluded him from even joining a church. The same messianic arrogance underpinned his politics. The man was a monster and is responsible for much of the rot we see today.
That sounds like a statement of the political reality to me. The US was expanding, and which system would dominate was at issue. It was easier to compromise when the situation of the colonies was already set. Expansion set free labor and slavery on a collision course.
I still maintain, though, that Northern society generally is so constituted that diversity is very agitating and disruptive to it. I would bet that the issue of escaped slaves produced as many John Browns as any particular morality did. I mean, even the Irish had a rough go fitting in!
It was not “free labor” versus “slavery.” There were still thousands of White indentured laborers (de facto slavery without the benefits of a responsible owner’s concern for his property) as well as thousands of impoverished, uneducated immigrants performing manual labor and factory work on starvation wages. The average black slave ate a whole lot better.
The Marxist interpretation of the American Civil War has been it was a conflict between different forms of slavery. It is not without merit.
Whatever you want to call it, that’s what I’ve heard it called, hence Lincoln’s use of ‘free’. At any rate, nobody was born into it or perpetually bound to it. Talk wage/debt slavery, fine. That ebbs and flows, right now it’s flowing.
Nobody who came to America got a hug. Whether they had to conquer a wilderness, serve some term of indenture, work in a mine or factory, join the Union Army, etc. But at least there was light at the end of the tunnel.
Adept liar? Apropos, given he’s famous for that aphorism about “fooling some of the people some of the time…”
He knew whereof he spoke.
Fanatics always need a holy devil to fill their inner void
wha?